<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">Neil and I attended last night’s meeting. The only other citizen present was ole ‘mister faithful’ Mr. Zeintek. There was a reporter from the JJ present; Peter Kemp. And (I believe them to be) three union officials.<o></o></span>

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">Tony was jockeying for about $2mil in funds to be culled from the budget. According to Mr. Doll the BBOSE could not simply reduce the tax amount without causing the State to reduce its amount of aid. My recollection is that in order to pass the budget another resolution had to be added to the agenda to accommodate Tony’s request. That was done.<o></o></span>

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">Tony hoped to move the COPS IN SCHOOL program from the municipal budget to the BOE budget. According to Mr. Doll state law will not allow that change.<o></o></span>

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">According to the budget it is anticipated that next year’s commitment from the city, in terms of taxes, will remain the same as this year. Based upon the numbers in the budget this year’s tax hit will be something around $4.5mil.<o></o></span>

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">There was a resolution passed to allow the BBOSE to approve a bond of slightly more than $7.7mil to cover various renovations throughout the district. Mr. Doll stated that anticipated State aid could cover anywhere from 20% to 40% of the overall costs. In addition some of the work would be performed ‘in-house’ thereby lowering expenses. If there were any funds left after the work was completed Mr. Doll informed the board that the differential could be used to retire a portion of the bond or the BOE could come back to the BBOSE with proposals for additional repairs to be done. The bond was passed. Now it must go before the council for approval.<o></o></span>

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial">There was one other bond that was requested. The BOE is hoping to get $1.9mil to be utilized “to purchase and the improvement of Repair Department facility/Bus Repair facility”. The vote was 3-to-2 with Tony and the Mayor voting “NO”. <o></o></span>

<font face="Times New Roman">bboseagenda_20080401.pdf</font>

<font face="Times New Roman">bboseappropriationssy_2008-2009.pdf</font>

<font face="Times New Roman"><font face="Times New Roman">renovationbond_20080401.pdf</font></font>

<font face="Times New Roman">busrepairbond_20080401.pdf</font>

HappyPolski

<p class="MsoNormal">Today I filed a motion in the Superior Court of New Jersey Chancery Division Hudson County against the Port Authority of New York &amp; New Jersey and the Bayonne Local Redevelopment Authority. That document is attached to this post.<o></o></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Bayonne Public Advocate was created earlier this year to get information into the hands of the people. Information about what your own government is doing, information that they would rather obscure from you. I have spoken about the need to not only have that information but to take action based on that it. I have said that it is not enough to rail against the wrong doings of public officials and agencies online, you must act on these issues.<o> </o></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We as a public attempted to act on a very important issue with the BLRA at the September 20^th, 2007 meeting. We told the BLRA with one voice that we did not approve of the Port Authority deal. They did not listen and they acted against the public interest. That was the day that I knew something more needed to be done. That was the day that I got the idea for the Bayonne Public Advocate.<o> </o></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We as a public took the next step and sought help from our city council. Unfortunately things were already in motion regarding the Port Authority deal. In their haste to make a deal a legal loophole was discovered by the International Longshoreman’s Association, who was also against the deal at the time. The Open Public Meetings Act was violated. The city council put pressure on the BLRA to have a new meeting to consider a new suitor, a higher paying suitor that would provide the Bayonne Public with a proper value for the land. The BLRA did have a new meeting and did choose a new suitor.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However the damage was already done. The Port Authority sued the BLRA, further putting the best interest of the taxpaying citizens of <st1lace w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Bayonne</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">NJ</st1:state></st1lace> in jeopardy. In the interim the Port Authority got to the ILA as well. Now instead of being against the Port Authority deal, the ILA is magically for it. One doesn’t have to be a genius to see that something occurred in a backroom somewhere for this to happen.<o> </o></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now it should be noted that at any time the BLRA could have, and SHOULD have filed suit. They should have done exactly what I did today, and filed a Complaint in Lieu of Prerogative Writ. Unfortunately for me, being a member of the public, unaware of the legal rights I had in this case, I thought there was no avenue for remedy...

neilbarton