One of the most embarrassing things about New Jersey, politically speaking, is the common practice by which business entities and professionals who want to do business with local governments, or the State and its agencies, make campaign contributions to those who award the contracts. It’s called “pay to play”, and was somewhat limited at the State level by a 2005 law, though most people believe the reform has been insufficient. It is, in my opinion, even worse at the local level. New Jersey municipalities are allowed to have their own regulations about this, or to have no restrictions at all. As would be expected in a City governed solely by Democrats, Plainfield has no restrictions at all.
To show how porous the regulations are, consider the fact that corporations are barred from making campaign contributions to anyone, but they get around it by making the contributions in the name of an owner or partner.
I want to ban pay-to-play in Plainfield altogether. I am tired of seeing contributions by lawyers, engineering firms and the like, who do business with the City, and realizing that this is precisely how they get the contracts. The problem, however, is wider than that. We need an ordinance prohibiting the City and its agencies from doing business with officeholders and their companies, and if elected, I will introduce one.
During Mayor Mark Fury’s tenure in the mid-1990s, the City hired Weiner Lesniak, the powerful law firm of Senator Ray Lesniak, to handle a wide variety of litigation and legal matters. I remember hearing that the firm tried to overcharge the City drastically, and then when Mayor Fury tried to fire it, the firm sued the City, and made off with all the money he was trying to save. Worse, Senator Lesniak made sure Fury didn’t get the Democratic “line” in the 1997 election, for his impudence. And indeed, he lost, though I think he was the best Mayor we have had in decades.
Senator Lesniak, you see, was Chairman of the Union County Democratic Committee at the time, and remains its major power to this day. Therefore, although Plainfield wasn’t in his legislative district, it was in his county, and thereby indirectly vulnerable to his whims.
I must add that I have no proof of any of this, though I remember it vividly. I also cannot say whether the firm was really charging too much or not, because in those days before OPRA, I as a mere citizen had no access to the records that would give me that information. As a lawyer specializing in legal malpractice and ethics, I often hear complaints from people who think they are overcharged for legal services, or perceive that they don’t get their money’s worth. I also have no reason to criticize the quality of the work Weiner Lesniak did. I did ask both Mayor Fury and then-Council President Malcolm Dunn to look into this issue, and let me help, but they ignored me, presumably fearing the wrath of Senator Lesniak and his hench-woman, Charlotte DeFilippo.
I have no proof of any of the above, but if someone like me has the perception that this is what happened, then so do others, and the damage is done!! Very few business people want to work for us, aside from those who are “in” with the State or County Democratic organizations, because they believe they will be shaken down for contributions, or else not seriously considered.
The most glaring current example is John Wisniewski, a lawyer who is both Chairman of the Democratic State Committee, and Deputy Speaker of the State Assembly. He has contracts with the City now, to handle such things as tax appeals. I readily state that his charges are reasonable and customary, and that his firm’s work is good. But I worry what will happen if he ever has a spat with the Mayor, or with Boss Green, because I remember what Senator Lesniak did to Mayor Fury.
It is offensive to me that there should even be a risk of such problems. Contractors and professionals should respect the City, and recognize that they have to keep us pleased with them, not the other way around. It should be possible to fire them, if they let us down in any way, without fear of reprisal. We need to ban all contracts with those who hold public office in New Jersey, or are members or officers of party committees at any level, including firms of which they are a part.
The Council has obviously never brought this reform about. If elected, I will push for it until it happens.
Michelson's View 
Of course pay-to-play is only one step removed from a private sector unfettered by regulations and able to game the masses to extract the maximum amount of wealth from their commercial marks. That seems to be the national GOP’s economic stance, so why should we expect any different on the local level? Although I’ve been accused of being cynical about this by Councilman Storch, who talks a good game, but ends up sitting in the clubhouse most days, our city government does seem to be more a creature of the contractors and professional-service providers.
Take PMUA, a ‘public body corporate and politic’, that beyond its basic utilitarian mission of a city taking care of its garbage and sewage, is an entity that seems more a vehicle for its attorneys, McManimon & Scotland, its auditors Lerch, Vinci & Higgins, and its engineers T&M Associates. They’ve been there from the creation, and they’ve made political contributions that have benefited, directly or indirectly, a disparate group that includes the mayor, Assemblyman Green, Cory Storch, Linda Carter, Vera Greaves and Rebecca Williams, among others.
We can add to this list the current city engineers Remington & Vernick, who may have been the biggest winners of the 2005 mayoral election, and the dynamic duo of Martin Statfeld and Gary Taffet who give and take through their insurance services. They all contribute mightly and with regularity to the political system from which they make their living. I think as taxpayers we pay a premium for the privilege.
Yes, I am cynical about this. A, because regulations generally are anathema to Republicans, and B, because our current crop of local Democrats have already shown their willingness to have the city enter into an illegal contract with a vendor with a long history of political giving, whose business, for all intents and purposes, is amassing public dollars for private wealth.
Now both you and Cory have brought up pay-to-play, but do either of you mean what you say?
I always mean what I say!! And also, I never lie, and I’m always right!! When I am in doubt about this, I ask my employees, and they always confirm it!! 🙂
Seriously, I have no reason to question that these professionals do their jobs well, or even that their fees are competitive. The problem lies in the public perception, and in the way the contract-holders become entrenched and calcified. In an electoral system built upon money, to make a contract with someone whose position you can threaten is a conflict of interest. That’s why the issue about campaign contributions isn’t the amount, but the fact that they are given at all.