Mr. Paul Sigmund is likely to start work this week as the Chief of Staff to Tony Mack. Our City Ordinances also call the Chief of Staff a Deputy Mayor, and I’d hope it is this title that is stressed over the next few weeks to emphasize the strong, seasoned and competent deputy Mayor Mack so desperately needs, as Mr. Sigmund starts up. Normally I’d give someone the benefit of a New Job Honeymoon of a few months. Not here, not now; he has mere weeks to make an impact on the second floor of City Hall.
Since my last piece on Mr. Sigmund – which relied only on the Mayor’s not-very-informational press release announcing his appointment plus a few newspaper pieces – I’ve read more about him, seen an online resume, and talked to people who know him. He’s not quite the cipher he first appeared to be.
He is quite experienced in private industry, with significant executive management. However, I can’t tell how much of his experience is in people management. He’s structured deals, worked raising capital, and is probably good with a business plan. But experience with personnel-intensive service-oriented organizations? I’m not seeing it.
Corporate experience can be good preparation for political service. Look at Michael Bloomberg. On the other hand, look at Mitt Romney, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina! Corporate experience is relevant for public service in a place like Trenton if it includes heavy Management responsibility, not simply vaguely-defined “Executive” work. We’ll see what skills Mr. Sigmund possesses, that will help him make up for the deficit in his knowledge and experience with government in general and Trenton in particular that he brings with him. I do wish him the best of luck, though. I pushed for someone to be appointed to this job. I hope he’s the right guy for it.
But before I go, I want to talk about two things that I think are highly relevant as Paul Sigmund starts his gig.
The first is a comment made by Mr. Sigmund earlier this week that bothered me on a philosophical level. The second is a specific example of the current morass that exists in the Administration, which clearing up is to be a big part of :is new job. And which will also be a big part of the job of the Business Administrator – if we can get a good one to stick around long enough to get anything done.
Mr. Sigmund was introduced to the public and the press by the Mayor at a City Hall event on Thursday. In a Times article by Meir Rinde, Sigmund spoke about the situation he was walking into, specifically the bad relationships among the several City departments, the Council and the Mayor. He said, “I don’t think it’s a lack of leadership. I think it’s a lack of communication.”
Now, that bothers the heck out of me. To me, Good Communication is an essential and necessary component to Leadership. If you cannot communicate – your goals to the People, your plans to your Council, your directions to your Departments, You Cannot Lead. By definition!
And if you do not allow all of those parties to Communicate back to you, you will operate in a vacuum. Or worse, you will operate in a closed-loop where the only person you listen to is Yourself. When that happens, You Cannot Lead!
In a nutshell, I think this describes the last 8 months of the Mack Administration: Lack of Communication = Lack of Leadership. Q.E.D.
I hope Mr. Sigmund understands this. Of course, he hasn’t been in Trenton these last nine months, so he hasn’t seen the first several episodes of our ongoing Reality Series, “River City.” But I Really, Really, Really Hope that in his heart and head he doesn’t see the kind of conceptual disconnect between Communication and Leadership that his quote suggests.
Case in point: I just said that Mr. Sigmund hasn’t been around Trenton, Mercer County, and New Jersey for years, so he hasn’t been here to see a lot of the drama. He’ll no doubt get filled in about what he’s missed. I could suggest a few blogs for him to read!
But I will expect him to read the local newspapers pretty closely, from here on in. So, I hope he had a good chance to read the story in yesterday’s Times, also by Meir Rinde, about the ruling by Judge Linda Feinberg settling (I hope!) the lawsuit that IT services firm ADPC brought against the City of Trenton and Lynx Technology over the flawed Contract Award that the City granted to Lynx, and which City Council approved several weeks back.
To a layman reading ADPC’s complaint, it was obvious that any suit would have had to go in their favor. And in her initial ruling a few weeks ago, and the final two-page order issued Friday, it did. Judge Feinberg vacated the contract award to Lynx, ordered ADPC to be reinstated for the remainder of its current valid contract until June 30, and voided the Entire Bid Process that the City conducted for this contract.
The two-page order, however, didn’t contain a hint of the vehemence felt by the Judge about this case, and the strong words she directed specifically toward Mayoral Aide (and current nominee for Assistant Business Administrator) Anthony Roberts, who ran the bid process for the City in the absence of the recently laid-off Director of IT. It is these comments that Mr. Sigmund would be well-advised to consider.
The newspaper articles give a small taste of the Jovian bolts thrown by the Judge: Mr. Roberts was “completely unqualified” to conduct the bid process, and the way that he actually conducted it was “suspicious.” In his Friday March 11 blog post on the ruling, Robert Chilson gives further blistering detail. If the judge could actually throw lightning bolts rather than rhetorical ones, there’d be several charred spots of ground where many of our public servants would have been standing.
A few parties escaped Judge Feinberg’s wrath, not entirely fairly in my view. She complimented the city’s attorneys, specifically Law Director Marc McKithen, even though he failed during Council’s deliberations on the matter to publicly inform Council on legal matters crucial to their decision: namely, the many material defects in the city’s proposal and bid process that should have invalidated the contract award before it was presented to Council. The Judge did Mr. McKithen’s job for him on Friday. He needs to do it himself.
And the Judge went easy on Council itself, excusing their 5-2 vote in favor of Lynx by explaining they were misled by Mr. Roberts and the rest of the Administration.
Well, yes and no. Yes, they were misled by Mr. Roberts and the Mayor, but they were also informed – in Public Comment and several private conversations and emails – and shown the fatal flaws in Lynx’s proposal and the City’s shabby bid process.
The Judge gave Council a pass, but each member of Council knew the Real Deal before their vote, and 5 of them went ahead anyway. Mr. Zachary Chester hid behind the fig leaf of a “letter” from the State he said endorsed Lynx. Ms. Phyllis Holly-Ward “also allow[ed] the State to make her decision” for her vote in favor.
Everyone in this matter looks bad to me, with the exception of the aggrieved party in the matter, ADPC. And they have just had their day in Court, and had Justice done.
I hope Mr. Sigmund reads that article, and takes the lessons of Lynx-gate (hey, that works!) to heart.
The first and most immediate lesson is to keep Anthony Roberts as far away from the City’s checkbook as possible. Judge Feinberg’s reaming should put paid once and for all to any plan to put that man in the Assistant BA chair.
This occasion, Sir, was both a failure of Communication AND Leadership. And it was far from an isolated instance; you can look them up.
They DO go together.
Welcome to Trenton. Good Luck with your new job.
Lynxgate……..it does work!
Thanks for the good wishes. Marge Caldwell was talking about setting up a meeting with you and Dan Dodson. Please give her a call and let’s try to set something up later this week.
Paul
P.S. And it should be “Welcome Back to Trenton.” After all, I spent my childhood being babysat by the Board of Chosen Freeholders right there on S. Broad 🙂
Romney, Whitman and Florina. You couldn’t think of one democrat to throw in there Kevin? Don’t make your biases so obvious, unless of course you don’t want to be taken serious.
@ITK – Mike Bloomberg was a Republican, too, remember! Seriously, you do have a point. All three of the negative examples are Republican. As I was writing this morning, they we’re frankly the only corporate execs turned recent political figures who I could hink of.
My biases are thereby exposed! However, I will gratefully welcom comparable examples of Democratic or independent successful business execs who failed a successful transition to public service.
Does anyone want to consider Jon Corzine? Just for laughs. Patricia Stewart
Here are two Democrats who made the, “successful,” switch; the meaning of, “successful,” is a matter of opinion. Herbert Lehman and William Averell Harriman. Both were elected governor of New York; Herbert Lehman was also the first Jewish governor of NY. PHS
Thanks, Pat – Lehman and Harriman are rather distant to our time, but they are good representatives of a past time when those of the patrician class (no pun intended!) would take up public service after making (or inheriting) their pile. They were both rather successful in their times, as the history books have it.
I think you’re closer to the mark with Mr. Corzine. He served well and honorably in the US Senate, I think, if perhaps with only moderate distinction. There are certainly less-talented people in that body right now, I think you’d agree.
As a Governor, opinions are certainly mixed. He tinkered at the edges of many problems, I think. He didn’t effect any major changes, but did well enough under the circumstances, I think.
What I think Jon Corzine does show is that it was his money that got him as far as he went in politics. He funded his own campaigns and bought a lot of visibility. What he couldn’t buy was the affection of voters, who I think tired of him. I think he lost the 2009 election much more than Chris Christie won it.
Kevin, please don’t forget about certain council members who did their “due diligence” in researching Lynx! Through direct communication with Ms Jackson I learned that she conducted her own “investigation” into Lynx and made her decision partly based on that and partly based on their “presentation!”
Brian – You are absolutely right. I collectivize “Council” in most of my comments. When 4 or more members vote one way, the entire Body is responsible for its actions.
Councilmembers Muschal and Caldwell-Wilson were consistent in their opposition to Lynx throughout the process, and Good for them!
I believe I have made it clear in earlier pieces that I applauded their efforts, while criticizing those of Members Holly-Ward, Chester and Reynolds-Jackson, who switched their votes and hid behind the fig leaf of an imaginary State “Endorsement” of Lynx.
Expecting an effective Council always requires counting to “4,” sometimes to “5,” if one hopes for a veto-proof majority. One, or two and even three, are lonely numbers.