The Six Million Dollar Ego

The State of New Jersey made a provisional offer of Transitional Aid to help balance Trenton’s current fiscal year budget one week ago. The City had applied for $24 Million in funding, down from last year’s grant of $27 Million.

The State’s award is an either/or. The full amount is for $22 Million, $2 Million less than our request. Accepting the full amount will require the City to accept not only the same terms as last year’s award (freezes on salaries and promotions with raises, State approval of new hires, etc – we’ve seen how well that’s worked out!), but also to agree to the creation of a new 3-member panel to vet City hires and appointments. One member each would be appointed by the Mayor, the State and City Council.

If the City declines to accept the new 3-member review panel, and accept only essentially last year’s terms, then the City would receive only $16 Million. What would the impact to the City be if we get only $16 Million?

According to an analysis  by City consultant David Rousseau, the difference is dramatic. Without going through the entire analysis (you can click on the link if you’d like to read more), with the $22 Million award – and with some additional bookkeeping wizardry that the state has approved – we can balance the budget, perhaps re-call some laid-off police, and even rebate some property tax payments to homeowners!

With the $16 Million, however, things are different. The budget would still be out of balance by perhaps close to $3 Million, we could kiss those re-hired cops goodbye, and we would likely have a property tax Increase!

So, the decision to take the $22 Million should be a no-brainer, right? Wrong. This morning’s paper carries a story in the Times, by Alex Zdan and Matt Fair, that reports that City Hall is still deciding which option to accept! According to city spokesperson Lauren Ira who emailed the Times, “We are still reviewing the options and will make a decision in the very near future, at such time we will certainly inform you of our decision.” If that sounds to you like she is telegraphing an announcement to come – perhaps as soon as later today, it is Friday, time to dump unpleasant news – that the city will leave $6 Million on the table, then I am right there with you!

Why in the world would the City refuse $6 Million from the State?!?!?! Apparently, Tony Mack is concerned that his mayoral prerogatives in selecting and hiring his directors and senior personnel would be offended by having to be approved by a panel that includes the State and City Council. There would be a violation of the separation of powers, or a rift in the space-time continuum, or something.

When you come right down to it, I think that Mack feels, probably correctly, that with a three-member panel he would be out-voted 2 to 1 on most of his personnel selections, if they continue to be as weak, ill-prepared or baggage-ridden as his appointments and hires of the last 16 months have been. It comes down to Mayor Mack’s ego.

Is his ego worth $6 Million to the beleaguered residents of this town? I don’t think so. In an editorial earlier this week, the Times didn’t think so; the editorial board implored Mack to accept the $22 Million, and the review panel. You probably don’t think so, either.

That the Mayor and his administration are still publicly mulling the two offers is very, very scary. There should be no room for discussion here. But since we have a mayor with no grasp of municipal finance yet in possession of an inflated ego and sense of mayoral entitlement, unfortunately this is still a matter without resolution. God Help Us!