As a Dec. 8 court hearing approaches, the Ocean City Ethics Board still has no money to pay for its legal representation in litigation filed as a result of one of its rulings.
A presentation by Ethics Board Chairman Stanley Pszczolkowski at Tuesday's City Council meeting answered some questions, but Council took no action on a resolution that would transfer $22,000 to pay for Ethics Board legal expenses.
City Council voted to table the resolution at a Nov. 10 meeting and questioned whether the city can afford to maintain the board. Council took no further action on the resolution after hearing the presentation on Nov. 29.
Ocean City Beach Patrol Operations Director Tom Mullineaux is appealing an Ethics Board finding of two alleged ethics violations related to changing scores on lifeguard requalification tests. Mullineaux was fined $100 for each violation. An Administrative Law judge is scheduled to hear the appeal on Dec. 8, Pszczolkowski said.
"We do need an attorney immediately," he said.
Pszczolkowski characterized the appeal as the result of a particularly complex complaint that started with "six or seven inches of paper" alleging 10 separate ethics violations by Mullineaux and former Ocean City Fire Chief Joseph Foglio. The complaints were filed by former Ocean City Beach Patrol member Mike Hamilton.
The Ethics Board found no violations by Foglio, and Hamilton appealed that decision. It found two violations against Mullineaux, who also appealed.
Hamilton dropped his appeal as part of a recent . Mullineaux's appeal continues.
Pszczolkowski said the board has spent only $1,500 in the more than four years of its existence (some for training seminars for board members and some for stenography). He said Ethics Board decisions have been upheld without cost to the city by the state's Local Finance Board in a number of other appeals.
Councilman Scott Ping asked if it's worth $22,000 in legal fees to collect $200 in fines.
"Where are the limits?" he asked. "What can we afford?"
But he acknowledged that the city should pay the expenses in the short term.
"We have to do what we have to do as far as putting that money forward," he said.
In public comments, attorney Ed Price recalled an old ad slogan — "You can pay me now or you can pay me later" — and said, "The Ethics Board is like the oil filter of our government."
He suggested a vigilant Ethics Board could be funded for several years with savings from the improper billings it could prevent.
"Do not be short-sighted and vote to abolish this board," he said.
Ocean City resident and recent Third Ward candidate Steve Fenichel also spoke in favor of retaining the Ethics Board.
"What price do we put in restoring a sense of confidence among our citizens?" he asked.
Even Hamilton spoke in favor of the Ethics Board. He told City Council that trying to address his compaints through the city's Personnel Department was unsatisfactory and that trying to do so through a state Ethics Board would be a long process.
From the Governors' office to the Statehouse corruption and lack of accountability are blatant. Maybe there are those hoping for Federal oversight but they probably didn't see the 60 Minutes episode of 11/13/2011 "The Insiders". There you can see the Speaker of the House John Boehner and the previous Speaker Nancy Pelosi making lucrative trades on Wall Street thanks to lobbyist tips and of course no Ethical consequences. Statewide I can list ethical lapses of the 3 last Governors and State Legislators with no apparent accountability. Below is a link to an Ethical lapse of 2 successful NJ politicians and a political boss: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/16/nyregion/up-front-worth-noting-the-eyes-have-it-after-a-stumble.html Hopefully Mayor Gillian will reconsider disbanding the Ethics Commission after reading this. With a local Ethics Commission made up of ordinary citizens and responding to the complaints of local citizens these abuses would at least be investigated. Steven Fenichel, MD.
I believe there are people in city government that look at the city as their own business and tax revenues as their own bank account. How much of what has been done (lately) was done for the benefit of the taxpayers of this town? Think abouit it.
Add to this that a finding of guilt can ruin a person's life, whether the finding is correct or not correct. And, we have an informal and reckless process for selecting people for the commision and putting them in a position to ruin people's lives. The real costs of this commission far outweigh its single, theoretical, unproven benifit. End it ASAP.
UP FRONT: WORTH NOTING; The Eyes Have It After a Stumble By Robert Strauss Published: March 16, 2003 Sign In to E-Mail Print Earlier this year, Joseph Roberts, the Democratic leader in the Assembly, introduced a measure that would allow optometrists to perform laser eye surgery, which is currently only done by ophthalmologists in New Jersey. Ophthalmologists perform eye surgery, while optometrists limit themselves to primary eye care and prescriptions for glasses. But Mr. Roberts is a part-owner of U.S. Vision, an optical-services retailer, and although U.S. Vision does not specifically employ optometrists, many of them work at U.S. Vision's 600 offices. Soon after Mr. Roberts introduced the legislation, he apparently realized there might be a conflict of interest, and he withdrew the bill. But last week, a similar measure was introduced by Assemblyman Jeff Van Drew, a Democrat who represents Cape May and Cumberland counties, and it sailed through the Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee. Dr. Van Drew is a dentist -- though presumably somewhat knowledgeable in the matter of eye care as well. He is also aware of Democratic politics in New Jersey, since the majority owner in U.S. Vision is George Norcross, a South Jersey Democratic fund-raiser and perhaps the most powerful non-elected political force in the state. Robert Strauss
More age discrimination suits are bound to follow from other "mature" lifeguards, and $50K and a gag order have been set as the benchmark for settlement. The estimated $22K needed by the Ethics Board will be insignificant compared to the backroom, out of court, settlements. And the beat goes on. Nothing will change, and favortism, privledge, and unethical conduct will continue. Even after Millineaux's actions and the fire department overtime fiasco became known, has the city taken any punitive action against anyone?