Activists say returning power to mayor may not help Camden

January 25, 2010  |  Courier Post  |  Link to article

Just after Dana Redd assumed her new role as mayor of Camden on the first of the year, legislative changes were set in motion to bring the state-controlled city back under her authority.

Last week, a bill revising the 2002 Municipal Rehabilitation and Economic Recovery Act passed through Assembly and Senate committees.

Both chambers are expected to vote on the measure Monday, the last day before the new legislative session begins and just in time for outgoing Democratic Gov. Jon S. Corzine to give his approval.

Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts, D-Camden, who co-sponsored the bill, said he's confident it will be approved now that a controversial impact fee has been removed.

"I'm pretty good at counting votes," Roberts said.

Redd, who testified before former Senate colleagues in support of the bill, says this would give her the power she needs to effect real change.

But Camden activists and community leaders wonder whether this will be little more than a new avenue for county Democratic leaders to collect more power and money from their dysfunctional city.

When lawmakers passed the recovery act in 2002, politicians and Camden residents alike applauded what they hoped would begin to reverse decades of decay and suburban flight.

Under the law, the city was given $175 million to aid rebuilding efforts and put under the oversight of a state-appointed chief operating officer. In addition to hiring, firing, budgeting and proposing legislation, the state overseer can veto decisions made by city council, the mayor and municipal boards.

This period of state-supervised rehabilitation was originally designed to last five years, but the Legislature extended it in 2007. It is now set to expire in 2012, followed by a five-year recovery period in which the city's mayor would resume control and assume many powers held by the chief operating officer.

However, in recent years,residents have voiced frustration that the law didn't deliver the neighborhood revitalization it promised while city deficits grew even greater. Over political campaigns of the past year, Redd and others called for Camden to be restored to local control.

The proposed revisions would do just that by allowing the state commissioner of the Department of Community Affairs to end the rehabilitation period at any time.

If that happens, the mayor would once again have top authority, including the ability to hire her own Cabinet. However, unlike other mayors, she would have additional powers to invalidate contracts, appoint school board members and overrule actions by independent authorities such as those that oversee housing and parking.

"There's clearly a powerful message being sent that this mayor's going to have a lot of degrees of freedom to operate," said Richard Harris, a political science professor at Rutgers University in Camden and director of the Sen. Walter Rand Institute for Public Affairs. "It's more than simply a restoration of the old regime. Dana Redd will be the most powerful mayor on the planet, or at least in the state."

Roberts, who was among the sponsors of the original law, spoke of restoring autonomy to Camden last fall. But it was not until Monday, his last full week as an elected official, that he introduced the revisions, co-sponsored by Assembly budget committee head Louis D. Greenwald of Voorhees.

Sandra Cunningham, D-Jersey City, dropped a companion version in the Senate on Thursday. In appropriations committee hearings, Democrats argued that the bill was needed because the state's efforts had failed. But Republicans questioned how the state could reduce oversight of a city that receives millions of dollars in state aid every year.

"It appears as though we're just turning the checkbook back over to the City of Camden without any accountability from the city," said Assemblywoman Dawn Marie Addiego, R-Burlington, noting that she didn't get a copy of the bill until minutes before the committee vote.

Addiego said she had faith in Redd but was concerned that the bill didn't lay out a plan for how the city would become self-sufficient "so the rest of the taxpayers aren't going to foot the bill."

"The appropriate thing to do would be to wait and give the new governor time to weigh in," she said.

That's exactly what Democrats want to avoid. Even though incoming Republican Gov. Chris Christie has agreed that Camden must move away from state control, this isn't how he would do it, said spokeswoman Maria Comella.

"This irresponsible bill does nothing to help Camden and everything to further perpetuate wasteful spending with little regard for accountability," Comella said.

Redd said that although she wasn't involved in creating the legislation, she'll be in Trenton again on Monday to urge its passage.

This, she said, is "step one" in getting Camden back on track.

Assuming the bill passes and Democrats convince the Department of Community Affairs to terminate the chief operating officer position, Redd would officially become the city's top authority.

In addition to overriding contracts and boards, she would be able to suspend civil service rules for those not involved in collective bargaining. Most of the city's 1,150 police, fire and civilian employees are protected under such agreements. However, Redd would be able to make her own appointments for department heads, professional staff such as engineers or lawyers, and confidential aides who serve at the pleasure of the administration.

She would also be able to raise taxes, which have been frozen since the act took effect in 2002, by up to 3 percent a year.

Redd said raising taxes would be a last resort, but even the full increase wouldn't be enough to balance the budget. Last year, state aid accounted for $110 million, or nearly 67 percent, of the city's $164.6 million budget. Taxes and other local revenue accounted for only $26.9 million.

Camden residents pay a 4.7 percent tax rate, of which 2.6 percent goes to the city. A property owner with a home valued at $50,000 currently pays $2,300 in taxes each year. A 3 percent tax increase would raise that payment by $120 to $2,420.

During the five-year recovery period, the state still would play a role in the city, though more removed. The director of Local Government Services in the Department of Community Affairs would conduct an annual audit of the city. Like the departed chief operating officer, the commissioner of the state Department of Community Affairs would be able to veto resolutions and ordinances approved by city council.

However, council could overturn a veto with a two-thirds vote. Currently, such disputes go before a Superior Court judge.

"The commitment is that we will work together and be held fiscally accountable," said City Council President Frank Moran.

Whether or not Christie agrees with the bill's methods, Harris said it makes sense for Camden to start disengaging from the state earlier than planned. The chief operating officer position hasn't functioned as effectively as intended, he said, so why not eliminate that now rather than assign a caretaker for the next two years?

Even though the city's all-Democratic council could easily override a state veto under the proposed bill, Harris said there seemed to be enough oversight to ensure transparency. Elected officials already know that they'll have to look harder at city finances because the "final stop on the gravy train is in sight," he said.

"The fact that it's a Republican administration and the state is in such a deep financial hole, the state's going to be less likely to be forgiving of fiscal irregularities or issues that may come up in an audit," Harris said. "There's no way that the current governor is going to be interested in or able to sustain the level of financial support the city has had for the past eight years."

But Kelly Francis, a fiscal watchdog in the city, said he didn't think the state would have much say if the bill passes.

"This whole bill is about continuing the money coming into Camden under the control of the Democratic machine," and not Christie, Francis said. "Council has the final word, which means the machine is in control. Politically, there's nothing wrong with that. But it's not good government. Politics is a game; to the victor goes the spoils."

Allowing the mayor even more control over school board appointments riled school choice activist Angel Cordero, who ran against Redd as an independent.

Local Democrats will put "their people in there to cater to their interests and not to the children," Cordero said. "These people do not care about the poor people of Camden. If Redd says she cares, she's not calling the shots. Make no mistake about it, the mayor here is George Norcross."

If the state really wants to restore democracy in Camden, it should allow the city to elect all nine board members, said Frank Fulbrook, also a longtime resident and activist.

"That's what we had, it wasn't broken," Fulbrook said.

Of the roughly 600 school districts in the state, only 21 have boards appointed by the mayor. An additional 29 technical and special services districts also have appointed boards.

The Rev. Willie Anderson, co-chairman of Camden Churches Organized for People, said he wasn't opposed to home rule but didn't think city officials could handle that yet.

"Electing a mayor, that hasn't changed anything to show that Camden has the capacity to rule itself in a responsible manner," Anderson said. "We didn't even have a very large voter turnout."

Anderson said this bill is just more "political hoopla" overshadowing the real needs in the city. Lawmakers promised big changes when the recovery act passed eight years ago, he said. Now all but $14.4 million of those funds have been spoken for and visible improvements downtown never affected the core neighborhoods, Anderson said.

"They're the same party with the same party heads . . . and nothing changes," he said. "The people still suffer while we continue to play political games."