critical Internet content toward appointee

[fiberisgoodforyou]

At the last Council meeting the chair of the Human Relations committee announce that there had been Internet content critical (not the exact words used to describe the content, but I will be forgiving) of the newest HRC member appointment.

It was further mentioned than this new committee member felt intimidated by the attention that this criticism has drawn, and it was inferred that perhaps this new appointee will withdraw his appointment.

Seems there are three options.

1 – Step down from the Committee, and tell the critics to pound sand....
2 - Address the criticism and move on with many more years of successful committee participation.
3 - Ignore the critics and move on with many more years of successful committee participation.

IMO...Option 2 seems to be a most reasonable resolution, and option 3 is an alternative too!~

After all its the Human Relations Committee, as a committee member, you must be able to relate to all the humans this committee serves.

[richardkelsey]

Well -- I disagree that there was critical internet content aimed at the appointee. I think the content was aimed at the appointment.

I know i have said that I am opposed to the appointment of open borders' advocates. I also said that the Borough should have a policy for all its appointments to check legal residency.

I took the personal view that appointments, absent some compelling reason or some dearth of available candidates, should be residents of the Borough of Freehold.

The man appointed might be terrific.

For me -- the criticism is with the appointment process, particularly juxtaposed against the Mayor's tough talk on illegal immigration.

Frankly -- the poor guy has been hung out to dry by the silence. The Mayor should have disclosed the appointment and defended it for the reasons he made the appointment. Instead, he let politics dictate his course of action.

Whether this guy is with CASA Freehold or is or is not of legal status is still unknown. When the issue first came up, the Mayor should have stood for his appointee, explained what he knew, and said why he chose him.

Brian -- the man who runs this site --- even made a case for why such a person could be valuable on the committee. In fact, one of the better threads on the issue discussed the relative merits of appointing a person who might be either illegal, out of town, or merely a day laborer.

Maybe for some the issue is the guy himself. To me, the issue is the appointment process, the political games, the silence, and the seeming inconsistency with what is said about the individual and the Mayor's stated tough positions.

If one of my appointee's came under fire -- I would find out why, and then answer the issue. I said this before, if the gentleman is a legal resident, and a non-partisan, the Borough would have jumped up and said so right away. (if that is the case -- I am shocked they have waited) If that is not the case, then all this tactic and delay is pure politics aimed at not wanting to say one of two things.

1. Yes, I knew his status and appointed him because [Insert justification]

or

2. No, I didn't know his status, but appointed him because (Insert justification)

The problem is -- both 1 and 2 are not politically great.

Frankly, if the Mayor had knowledge of his status -- assuming that it is not legal -- and appointed him, he should have defended that appointment and told the people he has served why he believes the appointment is good, and how it will help the town.

The man has served for 22 years, and enjoys support in town. Just tell the people what is really going on. If this is a shift from "bring it on" to "can't we all get along" then he ought to just come out and say that. I think he would have made some people mad -- he certainly would have made me mad. But, I will tell you this, he never would have made me as mad as when I thought he was trying to have it both ways.

I think Marc has come the closest to that concession. At the end of the day -- you have to do what you have to do for the good of the town. My issue is that this appears, consistent with my letter, to be an issue where words and actions cannot be reconciled.

The Town of Herndon once did it's own survey, and they found that almost 80% of day laborers were not legally in the country.
If the Borough wanted to put a day laborer on a policy making committee, they could find a legal resident. They might want to find one here legally, living in the Borough, and actively working to integrate his or herself into the community. That would be a great appointment. If that is this appointment, then the appointment ought to stay, and ought to be embraced.

If the appointment is not here legally, not a resident of Freehold, and active in open border's issues, then that is an entirely different appointment. One I would oppose -- and one I think most legal residents in Freehold oppose.

That is the issue. IMHO

[adefonzo]

richardkelsey said:

Well -- I disagree that there was critical internet content aimed at the appointee. I think the content was aimed at the appointment.

I know i have said that I am opposed to the appointment of open borders' advocates. I also said that the Borough should have a policy for all its appointments to check legal residency.

I took the personal view that appointments, absent some compelling reason or some dearth of available candidates, should be residents of the Borough of Freehold.

The man appointed might be terrific.

For me -- the criticism is with the appointment process, particularly juxtaposed against the Mayor's tough talk on illegal immigration.

Frankly -- the poor guy has been hung out to dry by the silence. The Mayor should have disclosed the appointment and defended it for the reasons he made the appointment. Instead, he let politics dictate his course of action.

Whether this guy is with CASA Freehold or is or is not of legal status is still unknown. When the issue first came up, the Mayor should have stood for his appointee, explained what he knew, and said why he chose him.

Brian -- the man who runs this site --- even made a case for why such a person could be valuable on the committee. In fact, one of the better threads on the issue discussed the relative merits of appointing a person who might be either illegal, out of town, or merely a day laborer.

Maybe for some the issue is the guy himself. To me, the issue is the appointment process, the political games, the silence, and the seeming inconsistency with what is said about the individual and the Mayor's stated tough positions.

If one of my appointee's came under fire -- I would find out why, and then answer the issue. I said this before, if the gentleman is a legal resident, and a non-partisan, the Borough would have jumped up and said so right away. (if that is the case -- I am shocked they have waited) If that is not the case, then all this tactic and delay is pure politics aimed at not wanting to say one of two things.

1. Yes, I knew his status and appointed him because [Insert justification]

or

2. No, I didn't know his status, but appointed him because (Insert justification)

The problem is -- both 1 and 2 are not politically great.

Frankly, if the Mayor had knowledge of his status -- assuming that it is not legal -- and appointed him, he should have defended that appointment and told the people he has served why he believes the appointment is good, and how it will help the town.

The man has served for 22 years, and enjoys support in town. Just tell the people what is really going on. If this is a shift from "bring it on" to "can't we all get along" then he ought to just come out and say that. I think he would have made some people mad -- he certainly would have made me mad. But, I will tell you this, he never would have made me as mad as when I thought he was trying to have it both ways.

I think Marc has come the closest to that concession. At the end of the day -- you have to do what you have to do for the good of the town. My issue is that this appears, consistent with my letter, to be an issue where words and actions cannot be reconciled.

The Town of Herndon once did it's own survey, and they found that almost 80% of day laborers were not legally in the country.
If the Borough wanted to put a day laborer on a policy making committee, they could find a legal resident. They might want to find one here legally, living in the Borough, and actively working to integrate his or herself into the community. That would be a great appointment. If that is this appointment, then the appointment ought to stay, and ought to be embraced.

If the appointment is not here legally, not a resident of Freehold, and active in open border's issues, then that is an entirely different appointment. One I would oppose -- and one I think most legal residents in Freehold oppose.

That is the issue. IMHO

Rich...I am surprised at you...you have been a keen observer of the political situation in this town for years...haven't you learned yet that Mayor Wilson never explains himself? Haven't you learned that Mayor Wilson is seemingly above such expectations of an elected official? Don't you know that he enjoys such a strong support in town because of the "political machine" that you continue to reference? That machine does not require politicians who are honest, forthright, and transparent...it simply requires a face and name the people know.

As far as this being a shift from the "bring it on" days, that started the minute the Mayor and town council started "opening lines of communication" with the very groups that just embarrassed them in a lawsuit (though they still refuse to admit that the settlement was in any way a loss - it's amazing what they're putting in that Kool-Aid nowadays). "Bring it on" was a way to try and rally the troops...figuring they would forget in a couple years when the lawsuit was over.

"Bring it on"...well, they brought it Mr Mayor...and you folded like a cheap suit. "We couldn't justify letting the legal fees continue to escalate"...what about the incalculable money the illegal immigrants have cost this town over the past 10+ years??? I guess we can continue to bear that burden, but $350,000+ in legal fees and funds to refund violations...that's just too much.

Look, this is certainly not the first time something rather sketchy has happened under the watchful eye of Mayor Wilson, and it surely will not be the last. Don't expect an answer from him on this...and even if he gives one now, it's too late...it would just be a response to political pressure now. As you said, Rich, if he was so sure that his appointment was the right thing, he would have defended it from the start. The only thing we can look forward to is Mayor Wilson not seeking another term in 4 years...I'm not holding my breath.

[Libyan Sibyl]

Rich, he is a member of Casa Freehold per the Los Nosotros article where he was interviewed. He is also a member of LLA.

And yes, he was hung out to dry. I don't think any of the attacks were against this man personally, but rather against the appointment of Casa Freehold and an alleged illegal alien who is allegedly not even living in this town.

p.s. Ali, you phony, your english has improved tremendously.

[casualreader]

Still More on Senor Juan Reyes and his appointment to the Human Relations Committee??

The only people who care about this are three posters on this board. The issue has no juice -- It is going nowhere.

It is as dead as Councilman Crawford. Nobody Cares.

Kelso dude placed it in a letter published in a local newspaper.

What was the reaction -- NOTHING.

I have yet to hear of any major protest over the issue.

Reyes is essentially a volunteer providing free outreach to borough officials about a community they know little about.

Wake me up when there is a serious issue to discuss.

Casually Getting his ZZZZ's

[richardkelsey]

casualreader said:

The only people who care about this are three posters on this board.

It's probably 6 or 7 people -- but I agree -- it appears no one cares, not even the papers.

The fact that no one appears to care -- may be the biggest story of all.

[admin]

richardkelsey said:

casualreader said:

The only people who care about this are three posters on this board.

It's probably 6 or 7 people -- but I agree -- it appears no one cares, not even the papers.

The fact that no one appears to care -- may be the biggest story of all.

Actually, that is going to change. I was interviewed on the topic and this will be in the papers. Of course, we will have to see what happens. The papers could go in any direction.

I hope to see more of this issue in the papers. The reason is because I want to know the truth. The Mayor could easily have answered us here and the silence has been scary. When this issue hit, the friends of the Mayor all turned tail and ran. I want to know why. If this does hit the papers, and the full truth is told, I am curious if the site participants were right or wrong. Will we all be vindicated or made to be fools? Only honest answers will tell us that.


I know you mentioned this appointment in your letter, Rich, but I believe the point was lost due to how ticked people got at your tone.

[bergsteiger]

A snow ball starts out small rolling down hill

[adefonzo]

adefonzo said:

Don't expect an answer from him on this...and even if he gives one now, it's too late...it would just be a response to political pressure now. As you said, Rich, if he was so sure that his appointment was the right thing, he would have defended it from the start. The only thing we can look forward to is Mayor Wilson not seeking another term in 4 years...I'm not holding my breath.

just remember this if there is an article and all of a sudden, there is a revelation from the Mayor and Town Council