en en en en en en en en en id en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en ca es es tr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en ko en en en en en de en en en en en en
Is Brigantine City Manager; Ed Stinson, following NJ State mandated Pay to Play (“PTP”) regulations? As of Sept. 2016, that answer is no. WATCH VIDEO.
PTP applies to most contracts the City of Brigantine enters into with vendors, contractors and other professional service providers. In general, the PTP requirements compel the contracting party to disclose all political contributions over a certain amount. See Local Brigantine PTP Ordinance here.
The goal of ‘Pay to Play’ rules is to prevent Brigantine City Manager Stinson, from signing no-bid contracts with those making political contributions over certain limits.
At a recent Brigantine City Council meeting, 4th ward councilman Rick DeLucry became aware that City Manager Stinson was not getting the required disclosures from all Brigantine vendors and professionals. Stinson stumbled through excuses why he hasn’t followed state law in this matter.
DeLucry smartly and legally abstained from a vote taken to pay vendors that Stinson admitted had not submitted ‘Pay to Play’ paperwork.
As usual, City Council majority lead by Mayor Guenther voted ‘yes’. Council members Lisa McClay & John Withers also, and once again voted against their colleague Rick Delucry. Both McClay & Withers voted with Guenther and OK’ed payments to vendors who (according to Mr. DeLucry) may have entered into non-valid contracts with the City of Brigantine. ( watch video )
See Bill Pay here for Sept 21 2016
PAY TO PLAY (PTP) regulations aren’t just good practice-they’re a legal necessity in Brigantine and through-out the State of New Jersey.
Under PTP, Brigantine has no authority to contract with any person or entity which has made political contributions over the allowed amount. Stinson was instructed to immediately determine whether he awarded any contracts that violate PTP.
The Press of Atlantic City called out the City of Brigantine for abusing ‘Pay to Play’ in the past.
Many small towns in South Jersey still operate like good old boys clubs, especially on the barrier islands. It’s all about pals, cronies and who went to high school with whom.
According to the Press of Atlantic City, Brigantine did pass a local pay-to-play ordinance to diminish the tawdry flow of campaign dollars from the city’s professionals. But Brigantine’s ordinance – which prohibits city contractors from donating more than $300 to candidates and more than $500 to political committees, and limits the total contributed from all partners in a firm to no more than $2,500 – is among the more liberal pay-to-play ordinances. The model ordinance caps all contributions from contractors at $300.
Read full stories in Press of Atlantic City >
Pay to play in Brigantine / Now close loophole
Brigantine lawmakers favor locals when it comes to contracts with the city
3 thoughts on “‘Pay To Play’ Still a Problem With Brigantine Contracts”
October 2, 2016 at 8:49 pm
What to Expect When the Forensic Accountant Arrives
Once financial fraud is suspected in a municipality, the fraud examination methodology requires that all allegations be handled in a uniform, legal fashion and be resolved on a timely basis. At each step in the fraud examination process, the evidence obtained and the approach is continually assessed. This investigation is frequently conducted for a municipality by a forensic accountant.
October 3, 2016 at 12:46 pm
Gov Christie doesn’t care. He’s hoping to wash his hands of NJ and get to Washington. Which does Brigantine no good and no wonder the real estate values will be falling again & another year in a row. Zillow, Trulia and Realtor.com published that Brigantine real estate values will fall another 1 1/2% to 2% next year.
If it keeps going the entire island will be worthless.
Good job Guenther/Simpson & Old Boys Club
October 5, 2016 at 9:34 am
Question to Stinson: can you at lease list the vendors that have not submitted the paperwork
Answer by Stinson: ah, the dog at my homework?
So in summary, Stinson should have had the disclosures before entering into the contracts, he didn’t, (unlawful) Stinson should then at least seen to it disclosures were filed post contract execution, he didn’t, (unlawful, lazy) Stinson should at the very minimal been able to advise council and the taxpayers which vendors had not submitted the disclosures , he didn’t (lazy, arrogant and INCOMPETENT).