This issue is more than about the selection of a local magistrate.
It's more than about stacking the local bench based on political ideology.
It's about how the Hopewell Township Committee chooses to operate . . . in secrecy, or with transparency.
IN THE NEWS
HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS - 03/31/2011: Letter to the Editor ~ Compelled to respond
HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS - 03/24/2011: Letter to the Editor ~ Represent us all!
TRENTON TIMES - 03/02/2011: Hopewell Township appoints judge amid controversy
VIDEO ISSUE UPDATES
Video Issue Update (02/28/2011)
Video Issue Update (02/07/2011)
CITIZENS SPEAK OUT
Melody Crawford Cannon (02/28/2011)
WHAT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BELIEVE
Deputy Mayor Markulec (02/28/11)
Township Committee Member Murphy (02/28/11)
Township Committee Member Sandom (02/28/11)
What do you think of this incident? Enter what's on your mind where it says Post a Comment, below.
See March 15, 2011, HVDemClub Editorial by Liberty Bell to learn our position on this issue.
Posted by: Liberty Bell | 03/16/2011 at 10:38 AM
TO: Fred B.
We are working on a site re-design already. It's due to launch sometime in the spring-early summer. The new site will feature many more social networking offerings.
HVDemClub.org Webmaster
Posted by: HVDemClub.org Webmaster | 03/07/2011 at 02:35 PM
This page needs a "Like" button just as Facebook. Then I could mark Allen's last comment with it.
Posted by: Fred B. | 03/04/2011 at 09:48 PM
Dear Fred B.
No, I am not aware of the salary associated with the position. It is hard to imagine that the pay would increase at a time when most government positions are in a pay freeze.
I am not sure if there is something in the water around here that's affecting local Mayors. It was surprising that the Deputy Mayor is the one who met with the candidate and discussed the position several months before the position became available.
This situation reminds me of lawyers looking for loop holes to get their clients off on a technicality.
The type of religion used is of no importance. It would only breed more separatism by making it a discussion point. The fact is, no religious-based selection process has any place in government when there are already bylaws and parliamentary procedures to draw from.
While I have nothing personally against the Judge as an individual, I think that I would not have accepted the position if I were him, considering how the decision was reached. One might reflect on the motives which drove this decision. Should a Judge insist on having a fair selection process? Maybe that is a question to be examined. Maybe a Judge with experience would have insisted on the process being transparent.
In my life, I have known many champions. They all stake their prowess on being "the best" by engaging all those who claim to be their equal. It is a mutual respect of technical and tactical proficiency that allows us to recognize the best in all disciplines. Sometimes you are just the best on that day. Sometimes you are just not at your best. But no matter what day it is, it is your ability to be consistently "best" that establishes your reputation.
I do not believe we have the best Mayor. I do not believe we have the best Judge. I do not believe we have the best Republicans on that committee.
The greater the differences in the collection of people, the more perspectives you have. It is those differences that promote a higher probability of reaching innovative solutions. It is time to move forward in a different way.
Not that long ago, the US Congress got a wake-up call through tragedy. We need to stay awake lest we sleep in a nightmare of our own creation -- with corruption and disenfranchisement being the bed in which our government slumbers all too comfortably.
Posted by: Allen J Cannon | 03/03/2011 at 07:09 PM
Allen, do you know if this new judge is getting paid the same as the previous judge? I'd be curious to know if there is a story behind that. Bravo to all who held in there on Monday night to watch...quite a long meeting.
I wonder what kind of religious based method was used? Did the mayor and deputy lock themselves away and reveal that a new judge was considered by having white smoke come out the municipal building chimney, like when a new Pope is chosen in Rome?
Posted by: Fred B. | 03/03/2011 at 01:39 AM
I attended the meeting Monday night. The evening was filled with 4 hours of animal shelter and sewer points and taxpayer money. After that the Jacobs Creek Bridge issues got a little time.
My comments go out to one and all in order to evoke thought and action. All of us have a right to be represented, and to have a voice. Our voices may not all agree. But they remain unsilenced by the Constitution of the United States of America.
As ethnicity has only recently been removed as a legal exclusion for participation in the political process, it is imperative that we make all necessary effort to exclude no citizen. Any exclusion, while no longer legal, may yet exist in the attitudes publicly displayed in assembled forums. No group - however differencing in ideology in this country - is to be excluded.
It is the responsibility of those in public office to enforce the right to be heard. Monday night, I asked the Mayor to enforce that right. My plea was based on my own sacrifice, as a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, and that of so many others who have died to protect that right.
The Mayor used a religious-based method of appointing a Judge, and did not allow all the members of the Committee to equally evaluate the candidates.
It is an affront to all in this township that the Mayor would use his personal religious methods to appoint any person, to any office. As we seek GOD’s sacred counsel in making decisions, it is only in prayer - during due process - that the spirit confirms or grieves what we do.
The office of Mayor serves in the best interest of the residents, and is sworn to protect and execute on the locality’s behalf.
It is a matter of public record that the Mayor refused an opportunity that would have caused him no harm, while supporting the ideals of the Constitution and his oath of office. The appointment would have passed on votes anyway. It is His honor’s total lack of honor that this taxpayer finds ethically despicable.
Certain groups have always seemed to experience less compassion from the justice system. Judges are the fabric of that system. The poor and minorities - both politically and ethnically - desperately need judges who are impartial. Equal protection under the law is what is at stake with every judicial appointment.
To know that the Mayor did not even have the consciousness of decency to allow the illusion of participation in due process is beyond my understanding.
["We will be made Kings and Queens by GOD through our humble service to those GOD has blessed to have need, that we may give of the more as HE so blessed others to have."]
I have spent my entire adult life away from my home, finally finding a sanctuary in this community. My sanctuary has been unsettled by what I'm seeing and hearing. We all know how unfortunate things happen when we refuse to talk. Disenfranchisement seems to be what politicians want in order to ensure they maintain and exploit their power to make personally beneficial decisions. I ask that we not relinquish our authority or interests to their self-serving and selfish agenda. We need to make them know that they are accountable to the citizens they are sworn to represent.
It is not about who the judge is. It is about how this selection was made. A man is innocent until proven guilty. This new judge has received this consideration, and yet the judge being replaced has not. There are no grievances against the Judge being replaced. Yet, the new judge still has questions to answer, and no bench experience to qualify him.
Maybe the Mayor should just pay for the judge himself . . . oh, that’s right, he will . . . using the township’s wallet as his own.
Posted by: Allen Cannon | 03/02/2011 at 11:18 AM
WOW . . . Is it the Mayor's sole decision as to who the new judge will be? What, if any, were the reasons for replacing the current judge? When is the Mayor up for re-election?
I think we should have a link on our site that profiles our Township Committee members' positions. The less we have to search around for the info the better. Maybe we could go as far as featuring some people, or giving our township a glance at our up-and-coming personalities.
I think if we concentrate on getting balance, instead of control of committees, we'll have the kind of checks and balances that will ensure perspectives are heard.
The videos really strike a negative chord as Mrs. Sandom appears to be outnumbered (see how your elected officials feel, above). We really need to get as many videos as possible. It makes a difference when you can see the interaction between individuals, and hear the words from the source.
Posted by: Allen J Cannon | 02/24/2011 at 02:15 PM