Letter to the Editor, from Brigantine Councilman, Rick DeLucry:…
On October 14, Respectable Government for Brigantine vice-president Vincent Sera posted a letter to the Brigantine Now website, regarding the recent rejection of his group’s petition seeking to revert Brigantine to the Commission form of government.
The letter began as follows:
“I would like to draw public attention to the fact that there has been a deliberate effort to prevent the people of Brigantine from exercising their right to vote”.
There is nothing remotely factual about Mr. Sera’s vile accusation. In that regard, it is consistent with virtually every other public statement made by his group concerning the Commission form and the petition process.
Petitioning is a simple process, clearly spelled out in state law. There are only three parts to a petition: the petition statement, the signatures and the affidavits verifying the signatures. The petitions submitted by RGB were deficient in all three areas. The responsibility for that failure lies 100% with the people who prepared, circulated and submitted the petitions-Mr. Sera and his fellow RGB officers.
Rather than acknowledging that reality, Mr. Sera instead creates the fantasy that RGB is the victim of unspecified wrongs at the hands of an unnamed “handful of individuals who hold a disproportionate amount of power”, and who are using “word games” and “legal technicalities” to take away people’s Constitutional rights.
Who are these individuals, Mr. Sera, and what exactly are you accusing them of doing?
Are you referring to the Democrats on City Council? I trust you understand that Council has no legal authority and took no role in the review of the petitions. Are you referring to the City Clerk? I would hope you understand that the Clerk is required by law to review and decide the legal sufficiency of all petitions, and that she has taken an oath to uphold the law fairly and impartially.
That is exactly what happened in this case. Even though it was evident on its face that the petition was invalid, the Clerk carried out her legal duty to review and verify every signature. That work consumed untold hours over many weeknights and weekends- and yes, she is entitled to be compensated for all that extra work. Most of all, I would hope that you will now exhibit the decency to publicly apologize to the Clerk for implying that she would ignore her sworn legal duty as part of your imagined “deliberate effort” to subvert voters’ legal rights.
If you want to demonstrate genuine respect for the voters, start by telling them the truth about why the petition was rejected instead of pointing fingers and attacking the integrity of people who had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Rick DeLucry
Subscribe BrigantineNOW
Well said, Councilman DeLucry!
“ME THINKS THOUGH DOTH PROTEST TO MUCH”
In response to Mr. DeLucry’s and Mrs. Phillip’s letters to the editor from last week in regards to the petition to change the form of government:
With all due respect to all involved in the process, there have been certain stumbling blocks that have had to be overcome, which is no reason for pillars of the community to publicly criticize fellow citizens and their efforts.
In addition, there is no proof that reducing the size of the government will lead to corruption and cronyism. In fact according to the majority of the current Council, the former Council & City Managers over the last 20 years are at fault for all of our current woes. So why not return to a more simplified form of government? This alone is a perfect reason to return to a format where elected officials are accountable to the public.
According to Mr. DeLucry,”if it was evident on its face” that the petition was invalid, why would the City Clerk have a legal duty to review and verify every signature on an invalid petition?
Why would anyone instruct the clerk to perform her legal duty on an invalid petition with “fatal flaws”?
Why was the petition not returned immediately with instructions to correct the deficiency of the circulators’ affidavits?
And lastly, as far as the sufficiency of the form of the question, that will likely be decided by the courts.
Ann Wenitsky