Editorial: Voters' Choice Tossed - No Place for TKO at Polticial Ringside

In the 32nd City Council district which covers parts of Richmond Hill, Ozone and South Ozone Parks, Woodhaven, Howard Beach, Hamilton Beach, Broad Channel and parts of the Rockaway peninsula, a special election for the city council seat will take place next Tuesday, February 24.

Although for our readers in the West, the election is not directly connected to their district, we wanted to share this editorial with them because what has happened in the 32nd could easily occur in any district, leaving constituents vulnerable and at the hands of those seeking elected office for all the wrong reasons.

In many past elections, this newspaper has endorsed candidates for various elections. This time our endorsement is somewhat unconventional. It goes to a candidate who is not in the race. His name is Frank Gulluscio and the reason Frank will not win this special election in because he was removed from the ballot due to a ruling by a judge in reference to the manner in which subpoenas for his petitions were served.

The purpose of gathering signatures for nominating petitions is for candidates to demonstrate that they have enough support from their potential constituents. We agree that there should be challenges to such volumes where flaws and defects exist concerning those who actually witnessed the signatures or in meeting requisite numbers of signatures, providing, of course, they were collected with no fraud involved.

But Geraldine Chapey has succeeded in making a mockery of the petition process, hiring a top-dollar election lawyer to get her opponents off the ballot not on the merit or quality of their signatures but technicalities that do not reflect the desire of the voters. To us that would strongly suggest that the voice of the people can be overruled by an error in paperwork or procedure. This we find inexcusable and void of ethic.

Last week we commented on the Wave’s debate in Rockaway where questions regarding Chapey’s city and state taxpayer funded Trinity Services were left unanswered in the minds of many. Chapey’s contemptuous attitude when a similar question arose from an audience member re-introduced the subject at this Thursday’s debate. It infuriated the crowd. At one point Chapey directed a comment to the audience. “If you don’t want to listen then please go outside.”

Chapey’s Trinity Services has been the recipient of well over a million dollars to provide youth and senior services. It is not an unfair question to ask who is employed by the program and how much of the money is spent on staffing. It’s not unreasonable to ask any other question regarding the disbursement of those public funds by a not-for-profit agency subject to public disclosure rules.

Another question that did not get asked but in our view requires an answer has been floating around regarding Trinity. People all across this country have been questioning and expressing dissatisfaction with the role lobbyists have been playing. Many believe, that a lot of our tax dollars have been wasted because lobbyists have influenced far too much in government to “feed” their clients from the public coffers.

A roam around another of our favorite sources of public information, the city’s lobbyist and client database, reveals some factoids. Between April 1, 2005 and December 31, 2008 Trinity Services, Inc. was the client of some well-known lobbyists to the tune of more than $60,000. Whose pockets did that money come out of as it moved into the pockets of the lobbyists is a fair question. Is that what the proceeds of the annual Trinity Luncheon were spent on? Is that what the “donations” to ride the van were spent on? Who knows? But, there are voters who want to know.

As if all this were not enough, the whole “pay to play” issue took another twist this week as the Daily News reported on an odd contribution to Chapey’s campaign coffers from the Bishop of Brooklyn. Bishops don’t usually mix themselves up publicly in “big” political races, much less the most local of local races. It doesn’t take much to agree that the “smell test” has turned in a pretty big failure in this case. Seems Candidate Chapey’s mother, the other Geraldine is a member of the State Education Department’s Board of Regents. The regents have a big say so when it comes to approving charter schools.

Now we’re not opposed to charter schools, but if a scheme is afoot to create them as political “rewards” rather than as a viable public education option for our children then something smells - please excuse the pun - to high heaven. Glenn DiResto got it right when he said in the News article, "It creates a suspicion of impropriety. This is politics as usual.”

Chapey was successful in narrowing the field of candidates. Her success was the voters’ loss. As candidates, both Frank Gulluscio and Eric Ulrich stood head and shoulders above Simon, Chapey, and Ricatto in all respects. Democracy lost in this round. Frank’s out, Eric’s in. The choice for the time being is clear as a bell. In November, we can all tune in for the race that should have been now.

The Forumnewsgroup/photo by JULIE COURT

Great Debate - Some Ill Equipped, Some Ill Mannered, but Prepardness Wins Crowd Over

Politics Unusual
By Patricia Adams

The last of the locally sponsored candidate debates took place last Thursday evening in meeting room at St. Barnabus Church. The Queens Chronicle and The Forum served up the first 45 minutes of questions and then opened the floor for a 20-minute round of pre-screened audience questions. There were pointed questions regarding a number of issues asked, some were answered, others skirted, while some left the candidates downright stumped.

There was no applause meter necessary to distinguish that Eric Ulrich drew the most active and verbal support of the standing-room only crowd. Of course everyone realizes that historically, candidates pack the audience with supporters and planted hecklers, but Mr. Ulrich was not only the recipient of cheers of those who accompanied him. The supporters of his opponents liked what he had to say as well. Ulrich came out way on top of this debate and deservedly so. For his command of the issues, combined with the best speaking style and the fact that he was so well prepared, we put him at the head of the class for this event.

Lew Simon was Lew Simon. Opinions of his candidacy were expressed here weeks ago and we believe that his long-standing track record of documented untruthfulness eliminates him from consideration because of the obvious deficits in character associated with not telling the truth. And really why elect Lew to the city council? According to him he’s already doing the job for you, so why not just get two councilmen for the price of one. It is only fair to give credit where it is due however, and we must say that Lew has a somewhat effective dynamic when speaking and does have a strong command of many of the issues-- albeit seen in his own light.

Glenn DiResto is apparently a nice guy. A retired NYPD Lieutenant, DiResto makes no bones about the fact that he is not a politician or a polished speaker. He simply wants to come in and do what’s best for the district. Touting his years in law enforcement as a strong training ground for understanding what the district needs, DiResto cites the same experience as his foundation for understanding the structure and mechanisms of city government. We like DiResto and have a feeling we will be seeing more of him in the future. For now though, he is not ready, but certainly has had a great opportunity to experience some of the highs of politics and bear witness to some of the all time lows we’ve ever seen in a local race.

When speaking about Mike Ricatto we can’t really say more than Mike says himself. He’s a businessman. While we have great respect for the success of people who make the most out of a good business model, in the times we are facing currently, the savvy of business is not what will bring home the bacon to this district. A true understanding of the issues, priorities and functions of city government is the only formula for any semblance of holding on for the upswing; for according to the proposed budget, there is no bacon to bring home. His obvious unfamiliarity of the area, centered both on geography and major issues, and his political inexperience will not send Mike Ricatto to the City Council this time around.

The remaining candidate, Geraldine Chapey, brought with her something the other candidates seemed to have left at the door — an attitude. A bad one. Chapey spent most of her opening statements reveling in a tale about a “kindergarten epiphany” when her mother, also named Geraldine Chapey, essentially explained to the teacher that while other children were quick to give up tasks, her Geraldine always took them on and finished them. Her answers to the questions were indirect, lacked substance and often spoke about connections to other governmental representatives with whom she had good working relationships. The position of city councilmember is just that. The district is not seeking an ambassador.

Chapey largely emphasized her academic achievements but if this were a classroom, we can’t see her even approaching a passing grade for this event. Her answers drew boos from the crowd and in a collective opinion, an angry audience delivered a message to Chapey—they were disgusted with her antics. Her apparent unwillingness to answer a direct question did not bode well. Transparency, when it comes to the spending of public money is something voters all across this country are clamoring for. The public has a right to know. Elected officials and wannabe elected officials are subject to open questioning from those they seek to represent. Voters have the right to seek information and it is the obligation of a candidate to answer direct questions directly without dissembling.

But it wasn’t until the last round - when candidates got to pose questions to each other — that were taken from interesting and informative, to shall we say — a new level. When Eric Ulrich brought what he called to the room “the eight-hundred pound gorilla,” he touched on the subject that has everyone up in arms over the legitimacy of this race. Ulrich asked a pointed question of Chapey — “Geraldine why don’t you want Frank Gulluscio in this race?” Her first response was to ask Eric why he challenged the petitions of another candidate. Once again Ulrich rose to the top expressing that Frank Gulluscio belongs in the race because of all his work and experience in the district and making perfectly clear that his challenge to Mike Ricatto was because in his eyes, Ricatto was a ‘Johnny-come-lately to the district’ carpetbagger.

It was at this point when Chapey revealed herself to be, not a viable candidate for city council, but one who considers this election comparable to a game. “When you go into the pool hall,” Chapey said, “the rules are posted on the wall.”

Well guess what Dr. Chapey, you are trying to head for City Hall, not a pool hall where random balls are sunk into felt pockets using cue sticks. You don’t need a cue, you need a clue. This is no game.

Your answers and your attitude were not one bit reflective of the academic, Christian and proud Irish heritage you claim is the fabric of your existence. In an all important special election in the 32nd, you’ve created an upheaval not at all deserved by the people of this district, especially in an already difficult set of circumstances.

Until next week…

Ballot Challenges in 32nd District Stun Voters, Candidates

Two Knocked Off Ballot; Chapey’s Tactics Called "Witch Hunt"

By Patricia Adams

The supposed front runner for Joe Addabbo's council seat, Frank Gulluscio, was thrown off of the ballot by his opponent, Geraldine Chapey on Monday because of a legal technicality about the nature in which his validating petition was served.

The candidate quickly cried foul stating that, "the idea that this is a system meant to uphold democracy is preposterous when the signatures of thousands of voters can be rendered meaningless by a legal technicality. We must demand that we have a system where the will of the people cannot be overturned by lawyers."

"Geraldine Chapey has been on what can only be described as a witch hunt, dragging her opponents into court, causing us hours of wasted time and thousands of dollars in lawyer’s fees. She obviously feels that the only way she can win is to eliminate the competition using her lawyer, rather than in a fair election by the will of the people. I cannot imagine that the voters of the 32nd Council District would want to be represented by someone like that."

Also among the candidates not to survive the challenge was former NYPD Officer Glenn DiResto.

The hearing was originally scheduled today because Chapey's team was claiming Gulluscio did not have enough signatures to make it on the ballot. Gulluscio had vehemently denied this claim and came into court prepared with hundreds of signatures that he felt had been knocked off erroneously. However, before they had the chance to make their case, the judge threw out the entire case because of what she felt was an error in the service of the validating petition.

Gulluscio commented that, "Although I am disappointed by the tactics employed by my opponent, I look forward to pursuing all options to allow me to continue to serve the people of the 32nd Council District."

James Wu, a spokesperson for the Chapey campaign explained the matter this way, “Frank Gulluscio did not attain the ballot because he had insufficient signatures.”

Some confusion seems to have existed regarding what challenges were filed and what was ruled upon. While a challenge to the legality of Gulluscio’s use of a star on his petition was filed, that issue ultimately was never considered or ruled on. The objection to the use of the five-point star was that it’s a recognized symbol of the Democratic party, which is not allowed in the non-partisan special election petition process.

As the Elections Commissioners resumed with their regular meeting on Monday morning, before the Executive Session, there was a second call in which they decided that Gulluscio simply did not make the signature requirement. And so it was, with a swift and final decision that the candidacy of Frank Guluuscio was ended on a technicality, that which the candidate continues to maintain was in no way a fair representation afforded to the voters of the 32 Council District in the upcoming special election.

With the field now narrowed to four candidates, one of the remaining contenders, Mike Ricatto had this to say, "I am extremely disappointed that some candidates have been thrown off the ballot for the upcoming 32nd Council District Special election. The democratic process is about giving voters a choice and the opportunity to vote for candidates who share their values, ideals and vision for better government. I am against eliminating candidates from the ballot for legal technicalities. Geraldine Chapey and her legal team along with Eric Ulrich and his handlers Tom Ognibene and the Haggerty's have successfully tied up candidates in court preventing them from reaching voters. I am glad this unfortunate episode is over and I can continue my efforts to speak to voters throughout the district about the important issues that concern them."

The third candidate who remains on the ballot is Democratic District Leader Lew Simon, Geraldine Chapey’s co-leader on the Rockaway Peninsula. There is much speculation as to why Simon’s petition volume did not fall prey to Chapey’s challenge axe, but nonetheless, Simon is very disturbed over the fact that any candidates were removed from the ballot during the process of the special election.

“I have been co-leaders with Geraldine for the last 15 years. Never once during that time did she produce more than 100 signatures for the district leader race. I find it shocking that she was able to gather these many signatures but I firmly believe that there should have been no challenges in the special election, especially due to the time constraints of the process. The bottom line, according to Simon is that he was disappointed and shocked to see that people were knocked off the ballot.

Simon also raised serious questions about why there has been no record of filings at the Campaign Finance Board. “It’s obvious that Geraldine has spent money on posters, literature, mailing and staff and that nothing has been reported. I would be most interested to see an audit conducted to see if these expenditures are in tact.”

The fourth and remaining candidate, Republican District Leader Eric Ulrich was quick to express that his feelings about the process is that it is “antiquated and that our state officials really need to re-examine the rules so that citizens have the right to get on the ballot and run in an election.”

Ulrich maintains that one of the first steps toward ensuring better government in the city and state is to make ballot requirements less stringent. “It is truly unfortunate that Geraldine felt it was up to her to select her opposition instead of affording that opportunity to the voters in the 32nd to whom it truly belongs. She felt it was her choice and not theirs.”