Ignore poll misinformation; make an informed choice

We've read it all on the Web site BC Voice (and nowhere else, mind you). According to "BCVoice Insiders," Binghamton mayoral candidate Douglas Drazen is a backfiring Pontiac J2000, while incumbent Matt Ryan's Boxster is being challenged, side-by-side, by Republican Rich David's slick M5.

In fact, if you read BC Voice with any regularity, on a mind-numbing number of threads you've seen that Mr. Drazen has no shot. He needs to pull out. If he doesn't, David's destiny will be thwarted by a veering clunker and the local anti-Christ's Porsche will sail across the line, beating an opponent that, some will tell you, could have won this race, if not for that dog-gone rust-bucket J2000 blocking all things progressive.

It's all bunk.

Like anyone else who posts on that Web site, I'm allowed an opinion. The difference? I actually sign my name to my view, good or bad, and I try to back those opinions with facts. While I don't have hard-and-fast numbers to throw at you today, I can tell you this, with a fair degree of certainty: Just about all polling information you read about there? Contrived. And it's contrived by one camp or another to attempt to sway you away from a cause, or toward another.

In a word, it's what's "wrong" with polls. Too many times, instead of being used by camps to gauge how things are proceeding for their candidate, they're used to garner sway. Time-honored tradition, of course. And misleading as it gets.

Let's say you have one internal poll that tells its supporters that their candidate is way up. Well, certainly they want that information out there. A salvo like that could be demoralizing to a foe. But let's say that same candidate's volunteers aren't hearing good news in their phone conversations with voters. Their candidate is down and it's looking grim.

Hey, not to worry. People love a front-runner, right? They like to ride with a winner. No one loves the thought of spending a vote on someone who "just can't win" or who may "cost the election" for another candidate who might just be a tad more palatable than the final choice.

So the spin comes out sideways. Translation: A candidate's camp will report false information to create a better buzz.

If you think this doesn't happen you (a) have never worked on a political campaign, and/or (b) just joined us on our fair planet.

I don't particularly like the job that Matt Ryan's done as mayor, so I'm not going to vote for him (nor did I last time around). That fact, alone, won't likely move anyone away from supporting the man, which is why I began questioning him, and some in his administration, about things that simply ... look wrong.

I've gotten him to respond, in his own words, to some pretty pointed questions, and in doing so, he's gone emotionally off the hinge. When he did answer questions, he was either disingenuous, or, I felt, he wasn't telling me the truth. I base that on several contradictions ... again, in his own words.

His approach is so far to the left that it doesn't register on my "liberal-centrist-conservative" screen, and I'm surprised that so many fairly conservative local Dems (see: Joe Merrill as a primary example) would express support for him to continue in this job. That sort of thing makes me highly skeptical about the back-room deals and potential strong-arming I've heard about lately in the local Democratic hierarchy (ie, you support X candidate, or come the end of the year, you may just find yourself on a job hunt).

Rich David, meanwhile, is a fellow I like personally. He replaced me in the community relations coordinator role at City Hall when I became Deputy City Clerk, so I know him a little bit. I also dealt with him on issues while I served on City Council in 2005. We sometimes butted heads, but maintained what I believe was a mutual respect, even in the event of dissimilar opinions.

I view Rich David as more of a traditional pol who would have his strengths and downfalls, like anyone, but who was also indoctrinated in The School of Bucci ... which isn't a bad thing at all, in my estimation. It's a conservative route, socially and fiscally.

I wonder if tradition is what's needed right now, though. Could be. But we see the city's in dire need of someone standing on the brakes, then turning this thing in a completely different direction. Armed with his background, is Rich David going to be able to steer things off a worn, tired road? I don't know. If he's elected, I hope so. If elected, he'll have my support.

Although some who frequent the BC Voice political forums surmise I'm a Drazen operative, or that I'm working on his campaign, neither is true. I currently have a Doug Drazen sign in my lawn. I voted for him last time around, and I may be voting for Doug again.

Doug's never asked me to help with his campaign, and I have not. That said, all the blather and bluster on BC Voice about him being a clown or being a whackjob either comes from folks who haven't met him, have seen a clip of him poking sardonic fun at an issue, or who simply wouldn't vote for him in the first place, based on their political biases.

Drazen is quirky and eccentric (maybe why my wife busts my chops, saying it's part of the reason I agree with him so often). His comments on how he'd tackle issues within City Hall and citywide have been perceived by some as perhaps too conservative, bordering on radical. But what I like is that, as he puts it, there's no political machine behind him, and he'll sink or swim on his word, in the public eye.

Oh, yes. This was supposed to be about polls and their validity. Suffice to say, my sources are as solid as any you'll read on this site, and as of last week, there were three candidates running neck-and-neck (and neck). In fact, in one instance it was reported to me that, according to a Rich David pollster, that there appears to be a David-Drazen flip-flop at the front of the pack, with Matt Ryan right there, just behind them.

It really points up the importance of voters getting to the polls on election day, making the most informed decisions they can. Don't let poll misinformation factor into how you spend that one vote.

Take everything you read and hear about polls with a grain of salt. That includes what I say here.

***

And now, for something completely different.

Matt Ryan and the Code Enforcement Contradiction

"I'm not gonna lie. I'm not gonna say that, you know, everything is enforced fairly. We have so many code violations in the city, we can't cite 'em all at once. You can't ... and we also have the problem of trying to find the people."

Last month I was one of several local taxpayers and homeowners to announce the formation of an oversight committee in the City of Binghamton. In theory, the group would monitor and question the city on issues related to code enforcement, or not to put too fine a point on it, areas where the enforcement of code was either miserably lacking, or terribly misguided, sometimes to the extent of the glaring appearance of vast lapses in ethics, and in some cases, the suspicion of illegality.

For example, in a previous blog entry I reported on a situation encountered by neighbors of mine. They received a code violation for a shared garage, the other half of the garage residing on the property of a vacated house. The two properties share a driveway.

The code violation corresponded with an admitted interest from the city’s mayor, Matt Ryan, and a man who, on numerous occasions, has referred to himself as the mayor’s business partner. That man, Robert Cavanaugh, has since been indicted by the Broome County district attorney on three felony counts relating to his contracting business.

The mayor admitted that he and Cavanaugh were, on some level, interested in the next-door property to my neighbors. It may have been an investment property, or one he would have bought to live in, himself, said Matt Ryan.

You may recall from that previous blog entry that when asked, on the spot, who reported the garage as a code violation, the following three responses were offered by three involved parties:

* Dave Chadwick, then-code director, now retired, but still reporting to work at City Hall in the capacity of consultant, said he didn’t recall who reported the garage.

* Chris Schleider, the code officer who wrote the ticket on the property, told me he had no comment, and that I should ask Matt Ryan or Dave Chadwick. He also told me that the information could be had through FOIL, also know as freedom of information legislation. (It should also be noted here that my neighbor said he was told by Schleider that he was directed to check out the garage by his boss - Chadwick, who had received direction from the mayor. Chadiwck and Ryan have since denied this.)

* Matt Ryan, the mayor, admitted in a taped phone conversation (at which time he knew he was being taped), that it was indeed Robert Cavanaugh who reported the garage to code enforcement. Ryan also said he asked Cavanaugh why he made such a report.

In the meantime, my neighbors have tried to move on. They recently shelled out a fair amount of money to have a different private contractor come in to remedy the garage situation. That side of the garage is now down. Problem is, they only own half.

So as you sit reading this, the other half of the garage sits crumbling. And what’s the city been doing about it since the spring? After checking in with my neighbors, they gave me the go-ahead to dig around a bit. They said they’re none too pleased having to face the other half of the garage now, as nothing appears to be in the works.

I inquired with the city’s new code director, Tom Costello, in an e-mail Tuesday. I copied the mayor on the e-mail, as well as Dave Chadwick, since he’s still employed there in some capacity. I asked what action, if any, has been under way regarding the monstrosity that sits next to my neighbors. Certainly, if their garage was a safety hazard back when the mayor had some interest in “running the numbers” on the next door property, then it’s assuredly no safer today as it sits, crumbling.

I received the following response from Costello at 5:37 p.m. Tuesday:

I have reviewed documentation for the property ... and noted that the property was inspected repeatedly in response to a series of complaints about lawn maintenance, uneven sidewalks, and structural deficiencies located at or on an existing accessory structure (garage). The most recent inspection was conducted on 5/17/2009.

Given this information, I have referred your questions to the Inspector who is responsible for this district, Chris Schleider. When he has responded to my inquiry, I will give you the most current information about the parcel.

I wrote back at 7:37 p.m.

Mr. Costello, I appreciate your prompt response. I'll share it with my neighbors.

It concerns me that the most recent inspection is listed in department records as more than 5 months ago. I'll be sending you photos of the remaining structure, photos that were taken this week (Monday, specifically), that will serve as visual evidence.

It's somewhat alarming that when the mayor had personal interest in this property, his administration's code enforcement division provided a full-court press. Yet when that interest subsided, so did the pressure to rectify a situation a man purporting to be the mayor's business partner deemed "unsafe."

I look forward to what Mr. Schleider has to say about this on-hold situation.

In the meantime, I couldn't help but note some incredible hypocrisy by the mayor, or perhaps someone who wrote a statement on his behalf. In either event, it was attributed to Matt Ryan, regarding code enforcement in the city. It was dated September 17, 2009, and was disseminated to members of the area media.

“The city’s commitment to transparency includes complying with all FOIL requests and encouraging citizen input on operations,” Matt Ryan’s statement read. “The city’s policy is to enforce the Housing Code fairly and equitably citywide. The city’s enforcement record speaks for itself.”

I agree that things do, indeed, speak for themselves. That includes when the mayor spoke for himself, in that same taped September phone conversation I mentioned above, about the city’s code enforcement efforts. The following are his words, verbatim:

"I'm not gonna lie,” said Mayor Ryan. “I'm not gonna say that, you know, everything is enforced fairly. We have so many code violations in the city, we can't cite 'em all at once. You can't ... and we also have the problem of trying to find the people.

“I mean, ya know, one of the things is - and I'll admit it - the local people who get fined, ya know, are the ones who end up, ya know, in court more (laughs) because (laughs) they're here,” Mayor Ryan went on to say. “It's very hard when someone's out of state to get 'em in court. It's very costly and, uh, it's almost impossible sometimes.”

Matt Ryan said that part of the problem is a lack of manpower. He added that another problem is the city’s small legal department.

“People say they should do this and do that, then they say, well, you should cut this and cut that,” he said. “What you end up with at the end of the day is, ya know, uh, an organization that's too small to have any great accomplishments except hold the line.

“It's not like we have a team ... that's why it was so important to consolidate tax collection with the county, which we did in six months, which the other group talked about for years and never accomplished anything,” Ryan added.

"... some people get caught in the system, uh, that you don't want to get caught in like Mrs. Monico - though I still think her sons (laughs) letting their mother go to jail over $500 ... I wouldn't have done that to my mother, but anyway, um ... ya know ... it's not a perfect world, so if you wanna, if you wanna, you know ... and I'm a, I'm a ... strong advocate,” Mayor Ryan continued.

“I was a really good public defender (laughs) and, uh, I made some of those arguments, the law's not fair, and we should ... and wouldn't it be great if everything was perfect,” he said.

“And you do that when you, when you ... ya know, my job was to make that argument and try to convince a court that somebody was, ya know, wrongfully prosecuted or overly prosecuted because of who they were,” Ryan said. “And that was part of the equation. But in this case, these code violations are not that.

“There's a lot of code violations that we've cited that we just can't get enforcement on, and it's not that easy.”

Speaks for itself.

***

And now, something completely different.