As a good-government watchdog, I have learned the hard way to be skeptical. When it comes to local politics there is no such thing as a coincidence. Gloucester Township is no exception.

At a council workshop meeting last year I witnessed two groups giving two pitches for their respective organizations. As I sat there, I noticed one proposal seemed to take a long time with council members asking a lot of questions. The second one flew through with barely anyone paying attention. This second presentation was Rocco’s Collision asking for a tax abatement. As I turned to the person sitting near me to ask why the difference in treatment, he replied Rocco’s is “connected,” the first presenter was not. I thought he was joking until he explained the connection:  Rocco’s is owned by Mark Cipparone. His brother, Rocco Cipparone, is the attorney for the GT Democratic Party chairman, Kevin Piccolo.

Even as someone relatively new to GT Council meetings at the time I thought it odd that a business that was already constructing their office and might have already opened for business would be asking for a tax break, and I also found it odd Council barely asked any questions. Government usually hands out tax abatements to entice business. Once they open, there was nothing to incent.

Months later, I proposed pay-to-play reform to that same Council. In an attempt to impeach me after I had clearly stated I was not investigating party PACs, a councilman brought up information about the Republican PACs. With that door opened, I researched the Democratic PACs and found a very disturbing set of coincidences.

1. On Oct. 22, 2010, Sam Siler formed a pay to play laundering PAC named “GT Citizens for Government Reform.” According to their ELEC forms, the treasurer of this PAC was Marianne Coyle, a customer service rep for Rocco’s Collision. In addition to her duties at Rocco’s, she is a member of the GT Democrat Committee and at one point became the secretary to GT Solicitor Dave Carlamere.
2. In late December 2010, Council introduced the ordinance giving Rocco’s a tax abatement, passing it 6-0-1 on its second reading in January 2011.
3. In April 2011, Sam Siler became a candidate for GT Council and Cynthia Carlamere (wife of GT Solicitor) took over his PAC. Coyle was still Treasurer, but listed her position as the GT Solicitor's secretary as her employer.
4. Also in April 2011, Coyle won a seat as a school board member of the Gloucester Township Public Schools board. 
5. Mark Cipparone personally donated $1,000 and Rocco’s as a company donated $3,000 to the campaign PACs.

I might be too cynical, but, in my opinion, given the relationship between the GT Democratic Party’s Chairman and Rocco’s, this timeline to me reads like a series of quid pro quos: Rocco’s employee manages one of Mayor-Council's campaign PACs and in return Rocco’s gets a tax break. Mark Cipparone donates a total of $4,000 to the party and gets a tax break. Rocco Cipparone himself represents the party chair in a federal criminal investigation and the company named for him gets a tax break. Is this the party’s method for paying for his representation? Marianne does the PAC work of the party and in return, she is rewarded with a school board seat. Too many coincidences for me to ignore.

According to GT Tax records, Rocco’s is assessed at $849,700. Using tax rates for 2011, the tax abatement has a value of $26,494. Most abatements cover a 5-year period. Assuming no tax increases, this is a total gift to the Cipparones of $132,468. Assuming a 4% yearly tax increase, this amount is as high as $143,498 over the same 5-year period. 

This blog is not about Rocco’s Collision of the quality of their work. I was glad to see a small business open and enjoyed driving past their location to see their exquisite artwork of cars in their window. I even thought of bringing one of my cars there. This blog is about how your elected officials use their offices to reward those who are connected to their party. I admit I am jaded given how Council has handled pay-to-play reform so I’ll ask you to come to your own conclusions:

1. Why give a tax break to a business that has already made the decision to open here and already had invested significant capital in building the site? Municipalities are allowed to offer abatements for redevelopment projects according to state law, and there might not have been any kind of link between the tax break and the party connection, but …
2. Why did our Council, and the Solicitor they defer to on ethics issues, completely ignore the conflict of interest of giving a tax break to the employer of one of their campaign PAC treasurers who is also a party member? Any one of the Council members and the Solicitor should have used better judgment than to give a tax break in excess of $132,468 to a company that is as connected as Rocco’s and whose owner was a campaign donor. Even if technically legal, it doesn’t pass the “sniff test.” It reeks of a pay-to-play type of reward.  A $132,462 return from a $4,000 investment is one very nice ROI.
3. Mayor-Council team Chief of Staff Gabby Mosquera is proposing ending multi-millionaires tax cuts in her Assembly election mailers. Why hasn’t she as Chief of Staff proposed measures to end politically connected tax breaks? Is this why they have fought so hard and for so many months to block pay-to-play reform? Would Rocco’s have gotten that gift from Council if their employee was not treasurer of one of their campaign funds?

At the same time many of us are having difficulty making our mortgage payments and are seeing stagnant wages while our property taxes go up to feed the political machine, a “connected” firm in Gloucester Township got a tax break worth at least $132,468 from their fellow party members on Council. How many other deals like this are out there just waiting for someone to make the connection?  How many campaign contributors and committee members got sweetheart deals while your neighbors' homes go into foreclosure? This is why we need pay-to-play reform now.

Let your voice be heard. Demand your government be accountable for their decisions. It’s your money.