Yacobellis Out: Councilor Resigns, Will Not Finish Term

1. This article is a keeper!

   My hands-down favorite quote?

   “Peter Yacobellis’ hard work for Montclair was invaluable,” said Rep. Mikie Sherrill. “I have great respect for the responsiveness and advocacy he showed while representing the residents of Montclair. I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors.”

   Maybe reshuffle your staff? Maybe get in touch with your own town? Maybe Washington is taking its toll? The Rand Well $2MM and now this?

2. Want to express gratitude for your dedicated service to Montclair. Best wishes for your exciting new journey out West, Peter.

3. Well it’s about time!

4. He wanted to stay for vindictive reasons? He really is a piece of work. Good riddance. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

5. I sense anguish in the Council Member’s increasing need to depart the scene, and for that I certainly hope he can get help. As a fellow anxiety sufferer, it is nothing to be made fun of.

   Politics ain’t bean bag, as they say in politics, and sometimes hard truths are even better for the soul than easy truths. Mr. Yacobellis can’t simply leave town without an honest assessment of what he brought to the scene. He has his fans, obviously, many of whom are veterans of hard-knuckled politics in places far away from Montclair. But it is rich that someone who states he “truly can’t deal with the toxicity in politics anymore” is as responsible as anyone for fomenting the toxicity in our politics. Anger, lawsuits, hardball tactics, finger-pointing, Saul Alinsky-style methods and then finally the retreat from the scene as the ultimate victim…these are not the qualities of a beloved local leader. They are the personal tactics of a man of great ambition who disguised that ambition as “passion.” Peter Yacobellis as the Oppressed? Spare us.

   If this sounds too personal, it’s not because I knew the man. I did not. I am simply a long-time observer of the downward spiral of our local politics, and I pin its rapid acceleration on Mr. Yacobellis’ arrival.

   Please, fans of Peter, defend him, loudly and proudly. But let’s not mistake sawed-off political activism, anger and agrievement for virtue.

6. Sorry to see Peter go. We’ve always felt he was a great communicator. And when we chatted with him around town he was alway a pleasant guy. I had no problems with him. He always seemed very transparent. And I’m happy he was able to stick around and see the Lackawanna Plaza project come to fruition. Peter was much more involved in the goings on around town than Mayor Spiller! We wish him well.

   NOTE, Brian Scantlebury giving himself a $40k raise – now that’s something to look into!

7. It now seems plain that Peter was a shill. Once he performed his duty to those he was beholden to and returned their favors, he (who proudly claimed he was the biggest vote-getter) was allowed to exit, the voters be damned, likely leaving that seat vacant until July 1 and possibly paralyzing the Council (not entirely a good thing). Let’s give a cheer (joke) for his decisive votes: Lackawanna, GSG, LaPolla, Culturupt, O’Toole, and Council professional appointments). Together with the two stooges, this is lickspittle politics — straight out of Union County, Trenton, and a CGI-worthy illustration of partisan manipulation and shenanigans. You can debate any particular vote, but it’s clear to me that the well-being of the Township and its residents was not the primary concern of the four members of the majority. Too bad about Peter, who coulda been a contender. And too bad for Montclair, which Peter et al. traded to Trenton for a player or players yet to be named.
   All that lovely praise for Peter is just building his resume for his next job. Good luck. Many of us were not fooled.
   Reply
   1m

8. No matter what your opinion of Mr. Yacobellis, he has been the most divisive member to ever sit on this town’s council. He played national and state politics with Clinton, Boxer and Cuomo. I imagine, for that reason, with his brand of left of center politics (full disclosure, he received my vote), it made perfect sense for him to plant his blue flag at 205 Claremont. And plant it he did, “receiving the highest vote total for any mayoral or council candidate in the town’s history”, according to the article. So why then, didn’t he succeed more so in coalescing Montclair? After having observed him for almost four years, I suspect a lack of trust, honesty, genuineness, and an overabundance of not very well disguised opportunism, with a certain air of smugness. Those can be career killing personality traits in most municipal jobs, here it is anathema. Unfortunately, Mr Yacobellis misread us as some of us misread him. This town may be many things, but we recognize transparent naked ambition when we see it, and we find it off-putting and distasteful.

   I wish him well on his personal journey toward mental health and his travels westward. Perhaps he can find peace and greater success in Washington State finding something that sits at the intersection of protecting wildlife, the environment, and tourism.

9. IMO Ira and Silverleaf said it best above. No fooling us, watching the behavior over time is the best 20/20 vision. Also the tempermental behavioral antics were getting to be too much! Outta here with tail between legs is the picture I see.

10. I was once a major political supporter. Had great hopes for him on both policy position-taking and seemingly logical, quality of life views. Until many of my fellow issue activists and I, began to see his downsides more clearly. Eventually realized that we were duped. Watching him act as a “shill” now for big development with seemingly Trenton political/personal gains attached, as Ira Karasick notes. And even more concerning, using the office it appeared really for narcissistic driven fulfillments, as Silverleaf describes above.

    Sadly, Peter did have the smarts and political talent to be…but it was not “to be” in the end. By his own Shakespearean hand. So personally, I will wear a badge of honor now, getting sued by him while “outing” an all too obvious “conflict of interest” with developer David Placek. Especially should this become the key legal ruling in a lawsuit over Lackawanna…making Peter’s vote on the project and departing immediately thereafter — an obvious “Count”. One legal count among many, when a court eventually hears this Montclair tale.

    So stand by…next to to see who some of the clowns on this Council are actually thinking about appointing to fill the remainder of Yacobellis’s term. If they dare. Because the circus will continue clearly, until this Sean Spiller led group within is fully done…

11. You know, every time I comment at a meeting, it was because I privately told the councilors FIRST what the issue was. I always asked you to do the right thing privately, before telling ANYONE ELSE the issue. I explained that hiring Hartnett and having him or anyone else from his company serve as Town Manager was a conflict of interest” (just like Hartnett himself told the counsel) and likely, illegal; that “signing a knowingly false certification is against the law”; and that “the Open Public Meetings Act and the Open Public Records Act are not suggestions, they are requirements.” Peter Yacobellis was a great communicator, and I thought he was good for Montclair, but in retrospect, I see he was only good for Peter Yacobellis, and some of the things he has done were shady, at best. If he is “the defacto Mayor of Montclair,” what does that make Sean? Why is the council attempting to control the municipal employees, including the Town Manager, instead of respecting their roles under the Faulkner Act? I wish the Township Council could do the right thing for Montclair, but they so rarely make good choices for the long-term, and rather, seem to think about how they (and their political cronies) can benefit off the backs of the taxpayers. I mean, Lackawanna may be a great thing; however, the appearance of impropriety was there for Peter. He could have chosen not to vote, after voicing his strong support, and he (and Sean and Robin and Lori, who rarely seem to have opinions of their own), might have been able to convince a fourth member to vote for it. Instead, Peter Yacobellis stayed just long enough to push it through. I think the Palaceks do GREAT work all around this town, and I think in many ways, you tainted THEM unnecessarily. Shame on you. You should have stepped down weeks ago. You were in talks with Hartnett and LaPolla for years?!? Not for advice, but to plot and plan how to turn Montclair back into the mess it was under Tim Stafford? I am all about getting the mental healthcare (or whatever type of healthcare) one needs, but this was about Peter Yacobellis USING Montclair. Maybe you did some good, but you also showed us what crooked looks like. YOU know I campaigned for you. I made a lot more phone calls than anyone else, and I had really high hopes for you. I loved that you built a method of communication where nobody else had, but I really thought you would turn that into a forum for ALL of the councilors to communicate. Instead, you wanted to keep it for yourself, so nobody else could use your database. Now you say “you” helped to remove some of the people who always fought for Montclair? I heard you fight with Renee Baskerville, even though being on her slate was likely the REASON that Montclair even thought about voting for you. Was that really best for the taxpayers? You voted for so many things that screwed us (as a town) over for the long haul. Some of the stuff we may be able to change when this entire council gets voted out, but some things – like the clerk – we are likely stuck with. You have the audacity to say that you don’t appreciate dedicated municipal workers (who actually work more than 35 hours a week) and who do their jobs properly? The clerk and tax collector are supposed to act INDEPENDENTLY, which is their sole reason for tenure. You all voted for someone you could control, who wouldn’t turn over documents because they might cause YOU harm? Come on, Peter. You know or should have known (after diligent – or even cursory – inquiry), that was WRONG. You got the budget explained to you by Padmaja Rao (because you and your colleagues didn’t really know how to read a budget), but you want to rely on Bernake, who had his license pulled by the SEC, making it illegal for him to give advice on anything that could potentially be paid for by municipal bonds?) what for? So you could pay another white guy to make tons of money off of this town? You were all about giving tenure to a clerk who refuses to do the job and paying Cuturerupt and O’Toole Scrivo and Burr (who was a closing attorney with absolutely no experience) to do legal work, while admitting that with so much [outside] legal “help” you should have known better than to break the law? Come on. You were “against” keeping information from the Judge, but suddenly were all about Riker until the Judge told you the arguments seems inappropriate? It’s not like you DIDN’T know. The public told you. PILOTS are not necessary in Montclair. Developers don’t need “financial help,” but our schools do, and we deserve to have students adequately supported by tax revenues, instead of having the money flow directly to the municipality and the county. Why don’t you force rateables instead of making certain 0% goes to schools, regardless of the number of students the project is expected to bring in? Telling US we don’t understand how budgets work is a little offensive, don’t you think? A lot of US have MBA’s and accounting degrees and law degrees. This town is quite educated. Why talk down to us as if WE don’t understand. We may not, but you are supposed to assist us, not try to sell us a load of nonsense that could not possibly make sense to you. Helping animal welfare? How many animals did you actually help? (ZERO, because the “legislation” you voted for was completely irrelevant – it did not apply to Montclair). I know you like to get photos with amazing public figures who actually helped this country and this town and this district, but you helped yourself, on the backs of us taxpayers. That indemnification Ordinance, while I am still hopeful will fail, if used, showed us all who you REALLY are. You want taxpayers to pay for your mistakes, and you use your platform to mislead the public. It is the definition of propaganda. Rushing LaPolla in, instead of letting Scantlebury vote against the police chief and his improper promotions (he was voting AGAINST for very good and just reasons, including but not limited to lying about their time – something that you did, as well but you and Sean want more union support) was crooked. Suing constituents for stating their opinions (which certainly were not with “reckless disregard for the truth”) was very small of you, as were many of the comments you left on websites, but then had wiped (but not always before people took screenshots). We are neither nefarious (wicked) nor unsavory characters (I know I am actually quite morally wholesome, if not naive), but rather, people who actually plan to live here and raise our kids here, and not pretend some project is going up “close to your house” when you knew you would be leaving long before the project broke ground. Who is the nefarious one? I know a lot of Montclair does not necessarily follow what is going on, but for all of us that do, and loved and supported your efforts, you let us down, not by leaving, but by staying for long enough to do real damage, not just to us, but also to your reputation. As somebody at the meeting last week said (and I am probably getting it a little bit wrong), “I hope your days are as pleasant as you deserve them to be.”

12. “Many of us were not fooled.”

    Ira – Admittedly I was fooled. At least for a while until it became apparent what was at the center of his modus operandi, power grab and self-serving political launching pad. Political narcissism still comes under the label of narcissism. This much is certain, Yacobellis is a complicated individual, but you don’t need a Rorschach Test. That said, I typically don’t pile on and criticize to this extent, but I find him excessively offensive with Spiller trailing not far behind. But maybe Montclair has changed too much in the last eight years. And just maybe, within this change is reflected the sort of politician these two personify. Let it be a warning for the next election.

13. Silverleaf — I had the advantage of being on the inside and seeing, albeit not completely, the yawning gap between perception and reality. Efforts to narrow that gap were unsuccessful.

14. The other shoe has finally dropped. I am not certain how anyone can vote on a Tuesday, quit a job on Thursday and easily move across the country by next Tuesday into a new home. hmmmm Montclair has been dooped and now we all get to the pay the price of this one person’s toxic behavior. Goodbye and please don’t return to sender.

15. Yacobellis must be laughing all the way to Seattle. For four years he had overwhelmingly positive coverage, was forgiven for every sociopathic outburst, was “contextualized” for his many horrid shortcomings because he was a poster boy for every marginalized group in town (counting himself among the marginalized of course), constantly made the story about himself, threw tantrums, then claimed we all gave him anxiety and scolded us for not taking care of him with better health benefits. And anyone who pointed out the obvious was shouted down and called hater.

    How about a little “Deconstructionism?” Here’s the gist of Yacobellis’s departing remarks. “As I said…I’m not feeling….I can’t see waiting…my health and happiness…I feel I’ve…I hoped to…”…blah blah blah. Not a lot of “we” or “us” or “you” in there, because there’s not a lot a lot of room for anyone but Peter Yacobellis in that shell.

    But if you want one final warm and fuzzy, one of our great local communicators, Jonathan Alter, insisted we remember Yacobellis as another great communicator, just as Yacobellis hit the gas pedal and shouted back, “Farewell, suckers!”

    Message received, loud and clear.

16. This is the first time I will say I’m underwhelmed by the coverage by this outlet. If the Local wants to be “stately”, the Local may want to consider covering a town like Verona or Roseland. When there’s nasty crap happening here, it is not helpful to pretend it’s all cool.

    Peter Yacobellis compromised himself and made a mess. All the drama aside, he ends up insulting the CFO and Scantlebury on his way out. Can it get any more transparent. Let’s just call it for what it is. Political prostitution. Gasp! There, I said it. I’d say it in French to make it more palatable, except that it’s the same word. We can call a spade a spade, no? Or are we too politically correct for it these days?

    I hope Peter Yacobellis will get deposed by Nancy Erika Smith. Right after Sean M. Spiller. I will be ordering those transcripts so fast. You can’t run away, Peter. This will catch up with you on the West Cost. There’s only so much ‘protection/cushion’ you can get from Sean Spiller.

17. People are being nicer than Yacobellis deserves. Bottom line, he escalated every issue. He made things personal, took deep offense to anyone who differed, lashed out constantly and still made time for the photo-ops. Lots of people egged him on, only to realize later he wasn’t in it for them at all. His genius was in leveraging every faddish impulse for his own aggrandizement, and still people believed. Identity politics has that effect. His final betrayal on a long-contentious issue, his abandonment of his core constituency, his self-absorption when people wanted self-sacrifice, and the final pathetic litany of complaints is truly sad. I hope he gets help, maybe a second chance at public integrity, but his legacy around here will be pretty grim: “Don’t pull a Yacobellis.”

18. The health insurance investigation still seems to be ongoing. You can’t really run away from that. We may still see indictments from it and Peter will have to come back to NJ to face that. The guy had all the ambition in the world but lacked any real political instincts. Suing constituents and not recusing himself on a pretty obvious conflict of interest are just a couple of his many blunders. Still wish we had all come together on a recall of the whole slate but everyone seems content to wait it out. We’ll see how weak the back bench really is.

19. What I don’t understand is why Peter Yacobellis keeps chiming in and sending stuff. Hey, Peter: you said you were done with Montclair and many of us felt relieved. Why don’t you focus on your photography and other great stuff now. Shoo already.

Comments are closed.