The decision to return Carlos Acosta to a position of judicial authority has once again raised serious questions about judgment, ethics, and public confidence in Union City’s government.

This is not about political parties or personalities. It is about the integrity of our courts.

The disciplinary history of Carlos Acosta is not a rumor or political talking point—it is a matter of public record. The Supreme Court of New Jersey suspended him from the practice of law after findings that included conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, gross neglect, a pattern of neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to expedite legal matters. Those findings speak for themselves.

Judges are expected to meet the highest ethical standards because the public entrusts them with decisions affecting people’s liberty, property, and constitutional rights. When an attorney has previously been disciplined for misconduct of this nature, it is entirely reasonable for the public to question whether that individual should again serve on the bench.

Mayor Brian Stack also deserves scrutiny for his role in judicial appointments within Union City.

As both the Mayor of Union City and a New Jersey State Senator who serves as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Stack occupies one of the most influential positions in New Jersey government regarding the judicial system. While the Senate Judiciary Committee does not appoint municipal judges, it plays a significant role in reviewing nominees to many judicial and prosecutorial positions throughout the State. That makes public confidence in his judgment especially important.

If reports are accurate that Carlos Acosta will not ultimately return as Union City’s Chief Municipal Judge after initially being selected, that decision raises an obvious question: what changed?

If concerns about public confidence or Acosta’s disciplinary history ultimately caused the appointment not to move forward, those concerns existed from the very beginning. They were matters of public record before any appointment was announced.

Public officials should exercise careful judgment before making appointments to positions of public trust. Judicial appointments should strengthen confidence in our courts—not create controversy that could have been avoided.

Citizens deserve transparency regarding how judicial candidates are evaluated. What standards are applied? How are prior disciplinary findings weighed? What assurances are given to the public that ethics and integrity remain the highest priorities?

These are fair questions, not political attacks.

The people of Union City deserve judges whose integrity is beyond question. The judiciary depends on public confidence, and that confidence is earned through accountability, transparency, and sound judgment.

Regardless of political affiliation, every resident should agree on one principle: our courts should never become the subject of avoidable controversy because of appointments that undermine public trust.

Our justice system functions best when the public believes those who sit in judgment have demonstrated the highest ethical character. That standard should never be compromised.

The Hudson County Sheriff’s Office exists to protect the public, maintain courthouse security, and support law enforcement operations throughout the county. But when reports begin circulating of low morale, officer resignations, complaints of political retaliation, drastic overtime reductions, and wages that officers describe as unsustainable, county leadership should be paying attention.

According to numerous accounts shared by current and former sheriff’s officers, the Hudson County Sheriff’s Office is experiencing a troubling period under the leadership of Sheriff James “Jimmy” Davis and the administration of County Executive Craig Guy. The consistency of the concerns being raised should not simply be dismissed.

Perhaps most alarming are reports that some officers have chosen to leave law enforcement altogether or have enlisted in the United States military as a means of escaping what they describe as a politically hostile work environment. If true, that should concern every taxpayer in Hudson County.

Law enforcement agencies across the country face recruitment and retention challenges. Experienced officers are difficult to replace. When trained personnel voluntarily leave an agency in large numbers, it raises legitimate questions about workplace culture, leadership, compensation, and employee morale.

The concerns reportedly extend beyond pay. Officers have allegedly described a workplace where political favoritism, retaliation, and fear of speaking out have become commonplace. Whether those allegations ultimately prove true or not, perception matters. An agency cannot effectively serve the public when its own members believe they are not being treated fairly.

What makes the situation even more troubling is the contrast between campaign promises and current reports. During the 2025 sheriff’s race, supporters of Jimmy Davis argued that new leadership would restore morale, professionalism, and respect within the Sheriff’s Office. Public endorsements from law enforcement organizations praised Davis as someone who would support officers and improve working conditions. (New Jersey Globe⁠)

Now, only months into the new administration, questions are reportedly being raised by officers who expected meaningful change. If morale is declining rather than improving, Hudson County residents deserve answers.

County Executive Craig Guy cannot escape scrutiny either. As the chief executive of county government, he ultimately oversees the administration responsible for funding and supporting county departments. If staffing shortages, retention problems, and employee dissatisfaction are becoming widespread, county leadership has a responsibility to investigate the causes and address them before the situation worsens.

The public should not view this solely as an employment issue. Every resignation represents the loss of experience, training, and institutional knowledge. Every vacancy places additional burdens on remaining officers. Every decline in morale has the potential to affect public service.

Hudson County residents deserve a Sheriff’s Office where officers want to stay, where employees feel valued, and where promotions, assignments, and opportunities are based on merit rather than politics.

If these reports are alleged through their PowerDMS systems where internal memos are published.

Either way, silence is not a solution.

The people of Hudson County deserve answers. More importantly, the men and women who wear the badge deserve leadership that earns their confidence, not leadership that drives them away.

Something doesn’t add up.

The City says the Bruce D. Walter Pool passed inspection and received a satisfactory rating. At the same time, complaints were filed raising concerns about ventilation, humidity, water leaks, maintenance issues, and other conditions inside the building. An engineering review even recommended that some of those concerns receive further evaluation.

So who are residents supposed to believe?

What makes this situation even more frustrating is that many people feel like Union City is run by the same political insiders who always seem to end up on the same side, no matter how bitter their battles were in the past.

Brian Stack built his political career by taking on former Mayor Rudy Garcia. The fight between the two men helped reshape Union City politics and eventually led to Garcia leaving office and Stack becoming mayor.

Fast forward to today, and Rudy Garcia’s law firm, Dunkin & Dunkin LLC, is representing the City in this matter.

For residents watching from the outside, it’s hard not to notice the irony. The political enemies of yesterday now appear connected through City business while taxpayers are left asking questions about conditions inside a public facility.

Then there is Justin Mercado and the rest of the City’s leadership. Residents deserve to know who is responsible for making sure public buildings are properly maintained and why concerns raised by employees and members of the public continue to generate controversy.

Adding even more questions to the situation are anonymous reports that concerns about the facility have allegedly reached OSHA and PEOSH, the federal and state agencies responsible for workplace safety in public-sector / private workplaces. If employees feel the need to take their concerns outside City Hall, that should be a warning sign to City officials.

Whether those reports result in any formal action remains to be seen. But many residents are asking why workers and members of the public feel they have to go outside the City government in the first place.

The bigger issue is trust.

For years, Union City’s political establishment has told residents that everything is under control. Yet every time another controversy surfaces, the public is told not to worry, not to ask questions, and to simply trust the people in charge.

That approach is getting old.

If the facility is safe, release the reports.

If the concerns are unfounded, show the evidence.

If repairs are needed, explain the plan.

Residents should not have to rely on rumors, leaks, and political insiders to learn what is happening inside a public building paid for by taxpayers.

At the end of the day, this is about more than a pool.

It is about transparency, accountability, and whether the people running Union City are willing to answer tough questions instead of expecting the public to simply take their word for it.