The Hoboken Tax Reform Coalition
Beth Mason's Mailer - Some Good Ideas. Bad Tactic.
I would like to set aside the portions of Beth Mason's recent mailer which consisted of a political attack for her obvious personal gain, and also set aside that as far as I know, Beth has not taken any constructive steps to suggest or help implement any of her own suggestions, and simply discuss the merit of the general ideas contained in her mailer.
The ideas:
1. Hiring Freeze
2. Job Cuts Through Attrition
3. Across the Board Salary Freeze
4. Furloughs
5. Cuts in Manager Salaries
6. End of Health Benefits for Part Time Employees
7. Restructure Public Safety to Eliminate Unnecessary Management
Now that Hoboken is being run much more by its elected leaders than by the State of New Jersey, the time has come to implement some of these ideas.
To me, nos. 6 & 7 are the most important. There is no reason to provide benefits to part time workers. That practice is not affordable anymore and should stop immediately. For No. 7, the Police Audit is now over a month old! Every day that passes by is one day where the taxpayers are responsible for the extra cost of unneeded personnel.
I am less interested in Nos. 4 and 5 because they provide only small or temporary savings.
As for no. 3, salaries should be frozen this year, and this includes the unions, including teachers. There is simply no justification for raises in this economy, unless someone can present to me data showing the town cannot attract quality professionals without further salary increases.
For Nos. 1 and 2, I see these, again, like 4, and 5, as temporary savings. I would rather implement the long term plan of the Municipal Audit. There is probably some savings that can be achieved simply by following the suggested changes in the audit, which of course to my knowledge has not yet been released.
Views: 1
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tony Soares on -
It would have been nice if Mason used the proper channels like attending the official council meetings/budget workshops rather than walk out twice and sit in the audience on the second day only to leave after an hour.
Mason says nothing about the fact that she once declined her salary (and flaunted it in her campaign) then in June of 2009 demanded all of her pay to be re-started and collected retroactively with raises included.
Mason makes no suggestions she only blows $25,000 on publicity stunts like these hoping we are too stupid to know that she failed us again.
-
Permalink Reply by robert randall on -
Mason's "proposals" strike me as pure political sound bytes not real proposals but here's my take:
No 1 - hiring freeze. This would make sense if we had all the right people and then some. I think we don't. We're not just staffed too much we're staffed wrong. Government cannot be made more efficient by just moving around the same unqualified people. We need to continue to hire qualified people to do the jobs that have to be done. Does it make sense to say can't hire someone with needed expertise in downsizing government or whose job will generate revenue like a traffic enforcement officer.
No 2 attrition. This is a way of saying lets not have lay-offs. Let's wait till the people we don't need leave on their own instead. I support lay-offs - does Mason? I guess not since its not on her list. I think Zimmer does based on what she said when she was running but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I wonder if Mason will support layoffs if and when Zimmer finally gets around to doing some. In my opinion, people we don't need should be laid off immediately to the extent legally possible and attritted only if we're legally barred from laying them off. People we actually do need can't be attritted they have to be replaced when they leave.
No.3 salary freeze - not possible with public safety which is where most of the money is since arbitrators will determine raises. The CC did all they can by voting down the proposed contracts - now it will be up to the arbitrators unless a new deal is struck. Have we offered raises to the other unions - I have not seen anything about this in the press but I hope we're negotiating strongly. There are very few non-union employees so blanket "freezing" those salaries may sound good but won't save any real money and like the "hiring freeze" could cause the city to lose people it needs.
No.4 furloughs - good idea hope we do it. Zimmer proposed it during campaign and I hope she follows through. I agree that this is short term solution, though, and the reason for the use of furloughs is often to avoid the necessity of lay-offs. I think we need both and hope we do both.
No.5 cuts in managers salaries - who does Mason mean? There are only 6 or so directors and their salaries have already been cut. cutting them each another $20,000 on top of the $13,000 already cut would probably make it impossible to hire good people for our most important jobs which would likely cost us far more in lost efficiency than the few dollars we would save. What was a better deal - Fred Bado for $116,000 or Brandy Forbes for $103,000? How about if the salaries were reversed? I'd still take Forbes even for more money. Wouldn't you?
No.6 end health care for part timers. Again - who does Mason mean? Except for the City Council I don't think part timers get health care. There's no money in this "proposal." I agree that eliminating benefits for the City Council is worth considering for symbolic reasons, though Mason didn't exactly create the right symbolism when she abstained on co-pays claiming she was conflicted because she didn't take benefits and then turned around and demanded back salary and benefits after she lost the election.
No. 7 restructure public safety to eliminate unnecessary management. Duh!! Isn't that what the police report was all about. Hopefully Zimmer will move ahead soon since like many others I am getting impatient. But notice that Mason once again forgets to mention lay-offs or even demotions. Calling for "restructuring" without saying how your going to do it is pretty meaningless. Assuming Zimmer finally does something to "restructure" ie layoffs and demotions - does anybody want to bet that Mason attacks it without offering a better (or even a different) idea?
-
Permalink Reply by Lincolnlogger on -
"For No. 7, the Police Audit is now over a month old! Every day that passes by is one day where the taxpayers are responsible for the extra cost of unneeded personnel."
Just a comment on this. There are only two possible outcomes of the police negotiations now that the City Council voted down (and rightly so) the terms negotiated by Tripodi. Either the police union will come to the bargaining table to renegotiate (which has been stated they will refuse to do), or it will be turned over to arbitration. The City has no control over which of these happens, and limited control (if any, really) over the time in which it does. But I agree with the principle, that cuts need to be made.
My main question in response to Beth's flier is: Why can't she try to work within the system to make the changes she proposes on the flier?
She has done nothing to advocate any of the changes she proposes. I'm sure with a couple of these ideas, she might be able to build some consensus and momentum, but she seems to let her personal grudges get in the way of actually doing her job. She has not met with the Finance Committee, she has proposed no worthwhile resolutions. She seems to prefer to just complain loudly about the situation, but offers nothing in the way of practical solutions- or at least doesn't seem willing to work with others to accomplish them.
As long as she continues to grandstand instead of collaborate, she will continue to be useless to our city.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Kaplan on
-
I could not agree more with this portion of your post.
Lincolnlogger said:
My main question in response to Beth's flier is: Why can't she try to work within the system to make the changes she proposes on the flier?
She has done nothing to advocate any of the changes she proposes. I'm sure with a couple of these ideas, she might be able to build some consensus and momentum, but she seems to let her personal grudges get in the way of actually doing her job. She has not met with the Finance Committee, she has proposed no worthwhile resolutions. She seems to prefer to just complain loudly about the situation, but offers nothing in the way of practical solutions- or at least doesn't seem willing to work with others to accomplish them.
As long as she continues to grandstand instead of collaborate, she will continue to be useless to our city.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Kaplan on
-
Regarding this portion:
What does any contract have to do with head count? The contract, whether implemented by agreement or through arbitration, prescribes how the city must compensate those that are employed under it. It does not, to my knowledge, dictate what the total headcount must be.
Why can't the department be right-sized right now?
Lincolnlogger said:"For No. 7, the Police Audit is now over a month old! Every day that passes by is one day where the taxpayers are responsible for the extra cost of unneeded personnel."
Just a comment on this. There are only two possible outcomes of the police negotiations now that the City Council voted down (and rightly so) the terms negotiated by Tripodi. Either the police union will come to the bargaining table to renegotiate (which has been stated they will refuse to do), or it will be turned over to arbitration. The City has no control over which of these happens, and limited control (if any, really) over the time in which it does. But I agree with the principle, that cuts need to be made.
-
Permalink Reply by robert randall on
-
Dave - I believe you are right about head count, though I believe that in NJ before layoffs can be implemented the city is required to notify the union of the proposal and be given an opportunity to negotiate other savings instead. As a result, the two issues are intertwined. If the unions say screw you, the City can proceed to reduce headcount but if they agree to talk the city has to negotiate in good faith and can lay off only if no agreement can be reached.
-
Permalink Reply by Tony Soares on
-
I'm pretty sure it's a 45 day notice minimum
There's also bumping rights, so the newer staff goes first
robert randall said:Dave - I believe you are right about head count, though I believe that in NJ before layoffs can be implemented the city is required to notify the union of the proposal and be given an opportunity to negotiate other savings instead. As a result, the two issues are intertwined. If the unions say screw you, the City can proceed to reduce headcount but if they agree to talk the city has to negotiate in good faith and can lay off only if no agreement can be reached.
-
Permalink Reply by David A. Liebler on -
Beth Mason has some good ideas and no doubt they should be reviewed. The problems I have with all of this is instead of sending us mailers why not actually do something about it! Beth's money would have been better spent on the YMCA or another charity. She needs to stop running for Mayor and start working with the council to actually get some reform done.
With each passing mailer she is only loosing additional votes for both her upcoming city council election and her eventual bid for mayor.
Enough mason PR......get something done or we will find someone who will!
-
Permalink Reply by Tony Soares on
-
David,
I agree with many of your points and while I don't trust or support Beth, she and her family have contributed personally to the Y and many charities.
Elected officials have no obligation to donate to local efforts (although most of them do) I recall when I was on the Council many hoboken charities held their fundraisers, boosters and advertising program sales drives in the Spring coinciding with local elections, so the pressure to not be left off a list, plaque or sign was very high. If you missed a donation, it was well spread among the event organizers that one politician or another did not contribute.
I wish all council people used their salaries to send emails and updates much like Cunningham, Bhalla, Zimmer and Castellano have done/do/doing.
When Dave Roberts was a Councilman he would regularly send out mail, updates and newsletters.
Marsh and I would rent the back of a First St Bar and hold meet ups ( until suddenly it was" no longer available " to us)
I understand Lenz is hosting a 4th ward meeting in the coming weeks.
These are the types of things I spent my council salary on.
Back them it was 19,500
David A. Liebler said:Beth Mason has some good ideas and no doubt they should be reviewed. The problems I have with all of this is instead of sending us mailers why not actually do something about it! Beth's money would have been better spent on the YMCA or another charity. She needs to stop running for Mayor and start working with the council to actually get some reform done.
With each passing mailer she is only loosing additional votes for both her upcoming city council election and her eventual bid for mayor. Enough mason PR......get something done or we will find someone who will!
© 2012 Created by Administrator.
Powered by
