The Hoboken Tax Reform Coalition
Council Discusses Police Audit - The Hoboken Reporter
At last Wednesday's Council meeting Hoboken Revolt demanded individual responses from each council member regarding the police audit. No substantive responses.
Views: 1
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Kaplan on -
There simply is no more time for Council excuses. If they have any interest in cutting taxes ever, this should be addressed immediately.
Unacceptable:
Councilwoman Beth Mason said she was “disappointed” in the audit, which she called a “one-trick pony” that only addressed the financial aspects of the force, not the quality of service. Mason also criticized Mayor Dawn Zimmer for having a draft of the audit for months without preparing a plan for its implementation once it was finalized.
After Mason put the ball in Zimmer’s court, Councilman David Mello brought it right back to the council. He pointed out it was the council’s job to set the Table of Organization that determines staffing for the department, which would then be implemented by the mayor.
Councilwoman Theresa Castellano said the council needed Zimmer to tell them what to do. She called Zimmer’s previous comments on the audit “wishy washy.”
Councilman Nino Giacchi echoed the sentiments of many police officials, questioning how 60 police officers could adequately patrol Hoboken.
“I can’t jump into this wholeheartedly,” he said, but also noted that the document could provide some leverage for the city in contract negotiations.
Mello said the council could deal with overstaffing in the upper ranks first, leaving for later discussion the issue of how many patrolmen the city needs.
Councilman Ravi Bhalla said he was upset the document was “held” from the council by the state for half a year.
Councilman Michael Russo said he hadn’t reviewed the document and claimed that it was only given to him before the meeting, even though he was e-mailed the document more than a week earlier and it was available on the city website.
-
Permalink Reply by georgia on
-
The last council meeting was disappointing, and Mason managed to waste everyone's time > 1 h with something totally irrelevant. It seems to me that no one wants to rock the boat, including the BoE. The BoE managed to be quiet for 1 year and the result is basically the same like last year. There's no tax cut in sight! I would rather disengage from the politics and let the crooks take over again - at least you know that nothing will happen ever, and you pack your bags and move to the next town!
-
Permalink Reply by SmartyJones on -
Nice work Dave. In the political battlefield laying straight ahead you need some leadership and frankly no one is going to go wander off alone and get whacked. You need serious evaluation and discussion at the top. Perhaps there's some of it going on within City Hall and I'll guess it is while the public side of this discussion is clearly not progressing.
Did anyone think that the same people who have offered nothing of substance on the budget would do so on this issue? Really? MSV posted a video of Councilwoman Beth Mason at the previous City Council meeting. What gets her worked up is aiding Councilman Mike Russo try to get a Church Towers real estate woman on the Zoning Board as an alternate. Oh and attacking her colleague who is out at a family funeral.
It's a bit hopeful to expect that a consensus will coalesce in the City Council on this issue. Like the budget, the hard work will be done behind the scenes and then there'll be a plan put forward. It will not jell up from the bottom.
It seems premature to throw in the towel. But I guess frustration is understandable. These things take hard work as even unlike a budget, there's no template for turning the ship around.
Lets's see what comes now.
Dave Kaplan said:There simply is no more time for Council excuses. If they have any interest in cutting taxes ever, this should be addressed immediately.
Unacceptable:
Councilwoman Beth Mason said she was “disappointed” in the audit, which she called a “one-trick pony” that only addressed the financial aspects of the force, not the quality of service. Mason also criticized Mayor Dawn Zimmer for having a draft of the audit for months without preparing a plan for its implementation once it was finalized.
After Mason put the ball in Zimmer’s court, Councilman David Mello brought it right back to the council. He pointed out it was the council’s job to set the Table of Organization that determines staffing for the department, which would then be implemented by the mayor.
Councilwoman Theresa Castellano said the council needed Zimmer to tell them what to do. She called Zimmer’s previous comments on the audit “wishy washy.”
Councilman Nino Giacchi echoed the sentiments of many police officials, questioning how 60 police officers could adequately patrol Hoboken.
“I can’t jump into this wholeheartedly,” he said, but also noted that the document could provide some leverage for the city in contract negotiations.
Mello said the council could deal with overstaffing in the upper ranks first, leaving for later discussion the issue of how many patrolmen the city needs.
Councilman Ravi Bhalla said he was upset the document was “held” from the council by the state for half a year.
Councilman Michael Russo said he hadn’t reviewed the document and claimed that it was only given to him before the meeting, even though he was e-mailed the document more than a week earlier and it was available on the city website.
-
Permalink Reply by Lincolnlogger on -
To be fair to the members of the council who do want to implement cutbacks in police staffing, we need to remember that they need to be very careful in doing so. If every t is not crossed, and every i not dotted, it will be possible to lose the lawsuit you KNOW that the police union will file. And a lost lawsuit over staff reductions will make the already bloated PD salary and benefits even worse.
The reduction in staffing will not happen overnight. And you know the police will fight it tooth and nail. I would expect to hear statements from Falco and others indicating that they don't have enough staff to do their jobs, especially if you call for something they consider low priority. I also expect them to rail about how if staff is reduced (despite focusing on the paper-pushers) that crime will go up.
I have plenty of respect for the police and the work they do. They deserve fair and equitable pay and benefits. But it is not fair to the community and taxpayers that they have been given too much. I think many on the council share this viewpoint, but must tread carefully. Meanwhile Mason, Russo, Giacchi, and Castellano will fight it and hopefully lose votes doing so.
Dave Kaplan said:There simply is no more time for Council excuses. If they have any interest in cutting taxes ever, this should be addressed immediately.
Unacceptable:
Councilwoman Beth Mason said she was “disappointed” in the audit, which she called a “one-trick pony” that only addressed the financial aspects of the force, not the quality of service. Mason also criticized Mayor Dawn Zimmer for having a draft of the audit for months without preparing a plan for its implementation once it was finalized.
After Mason put the ball in Zimmer’s court, Councilman David Mello brought it right back to the council. He pointed out it was the council’s job to set the Table of Organization that determines staffing for the department, which would then be implemented by the mayor.
Councilwoman Theresa Castellano said the council needed Zimmer to tell them what to do. She called Zimmer’s previous comments on the audit “wishy washy.”
Councilman Nino Giacchi echoed the sentiments of many police officials, questioning how 60 police officers could adequately patrol Hoboken.
“I can’t jump into this wholeheartedly,” he said, but also noted that the document could provide some leverage for the city in contract negotiations.
Mello said the council could deal with overstaffing in the upper ranks first, leaving for later discussion the issue of how many patrolmen the city needs.
Councilman Ravi Bhalla said he was upset the document was “held” from the council by the state for half a year.
Councilman Michael Russo said he hadn’t reviewed the document and claimed that it was only given to him before the meeting, even though he was e-mailed the document more than a week earlier and it was available on the city website.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Kaplan on
-
As far as I am aware, the police union has no say over how many people the city has to employ. I don't see any possible cause of action for a lawsuit.
Even if that were the excuse, why not say it (council).
I find Mason's and Russo's responses particularly troubling, given that they certainly had time to be outraged over less than $30,000.
When it comes to $5,000,000 PER YEAR, they are nowhere to be found. Not having time to do one's job and obtain a copy of the audit is not acceptable. If he doesn't have time, he should resign.
Similarly, criticizing the Mayor for not doing the council's job also sets a terrible precedent.
I don't want to hear any further excuses. All nine council members should take a clear position on the audits at the next meeting.
If they do not face the number one way to control expenses in our city (or admit that they won't follow the audit), then they should consider resigning.
Lincolnlogger said:To be fair to the members of the council who do want to implement cutbacks in police staffing, we need to remember that they need to be very careful in doing so. If every t is not crossed, and every i not dotted, it will be possible to lose the lawsuit you KNOW that the police union will file. And a lost lawsuit over staff reductions will make the already bloated PD salary and benefits even worse.
The reduction in staffing will not happen overnight. And you know the police will fight it tooth and nail. I would expect to hear statements from Falco and others indicating that they don't have enough staff to do their jobs, especially if you call for something they consider low priority. I also expect them to rail about how if staff is reduced (despite focusing on the paper-pushers) that crime will go up.
I have plenty of respect for the police and the work they do. They deserve fair and equitable pay and benefits. But it is not fair to the community and taxpayers that they have been given too much. I think many on the council share this viewpoint, but must tread carefully. Meanwhile Mason, Russo, Giacchi, and Castellano will fight it and hopefully lose votes doing so.
Dave Kaplan said:There simply is no more time for Council excuses. If they have any interest in cutting taxes ever, this should be addressed immediately.
Unacceptable:
Councilwoman Beth Mason said she was “disappointed” in the audit, which she called a “one-trick pony” that only addressed the financial aspects of the force, not the quality of service. Mason also criticized Mayor Dawn Zimmer for having a draft of the audit for months without preparing a plan for its implementation once it was finalized.
After Mason put the ball in Zimmer’s court, Councilman David Mello brought it right back to the council. He pointed out it was the council’s job to set the Table of Organization that determines staffing for the department, which would then be implemented by the mayor.
Councilwoman Theresa Castellano said the council needed Zimmer to tell them what to do. She called Zimmer’s previous comments on the audit “wishy washy.”
Councilman Nino Giacchi echoed the sentiments of many police officials, questioning how 60 police officers could adequately patrol Hoboken.
“I can’t jump into this wholeheartedly,” he said, but also noted that the document could provide some leverage for the city in contract negotiations.
Mello said the council could deal with overstaffing in the upper ranks first, leaving for later discussion the issue of how many patrolmen the city needs.
Councilman Ravi Bhalla said he was upset the document was “held” from the council by the state for half a year.
Councilman Michael Russo said he hadn’t reviewed the document and claimed that it was only given to him before the meeting, even though he was e-mailed the document more than a week earlier and it was available on the city website.
-
Permalink Reply by David on
-
"you aware approximately 80 cents of every tax dollar in Hoboken goes NOt to run municipal government but to the County" -- That figure is in no ways correct, but I think it speaks to your intention to divert the debate away from pressing issues in Hoboken. Why don't you go to http:://www.hudsoncountyrevolt.com and post there?
wrongagaindonna said:Speaking of high taxes why don't Revolt attack the County and school board. Are you aware approximately 80 cents of every tax dollar in Hoboken goes NOt to run municipal government but to the County (duplication of services) and the school board in which i see no children going to harvard law from the syetem.
Also Councilman Michael Lenz makes $68,350 as a "Management Specialist" with the County with raises of 3.5% in 2008 and 1.5% in 2009. Yet public safety is being denied any raise? Is this not fair and rather subjective?
As a Revolt member i think the prorities should also be to shrink County government and the school budget then and only then will you see significant tax reductions, maybe even that pie-in-the-sky 25% reduction that Team Zimmer has promised and not delivered.
-
Permalink Reply by FAP on
-
You're off by at wiiiiiiiiiiiide margin. More so if you think of the schools tax as a local tax.
A serious question. If you don't understand the tax structure how in the world do you think you can have an informed opinion on how the tax structure should be changed?
wrongagaindonna said:Please do enlighten me as to how many cents it is then. Thanks and i thought the cause was to lower our tax bills, at any cost?
David said:"you aware approximately 80 cents of every tax dollar in Hoboken goes NOt to run municipal government but to the County" -- That figure is in no ways correct, but I think it speaks to your intention to divert the debate away from pressing issues in Hoboken. Why don't you go to http:://www.hudsoncountyrevolt.com and post there?
wrongagaindonna said:Speaking of high taxes why don't Revolt attack the County and school board. Are you aware approximately 80 cents of every tax dollar in Hoboken goes NOt to run municipal government but to the County (duplication of services) and the school board in which i see no children going to harvard law from the syetem.
Also Councilman Michael Lenz makes $68,350 as a "Management Specialist" with the County with raises of 3.5% in 2008 and 1.5% in 2009. Yet public safety is being denied any raise? Is this not fair and rather subjective?
As a Revolt member i think the prorities should also be to shrink County government and the school budget then and only then will you see significant tax reductions, maybe even that pie-in-the-sky 25% reduction that Team Zimmer has promised and not delivered.
© 2012 Created by Administrator.
Powered by 
.
