Wednesday, May 20, 2015

The Great Explorers Controversy

At the very end of Monday's 2015 budget discussion, the subject of the two Explorers came up again. We're not talking about Matthew Henson and Gonzalo Pizarro here, it's about 24-hour city-owned vehicles for the mayor and city administrator. How were these Explorers purchased, was the process wrong?

Citizens' Budget Advisory Committee member Tom Kaercher said he was looking in the budget and didn't see the money anywhere.

Council President Bridget Rivers said the purchase was in 2014.

That was part of the problem, mixing up budget years. Despite frequent reminders to stick to the current year, it was just too tempting not to drag in past history in the final weeks before the June 2 primary. Former Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs  even wanted to know what became of the two cars assigned to herself and her city administrator, or should I make the latter plural, as eight different people held that post, including the mayor herself for three short stints.

The current mayor and his department and division heads all have two budget lines, one for salary & wages and one for other expenses. Items meant for long-term use, such as cars and fire engines, come out of the capital budget.

Public Safety Director Carl Riley said on May 6 he believed the money for the vehicles was "transferred to the city administrator's office." On Monday, Rivers insisted any vehicles purchased with Public Safety funds could only be used for public safety purposes. Chief Financial Officer Al Steinberg said money for the ShotSpotter system was used and transferred back, which brings up another question, as the ShotSpotter bill was left unpaid in 2013.

Another mystery, as long as we are turning over old rocks, is why objections were not raised when at the 2014 annual reorganization vehicles were authorized for the incoming mayor and city administrator. Or one might ask why nobody seemed to notice that vehicle authorizations were left off the agenda for the 2015 reorganization.

The short answer to any or all questions may be simply that it is the pre-election season, traditionally the time to make allegations and cast aspersions, hopefully on camera for the viewing pleasure of the electorate.

This year's budget process made me recall the format that former Councilwoman Annie McWilliams set in 2010, giving all department and division heads the same 10 questions to answer regarding their budgets.

“If anyone is coming before us asking for money, they should be prepared,” she said, noting the governing body deserved more than “five or six pages that we can read on the city web site.”

McWilliams set the bar high, saying she wanted five-year data comparisons that division directors “should be able to do off the top of their heads.”

(Recently married to Uche Ndumele, Annie has also just graduated from New York University with dual MBA/MPA degrees.)

While many officials came prepared this year with rationales for their 2015 budget requests, the sessions have all too often gone off the rails with other issues. But the end, whatever it may be, is in sight, as only one more session is expected before a public hearing, possible amendments and final passage.

--Bernice

25 comments:

  1. so only SRB can use funds meant for one thing on another thing..... Just wanted to be sure I'm looking at the proper glass house. Were this anywhere but Plainfield, it'd be considered a legitimate question..here, it's all about the primary and election..who gets the bigger slice of pie.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ms. Paglia this have nothing to do with politics this have to do with right and wrong.

    I ask the same question to the council member's and the simple answer from them was the public safety director is asking for money for shot spotter in his budget this years and there is no need to give the department money for shot spotter this year when they didn't need the money last year.

    If they had money that was left over from shot spotter to purchase vehicles last year then why ask for money this year.

    It seems to me that when this administration misappropriate taxpayers dollars and it is bought to task everyone says it is political. It's not political it's wrong and it should also be investigated.

    I was one of Mayor Mapps strongest supporters and I could not wait until the previous administration was out of here but this administration is worst. I am extremely disappointed.

    I would love to see if this will be swept under the rug.

    Renee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did Jerry get you a job? It sounds like you sold your self to the devil. Too bad. Go on ignoring Shady Sharonda and her misappropriation of funds. Sharon's dirt got swept under several rugs. Let's look in Bridget and Vera's houses. GET REAL!

      Delete
  3. Rob or Bob or what ever your name should happen to be, I pay taxes here in Plainfield and I could care less if it's a dollar it is WRONG. I have set higher standards for Mayor Mapp after all he is a CFO in Orange and he should know better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In case you missed it....and obviously you did... "people in glass houses"... she is no better than the one she dare criticize... hence my comment, she's got a lot of gall to be attempting to judge from less than ivory tower... and I believe my spelling was quite exacting when I signed my name --- ROB, my real name, and Bernice has met me... I'm a real person ANONYMOUS

      Delete
    2. GLASS HOUSE... GLASS HOUSE.. look it up... wow.. so amazed at you knee jerk Democrats

      Delete
  4. I have been telling the council member's follow them money. Do your job. Look at the bills list carefully. You were elected by the people. I do not live in Plainfield an with out saying to much to stir up a lawsuit in Orange I will say if you have uncover this you will find more. Keep your eyes open.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not sure that anyone disagrees we should ask about the origin for the money in the purchase of vehicles, it's a matter of timing that makes SRB's questioning shady.

    If there were a request for money for vehicles in the 2015 budget hearings then it would make perfect sense to ask about the previous vehicle purchase in 2014. Bring it up during the council meetings. It's not relevant to the upcoming budget being reviewed. It's very tit for tat as per the usual behavior of our recent and recent former city officials. Sad all around.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's why she is widely known as and has worked for the moniker "Shady Sharonda."

      Delete
    2. Bob, in all fairness, you began that nickname and I am hoping you will try to make your points without using derogatory nicknames. I have omitted your comments sometimes for that reason.

      Delete
  6. I am, Bob, not Rob, and I think it's interesting how Jerry's kids are trying to repay Jerry for the jobs they have. It's also interesting to see how Sharon's dirt is hidden and things that were not even questioned about her miuse of monies. I'd give anything to have Annie back as Council President, as she was professional and unbiased. Bridget doesn't have an idea what professional or unbiased is. Too bad for Plainfield.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Whats the big deal. Buying cars for the Mayor and City Administrators office from the Police Division's Budget has always been an ongoing practice. Sharon needs to get off her holier than thou throne.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To anon 9:33am to answer your question the reason why the cars were bought up was the face that the money to purchase the cars were used from the shot spotter budget line and the director is asking for more money for shot spotter this year. If he didn't use the money last year then he do not need the money this year.

    ReplyDelete
  9. to rob or bob or what ever your name maybe who cares if Vera, or Bridget have a job from the Chairmen. Look at how many jobs have been created in this City alone for Mayor Mapp supporters. You are tired as they come.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Bob I am as real as it get. I will not support wrong doing. Let's stop talking about the previous administration they are no longer there.

    This administration are misappropriating funds now so what are you going to do or say about that.

    It just so funny how there are a core group of people that are trying to change the subject and keep talking about the past to keep the blinders on for what's really going on in the City of Plainfield.

    I will tell you that my blinders are off. and I see

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the problem is that the blinders aren't off Jerry's Kids ( thank you Bob for using my "name" for his band of blunderers ) and they refuse to allow a look-see into SRB's fiscal hot mess -- HENCE THEY ARE PROTECTING HER AND ALL HER MINIONS and I suspect a couple of them on City Council with their obstructionist ways..but, we'll not know for sure as long as they prevent any type of audit on the past .. so keep your blinders on the past .. I'll keep mine firmly open to the past and present...

      Delete
    2. I will not support wrong doing, and next statement you say stop talking about the previous administration, they are no longer here, NOT TRUE. Sharon is still here and was the previous administration. I personally don't care for either one of them (Briggs or Mapp) but the previous administration - Sharon, is still here, still running her mouth, running the Council and the Budget committee she should be prosecuted for all the mismanagement of funds during her 8 years. She made sure all her friends had jobs in City Hall, even when they came to work falling down drunk. Now you have Mapp trying his best to outdo Sharon, he is responsible for as much wrong doing as Sharon, they are like two kids playing with the taypayers money/livelihood. They should both be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and hopefully one day they will along with most of the City Council Members.

      Delete
  11. I recall a time not terribly long ago when the Mayor's stipend was $2,000/year. He had neither a car nor personal assistant ( Chief of Staff). I think the first "personal assistant" in the Mayor's office started with Sharon. On my 2 visits to the Mayor's office in an attempt to obtain an audience with Sharon, ( which was never granted ), the 2 secretary's and "personal assistant" were busy chatting . When the City ran like well oiled machine the Mayor and City Manager each had one secretary. There were 2 men officed in the Hall that managed the Sewer Department. The Sewer charges were billed through our taxes. The garbage was collected from our back yard by a private hauler for about 1/6 of what we currently paid the PMUA. All these are fruitless reminisces of what once was, could be, but will never be, again. Bill Kruse

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wait .... is it 24 hour use of the vehicle to accomplish CITY business OR 24 hour use to make a day trip to Great Adventure and such?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point ---- Remember when the Fire Chief used a City car to tow his boat to Florida?

      Delete
    2. Let's not forget the Police Director and the Massage Palor

      Delete
  13. Sharon needs to stay out of Plainfield's Municipal business, she had her opportunity (8 miserable years) and messed it up royally. She should stay on that high horse she is on and ride it as far out of Plainfield (even Union County) as that Nag will take her.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Rob/Bob or what ever your name is your telling me its ok for this administration to misappropriate funds because the previous administration did???? WOW I feel sorry for Plainfield

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can see much is lost on you.......... NO, I don't support ANY malfeasance of public funds of any sort ( sorry you can't see the message in what was said, might I suggest pausing an re-reading things before you decide to comment ) .. people in GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN"T THROW STONES... look it up, then maybe you'll get the point... SMH ( that's shaking my head, to save you from having to look up another thing )

      Delete
  15. I am disappointed in the tone of your article. Just give us the facts and let us decide. If we need commentary we will go to Dan or Doc or one of the politicians. Right is right. Wrong is wrong. Political season or not.

    ReplyDelete