Supporters of Planning Director William Nierstedt and retention of an in-house Planning Division thronged Tuesday's City Council meeting, but did not have to protest its proposed outsourcing after all.
Nierstedt, white shirt, with April Stefel in blue blouse
Applause broke out after City Administrator Rick Smiley read a statement from Mayor Adrian O. Mapp, in which he said four proposals for outsourcing were inconclusive on services offered. The administration was "left with more questions than answers," Mapp wrote. Instead, he said, the administration would challenge Nierstedt and his staff to improve.
Stefel hugs Nierstedt
A resolution to submit a layoff plan to the state Civil Service Commission was withdrawn, sparing Nierstedt, Principal Planner Scott Bauman, Senior Planner April Stefel and Assistant Zoning Officer Ronald Johnson. Many of the supporters present Tuesday were from land use boards that the Planning Division assists. Members of the city's six residential historic districts also came out in force.Councilman Cory Storch, who gave reasons on his blog why the Planning Division should be retained, thanked the administration "for weighing the facts." But Councilwoman Tracey Brown, pastor of Ruth Fellowship Ministries, said Nierstedt had given her church a hard time over wheelchair access and insisted on the church planting "$2,000 worth of trees," an expense that she said "almost made us not make our mortgage."
Councilwoman Gloria Taylor put the onus for better performance on the administration itself, but said she was very happy that the layoff plan was being withdrawn.
"I did not believe that is the right thing to do," Taylor said of the layoff. "I was going to vote against it."
In public comments, Malcolm Dunn praised retention of the Planning Division because, he said, the city currently has "the most ambitious development program we have seen."
Richard Lear said an outsourced engineering department has been paid more than $2 million since January 2012, but residents are still waiting for a flood map. He said he was "very excited" that the city is retaining the Planning Division and suggested engineering should be brought back in-house.
Not everyone was happy. One Rahway Road resident lashed out at Nierstedt, saying he thinks he is "king of Plainfield" and also complained that she called Councilman Cory Storch about her problems with Planning and he did not reply.
"Oh yes I did," Storch said. But he said after he told the corporation counsel the resident was planning to sue the city, he said, he was advised not to say anything.
Rumors of outsourcing the Planning Division began circulating in late August. Those affected had let it be known that they had received Rice notices and were taking the option of having their employment status discussed publicly. Objectors to outsourcing the Planning Division waited an hour on Sept. 8 to attend the Rice hearing and spoke against it at the council meeting that followed. There were more protests at the Sept. 14 council meeting and Storch even blogged about why the division should be retained.
No sooner were outsourcing proposals received on Oct. 1 than residents began questioning them, saying they would not save money and outsiders would know nothing of Plainfield's unique history. In a reaction shared by many over Monday's outcome, resident Tom Kaercher said, "I'm thrilled."
--Bernice
Bernice,
ReplyDeleteI want you to have the exact numbers.
The last bill paid out to the Outsourced Engineering Department was on 8/12/15. From January 1, 2012 until then we have paid $2,041,996.89. If you divide that amount by the number of months to get an averaged annual cost for Engineering you get $765,748.83. We currently pay the planning department a little over $300,000 per year and that is 4 employees. I definitely think it is time to bring Engineering back in house. Even though we are paying 3/4's of a million dollars per year, a lot of money in my opinion, we have not received a new flood map, which will save some homeowners money. We have been waiting for 4 years for that map.
I really hope the Administration looks at this number and realizes that outsourcing is a bad idea.
$765,748.83 per year!
I also hope the administration apologizes to the planning department for putting them in the position of possibly losing their jobs. I can only imagine how awful they all must have felt sitting their waiting to see if they were going to lose their livelihood. Everyone should put themselves in their position and hopefully reach out and let them know they supported them through this horrible circumstance.
What I do not understand are the pronouncements that the planning department should do better. They were never told they were doing a bad job. The point of this was to save approximately $200,000 per year, which turned out to be an error on the part of the recommending administration. It was not to get rid of a department that was performing poorly. The planning department has never been informed they were not doing their job. Carlos Sanchez said the outsourced planning department would "compromise" with new developers. Compromise is not something I want when it comes to the development of our town.
As for the complaints about Bill Nierstedt, no one wants to be told the law requires them to spend money. Councilwoman Brown talked about how he made her church spend money they did not have.
My question to her is, do you want the planning department to tell new developers they do not have to follow the law? Do you want them to cut corners so they can overrun our town with too many apartments per square foot, or not enough parking or green space?
I know the answer is no. However, we have to stand up and take the responsibility when we want to do something new to our property. The planning department is not making things up as they go along. They are following the guidelines provided by the state or the planning board. Just because you are a church you are not entitled to a different version of the law. By allowing shortcuts we cheapen our town and everyone suffers for it.
As for the woman screaming Bill thinks he's king, I really would like to hear the other side to that story. Her screaming made her look like someone who didn't get her way. She said last week she had a number of trucks drop soil on her law. Did she provide a grading plan to the city prior to doing this? Did she advise the city of her plans prior to having the soil dropped? Her saying she didn't sue because she didn't want to cost the city money is ridiculous. It makes one believe an attorney did not see a law suit in her situation and would not move forward.
Richard Lear
It was inappropriate for Tracey Brown to use her seat on the Council to admonish Bill Nierstedt for what she perceived to be a "racial" issue. What a bogus move.
DeleteTracey Brown has been much more balanced than most would have expected her to be, however, this is not the first time she has played the race card and/or pontificated her "holier than thou" sermon from her seat on the Council. As a resident or “business” owner, if she wants to make comments, she should stand on line with all other residents.
It's not uncommon to hear a claim of racial bias from a councilor or member of the speaking public any time there is a disagreement between black and white. A very useful strategy for someone like Brown as she tries to garner support for her cause and elicit the sympathy of her followers and admirers and in the process, stir up hate and controversy.
Mr. Nierstedt, like many employees in City Hall, are tasked with making sure we are all on the same playing field. Just because Ms. Brown did not get the pass she was expecting, as a public official it is irresponsible for her to publicly characterize the situation as being racially motivated, merely because that is her perception. The law is the law Ms. Brown or, is it your expectation that the law only be applied selectively when it is in your favor?
As for the woman from Rahway Road who, last week, characterized her experience with the Planning office as though she was in the deep South (or something to that effect) – obviously setting the scene for a race card moment; the only thing that was apparent from her rant was her divisive and elitist demeanor as she introduced herself as being "up from Sleepy Hollow" Who says that?
No one wants to spend more money than anticipated, however, it's apparent she was not hearing what she wanted and was upset with Mr. Nierstedt -- so of course, codes and ordinances fly out the door and the only explanation must be race.
If you pass by her property, it’s a mess with a spray painted piece of plywood in front of the property – GROSS!
We are in the 21st Century and, yes, we are still facing racial issues and there are lots of bigots on both sides of the fence – but every disagreement between black and white is not racially motivated. These types of public/private comments are irresponsible, hateful, destructive and counter-productive to any type of bridge-building between communities.
The administration shot first, only to ask questions last. Twice it sent Rice notices to the four employees, hanging them out to dry and leaving their futures up in the air, only to finally admit the proposals were inadequate and it was "left with more questions than answers". Nevertheless, the administration blinked in the face of an onslaught of public indignation. It owes these four employees a very public apology.
ReplyDeleteMr. Lear, No one is looking for a shortcut. We always follow every letter of the law and policy.Where is it law that in order to put a handicap entrance into a church requires $2000,00 worth of trees to be planted, and the type of tress that only the director likes or approve. Where is that the law? There is The Law, and there is Mr. Bill's Law. I still have notes and receipts to prove it. We are not a rich church, and that $2000,00 could have been used in a more productive way. If you have never been hurt, frustrated, or made to suffer needlessly by this person it is easy for you to defend him, if you have gotten everything you need from him it is easy not to understand why people feel the way they do. It is easy for you to judge people and label them crazy or out of control. I just happen to know personally their pain at his hands .No one wants shortcuts, we just want people to be fair. I have spoken to other pastors, and numerous residents in reference to unfair treatment.Shortcuts, wrong word. Rev. Tracey Brown
ReplyDeleteRev. Tracey Brown to be fair you should come to a planning or zoning board meeting. Trees and greenspace are discussed with every application that comes forward as they are a great long term benefit for the entire community. Quantity is required by the NJ municipal land use law (MLUL) and we typically leave recommendations of species etc to the Shade Tree Commission. I dont know specifics of your application but to be fair trees are almost always required for every application.
DeletePerhaps Ms. Brown you and your church were ripped off not by the Planning Office but the landscape contractor you selected to purchase and install the required trees. Three trees should have cost your congregation $900-$1200 dollars delivered and installed.
DeleteTracy you may have an issue with Bill as not everyone see's eye to eye on issues and thats fine. The issue was outsourcing the planning department if we had an outsourced department they would probably require trees as well but the big $$$ would be the much higher fees they would charge for you to put in escrow. Having an inhouse planning dept cuts down on the fees a homeowner or applicant has to pay which saves everyone money.
DeleteCouncilwoman Brown,
DeleteThe point of my post is this: The planning department was never told they were not doing their job appropriately. The council and the mayor decided to add that in the letter and comments after the layoff was withdrawn.
You have no right to divulge your dissatisfaction with Bill Nierstedt in that environment. Bill was not on the chopping block because he was not doing his job. The entire department was being let go to "SAVE MONEY," supposedly.
For the record, I met Bill Nierstedt one time when we first bought our house. I did not have any contact with him until the proposed layoff. I am more acquainted with Scott Bauman due to the Historic Preservation Commission, and April Stefel is my neighbor. I met Ron Johnson for the first time at the first council meeting.
My defense of the department had nothing to do with personal relationships. My concern is for the town of Plainfield. I know how involved the Planning department is with the city and their knowledge is invaluable, not to mention that outsourcing destroys communities and ends up costing exorbitant amounts of money. Look at the Engineering department. We pay them double what we pay our planning department and they do not bring in money to Plainfield for their services like the planning department has done. Maybe you should suggest we reinstate an in-house engineering department that can hire Plainfield residents?
I have to say our council constantly imparts their personal experience or opinion when it is not needed nor warranted. The council is in place to move the city in the right direction to create a better place to live that is prosperous. If you, as a citizen of Plainfield, feel someone is not doing their job appropriately you need to follow the same channels everyone else does. You talk to his/her supervisor and address it from there. You do not air your grief at a city council meeting because of the weight of the position you hold. You are supposed to be impartial, removing your personal issues.
As for your experience, are you sure the shade tree commission did not determine the type of trees you have to plant? I also have to ask who authorized the purchase of 3 trees for $2000. That is a ridiculous price. You were completely taken and that has nothing to do with the planning department. Did the church contact the shade tree commission to see if there was aid available to help cover the cost?
I would like to hear the other side to your story too. It is really easy to say someone has done a bad job when you do not allow the other person to defend themselves. The woman that relentlessly railed against Bill Nierstedt should have been told her time was up after the first 3 minutes. The council should have said, "we hear you and understand you are dissatisfied with Mr. Nierstedt. However, he is not being laid off due to lack of performance. We recommend you talk to his supervisor." Councilman Storch let it be known he did call her back when she swore he never did. Her anger got the best of her and without knowing the other side I can only assume she needs someone to pin that anger on, whether just or not.
Now, with all that said, if Bill Nierstedt is not doing his job properly he needs to be redirected by his superiors. However, in being addressed for these issues I would expect him to bring every case to his supervisor to explain the reason for his directive.
You still do not get a pass Councilwoman.
Respectfully,
Richard Lear
Not really a blog person but wanted to set the record straight.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all Oscar I DID NOT use the race card ,and I never do, you have me mixed up with your cronies. Prove where I ever used the race card. This has nothing to do with race, those racist words came out of your mouth. I never called your friend Mr. Bill a racist. I don't know where you get that holier than thou mess, your hatred of me has always been evident, but get your facts straight. FIND one time where I ever used the race card. Our lawyer let me know that I was perfectly within my rights to speak from my seat.If you were listening I said several pastors and residents had called me in reference to Planning, so if you did not have such hate in your heart for me and everyone else that does not agree with your self-righteous self you would have heard that. .I welcome a face to face talk, but stop lying, never used the race card. You know nothing about me, but what you perceive in a mind full of hate, anger, and deceit. Have a blessed day.I expect your hate, but lose no sleep over it. Rev. Tracey Brown
ReplyDeletePlease re-read my comments. I didn't accuse you of calling anyone a racist, rather, I commented how you unnecessarily made it a racial issue by what you said. Watch the video tape and listen to your remarks.
DeleteYou have, on more than a handful of occasions, reinterpreted comments made by residents in public portion of the meeting to suit your needs or, so it seems.
I regret to say that Mr. Nierstedt is not a friend, although he and every member of his staff has always been very cordial and helpful, in person and by phone.
It is troublesome that someone with so much love in their heart and in a leadership position, such as yours, often makes such irresponsible remarks, evidenced in what you said last night and in your reply commentaries today.
Unfortunately, your invitation for a face-to-face meeting seems disingenuous as you follow it up with a tirade of insults. We tried this once before and you never followed through on your invitation.
You have a blessed day as well.
Let me offer another thought of understanding. As a former employee, I have witnessed a particular meanness of some supervisors/employees that comes from enforcing rules that are in the supervisor’s mind. I will cite a couple of examples. How about you are charged an incorrect amount but because it was accepted and a receipt given though not submitted for deposit, you are denied the ability to replace that check immediately and told you would have to wait until the check is cashed by the City and then a refund would be issued which could take weeks to be processed. How about you can’t register for a program because the supervisor arbitrarily chooses a closing date for enrollment but late sign ups would not be detrimental to the participant or the instructor. In fact the instructor wants as many participants as possible and the supervisor insists the closing date must stand. How about you are eighty five years old and sited for a possible violation which would cost a lot of money to correct but it is discovered and proven by the resident that the violation became an ordinance after the fact and yet the supervisor refuses to document that the condition was acceptable leaving that elderly resident open for future harassment even though it was requested many times but just brushed off. How about a favorite quote is “an emergency on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine”. Therefore services you may need from the city are deliberately delayed until it’s gotten to. I could go on but hopefully you get the point.
ReplyDeleteI have been accused of being a bleeding heart as if it was a fault being an employee. However I was raised to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. I believe by conducting myself with that thought process, customer service came easy to me. I embraced the fact that being a city employee is all about customer service and therefore it was a responsibility to help anyone who came to the office.
Perhaps there should be a complaint department/committee that will listen and be responsive to people who voice concerns. If the number of concerns are consistent and frequent, there should be a review of the employee with possible sensitivity training.
In conclusion, it’s not always about someone wanting to get around the law but about getting around someone who makes decisions arbitrarily to give you a hard way to go.
Nancy Jordan
OK, this is my last blog today, OSCAR, you are blatantly lying on me, but I expect that of you. You view the tape and every tape. I said nothing that can be considered the race card. Last night had nothing to do with race, absolutely nothing. I would like to thank some writers for informing me in reference to applications that require tree planting. I never bring up race in meetings, therefore Oscar you need to check the tapes. Your insults of me have no merit, but people like you who insult people, cannot take it when the negative truth is said about them. Again, I lose not an ounce of sleep over your hatred. You never tried to meet with me, because people like you don't like or welcome peace. You can take your anger and bitterness out on me, I can take it, remember I am a bold preacher of the gospel, but still human. Have a super blessed day. Rev. Tracey Brown
ReplyDeletePerhaps through your emotions you don't realize that your post on this blog today seems out of character for a pastor. If I didn't know you I would have never thought you as a pastor or child of God. I can feel the tension and anger in your email. I will be praying for you.
DeleteAs Councilwoman Brown, and not Reverend Brown citizen, it was inappropriate to excoriate Mr, Neirstedt from your exalted position on the dais. The Mayor had taken a rather brave step by withdrawing his initiative and offering a reasonable letter of explanation. The Mayor, recognizing the error of his ways, was attempting to establish a measure of comity amongst himself, the Planning Department, and the public. Rather than enhancing this initiative you roiled things up. You inappropriately used your political position to attack an important City employee at a forum in which he could not reply. I have every confidence that had Mr. Neirstedt had an opportunity to explain why he took the position with you that he did that it would have merit.. I am equally confident that he explained his position to you and you didn't want to hear it. Your continuous mingling of your political posture with that of your religious calling is not tenable. Telling people to "have a super blessed day", in the context of your message, is not a Christian message, it is vitriol. Please get out of politics.. I did not observe any race card in your comments. This is not true of Councilwoman Taylor who clearly stated that Mr. Neirstedt's decisions, "had a racial component". This is more egregious than any comment you made. Some of Ms. Taylor's constituents apparently complained about decisions made by Mr, Neirstedt that did not suite them. Conclusion: Since Mr Neirstedt is white he is a bigot. How can we ever achieve unity when people like you, a leader in elected office, impugn a man's reputation in a public meeting on the basis of hearsay? Great job ladies! May both of you have a blessed day. I will pray for you.
ReplyDeleteWe cannot ignore complaints that the Planning Division may be too rigid when dealing with those who may be limited financially. While it is wonderful that trees are required to be planted in Plainfield, if a church, organization or individual is truly having difficult financially (and that would have to be proven), certain rules should not apply. These are all issues that can be worked out. And all white people MUST examine ways that they may be harming black people. Stop discounting complaints of racism, but instead, respond to them in a caring manner.
DeleteRegarding your perception that the Mayor took a "brave" step: I don't think it was brave but it certainly was the right thing to do. He made a mistake. A big one. An apology is in order to everyone. A lot of time and energy was wasted. He also needs to apologize for his behavior at the last Emergency Council Meeting.
Oh Please! Stop playing the victim game. Equality means everyone plays by the same rules and if that's what we're striving for, then put on your big boy/big girl pants and move along.
DeleteMost people are fine with legitimate exceptions but, we see those in power abusing their position on a daily basis and members of this council and Administration do it all the time.
All people must examine ways in which they may be hurting each other PERIOD!
If you want to keep making it about race instead of making it about human beings, we will not move forward!
Give that some thought Elizabeth.
To anon,6:20, and anon9:09,Your attacks on Rev. Brown, or councilor Brown or what ever you call her is unwarranted. I was at the meeting last night and she simply stated what happened to her at the hands of Bill Neirstedt, and others who she represent.Mr. Neirstedt could have responded he has come to the mic on other occasions.How are you so confident that he explained his position to Rev. Brown, were you there, no, so you really don't know what was said, or not said. You people always stick together against certain people.I attend meetings regularly and Rev. Brown does not contentiously mingle, most of the time she only speaks when she feels that it is necessary, and whoever said she uses the race card is out of touch, and talking nonsense, I have never heard her bring up race. To attack her as a pastor is stupid, pastors are people too. I dId not hear her say one word of profanity, I did not hear her say anything except how her church suffered, and others suffered at the hands of Planning. You people have a lot of nerve to judge and question somebody's Christian character. You make somebody mad as hell, and than when they react you all say oh, they are suppose to be a pastor or a Christian. If she wasn't I can only imagine what she would have said. It is interesting to know what you do for the city. Do you feed the hungry, do you cloth anyone, do you visit the sick,do you help anyone? Probably not, just criticize those who do not look like you, act like you, or think like you. I do observe in your comments that you take sides not knowing any facts anon, 9:09PM, You are not interested in unity not after your tirade towards Rev. Brown who has more Christian works than most people I know. Now me, not so much, have a super, super blessed day, and I mean it vitriolically.
ReplyDeleteThe rules are the same for everyone that has to do with bonding. The engineer sets the amount not the planning dept. If she was running short on funds for her project she should have asked her church members to help fundraise to make up for any shortages. I believe the former Mayor is a member and she is a good fundraiser. Ms Brown should have asked for your help!
DeleteBernice, I would like you to edit this article. This statement is inaccurate: "Supporters of Planning Director William Nierstedt and retention of an in-house Planning Division thronged Tuesday's City Council meeting, but did not have to protest its proposed outsourcing after all." It was because of protest at the prior meeting that the proposal was withdrawn. At the prior meeting, the Mapp Administration wanted the Council to approve the layoff.
ReplyDelete