| Author |
Message |
    
breal
Citizen
Username: Breal
Post Number: 504
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 4:12 pm: |     |
“I don't know you or the kind of officer you are but I hope you are one of the good ones”.
What a snotty, disrespectful comment, Woodster. I think you just don't like cops. Does Mr. DeLuca like cops?
I do.
|
trapper
Citizen
Username: Trapper
Post Number: 191
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 4:36 pm: | |
Breal,
My guess is Woodster is Vic DeLuca's nom de net.
For all Woodster's conjecture, he sure does know a lot of insider baseball. More so than the av-er-age bear, for sure.
And he sure pretends to not know stuff too. Like he just was in town talking to Profeta supporters at night (?) and learned from them that Profeta hired a secretary. - <gasp!>
I wonder if the "president" of the Noyes foundation has a secretary?
fwiw, if it's not Vic's screen name, it's certainly one of his closest supporters. I think it's a real good indicator of how mean-spirited Vic and some of his supporters (ok, not all) can be. Vic simply must do things his own way. He seems to know the meaning of true government, and will not stop to ask others' opinions.
Funny thing, though. When others got the chance to give feedback, they fired him!!
He still refuses to let the voting public have their way. He's back for more. |
breal
Citizen
Username: Breal
Post Number: 505
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 4:55 pm: | |
Woodster, do you remember the snafu relating to the citizen-director position of the p.d. that the township committee invented during the DeLuca era?
Rather than deal directly with the p.d., the township hired a retired police captain to be citizen director of the department. Apparently the town assured this fellow, as I said, a retiree, that full-time employment with the town of Maplewood would not affect his police pension eligibility.
But it did. There were protracted legal proceedings, which must have cost the township a fair amount. In the end, the arrangement was found to be against pension rules. There was some kind of penalty assessed to the retiree's pension, and the town had to make up the difference.
Do you remember that Woodster?
I like Profeta and Pettis's way better. They made a deal, not a stink. All DeLuca made was a stand, and stink. Let him go make stands on his nonprofit committees. That's the place for them. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 4484
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 5:07 pm: | |
Unions, newspapers, volunteer organizations, houses of worship make endoresements all the time. What's the problem? |
breal
Citizen
Username: Breal
Post Number: 506
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 5:36 pm: | |
You donate money to a group thinking the money is going toward preventing Bush from privatizing social security. But instead the money goes toward the township committee campaign of an officer in the group.
The problem is the money being directed toward something the donor didn't know she would be supporting. I would support a group that is against privatizing S.S., but not a group campaigning for one of it's officers in a township committee race. Doesn't pass the smell test for me. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 8511
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 6:19 pm: | |
Greenie, the problem is that there is no indication on NJCA's website that they have endorsed Vic and the people doing the solicitations don't reveal their true colors until after they hook people on the Social Security issue. Also NJCA uses paid solicitors (they advertise for these jobs on their website). If the solicitors stumping for DeLuca are being paid by NJCA, this would probably be viewed as a contribution to Vic's campaign that brings up all sorts of issues. |
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 6
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:08 pm: | |
Claims that NJCA monies are being funneled to the Deluca campaign are extremely serious and should only be made when there is hard evidence.
It is absolutely fine for the PBA or any organization to make an endorsement. It is also appropriate that our Officers are paid well. This being said, the endorsement was and is clearly based on the PBA getting what they wanted. It was not based on a range of broad based policies or ideas. Officer Gugliemo should note that, or describe what the endorsement was based on. |
Joseph Guglielmo
Citizen
Username: Plt_guglielmo
Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 12:46 am: | |
Lucifer
I couldn’t agree with you more, I to believe that the officers should be paid well.
The PBA endorsement of Mayor Profeta and Vice Mayor Grodman was definitely based on the Officers getting what they wanted, which was a Township Committee that would listen to the local and work with it to achieve the common goal of making the Maplewood Police Department the best in could be.
Our Endorsement of Mayor Profeta and Vice Mayor Grodman had nothing to do with “broad based policies or ideas” and everything to do with their upfront and honest dialog with the PBA.
If you read my first post (May 18th 6:56pm) you will find that I explained how and why the Local came to its decision to Endorse Mayor Profeta and Vice Mayor Grodman.
Woodster… still waiting for you to tell us what the deal was?
|
wharfrat
Citizen
Username: Wharfrat
Post Number: 1837
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 5:17 am: | |
I'm curious why PBA members, who were handing out leaflets in town kept saying the following:
"Do you love Maplewood? Are you a good American?" |
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 10
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 8:51 am: | |
As officer JG just stated, the Officers were concerned with one thing, getting their raise. This lead to their endorsement of Profeta/Grodman and also lead to their stalwart support of him in more that one way. I recall an incident at the Dehart Center when an Officer violated election law by planting himself right in front of the doorway and telling a delcua supporter handing out leaflets that they couldnt be anywhere near the dehart center. |
Jack Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 5108
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 9:15 am: | |
The above poster is full of crap. Ignore his foolisheness.
Officers want a raise?? OH NO! How dare they!
They have endorsed Fred/Ian because they believe Vic is frankly incompetent. And you know what, your posts seem to validate their opinion. |
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 11
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 9:44 am: | |
Mr. Straw, once again using ridiculous tactics. If you read my post earlier you would have seen that I said I wholly supported a pay raise. What I was pointing out was that the PBA's endorsement was based on one thing: personal gain. Im not saying that is right or wrong, it should simply be included in the conversation. Furthermore, you should not be quoting reasons why the PBA endorsed Profeta/Grodman since you are not a member of the PBA. The event described in my most recent post certainly happend. Although it must be said that I am sure the PBA was not employing widespread tactics such as those; it was probably the act of one Officer. |
steel
Citizen
Username: Steel
Post Number: 684
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 10:11 am: | |
Fred is going to keep his seat. The real choice is do voters want to have Vic take Ian's seat or for Ian to remain. |
Joseph Guglielmo
Citizen
Username: Plt_guglielmo
Post Number: 7
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 10:15 am: | |
Woodster
People like you are one of the reasons that I have avoided this format. You should be ashamed of yourself. You hide behind an alias and make accusations that are false and unsubstantiated. Who cares if you don’t like the PBA getting involved in politics and endorsing candidates! It’s not your safety that’s on the line day in and day out.
You pick and choose items that suit your point yet you fail to be accurate or completely truthful when you present them. For example “the officer who stood up at the T/C meeting and told of problems in the past ended that statement by telling the committee that it was “never as bad as this”. And what happened at the T/C meeting that date was not negotiations. Negotiations require listening and respect for the other point of view, the PBA received none of that from then Mayor Deluca, (who continually referred to the Police as cry babies).
I also find it funny that when it suits you and involves “your candidate” its negotiation, but when the PBA manages to work out problems with the current administration its “deals for political backing”.
Try and get this straight, as I know it has been posted prior but again you ignore the facts to make a point. The 9 promotions that were made by this committee were to fill positions that had been vacated over the previous 5 year. We were able to fill the positions and create a promotional testing system after much negotiation with the Safety committee (Mr. Profeta, Mr. Grodman and Mr. Petis). This was not possible under the former mayor as he would not negotiate with us.
Again, I hate to let the facts get in the way of your opinion but, the negotiations and arbitration processes began under former Mayor Deluca. This process was already underway and there was nothing that Mayor Profeta could have done to change the outcome. The 19.5% Raise that was awarded by the arbitrator was a direct result of “your candidates” failure to negotiate in good faith with the PBA. And don’t worry woodster, were still towards the bottom of the pay scale amongst Essex county Police Departments.
|
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 4434
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 10:59 am: | |
Lucifer...read JG's post. He basically agrees with and stipulates your point. But connotation matters, and "personal gain" is a selfish and silly choich of words. They were after a better, more in line contract. Why on earth do you have a problem with that? Which you must, since even after AGREEING with you on point, you bring it up again?
And I, too, am waiting for Woodster to respond. The silence is deafening, and extremely telling. |
L'Angelo Misterioso
Citizen
Username: Misterioso
Post Number: 258
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 12:39 pm: | |
To correct Officer Guglielmo: No, the 24% must have been for three years. Police contracts, up until the most recent, had 3 year terms. The 4 year contract was a creation of the arbitrator.
In one post, echoing Tim Durkin, Officer Guglielmo says "the Township started at 0%" - which is patently ridiculous. As I remember public discussions at the time, the PBA was initially offered the same settlement the FMBA had received the previous year - 4%/4%/4%. In fact he later says (in another, more forthcoming post) that the final settlement imposed by the arbitrator "was 2% over what the Township offered and 4.5% under what the local requested." Since the contract negotiations (not the arbitratration) were for a 3 year contract, I assume that means the first 3 years - 4.5%/6%/4.5% = 15.76% compounded. If that is 2% over what the township offered, then the township actually offered about 13.5% over 3 years - almost 1.5% more than the FMBA got. That hardly sounds like a shabby offer to me.
As for not getting a raise for 28 months - well, that's what happens when you force an arbitrator to step into the picture - arbitration takes time.
|
Joseph Guglielmo
Citizen
Username: Plt_guglielmo
Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 2:36 pm: | |
l'Angelo Misterioso
You are absolutely wrong; The PBA never received the same offer as the FMBA during the most recent negotiations. The arbitrator’s imposition of a four year deal was during the 1998 to2002 award. The most recent FMBA contract (2003 to 2006) was an agreed upon four year deal with the town, and they did not receive 4% across the board.
The PBA and the Town both agreed to seek a 4 year deal during the 2003 to 2006 negotiations. Your assumption is wrong, as are your numbers. If you want to correct me please try to be accurate.
If you don’t believe me I have copies of all the most recent FMBA and PBA settlements and awards, as well as files covering the past three PBA contract negotiations. If you ask nice I will let you see them.
|
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 13
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 2:57 pm: | |
"They were after a better, more in line contract. Why on earth do you have a problem with that? Which you must, since even after AGREEING with you on point, you bring it up again?"
Duncan I do not have a problem with that, as I already stated. Nor do I think "personal gain" is the wrong choice of words, because thats what it was. If you read my post you would see that I have no judgment on that issue, I was simply including it in the conversation. What I have a problem with is someone saying that my posts are "full of crap" and you should ignore my "foolishness".
For the record, I was suspended for 4 days because I called Straw a moron in another thread, which I apologized for. It seems to me that his post above is no less of a "personal attack", the language that was used in my suspension, than mine was.....
|
Lydia
Supporter
Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1260
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 8:06 pm: | |
Lucifer,
quote:What I have a problem with is someone saying that my posts are "full of crap" and you should ignore my "foolishness"
Criticizing your post as full of whatever is a far cry from attacking you personally as a crapster.
I'm thinking your handle isn't doing you any favors.
"Lucifer" connotates an unfortuanate hayta vibe IMO.
I have some suggestions for more MOL-friendly monikers:
1. "Fluffy Kitten" - everyone loves a fluffy kitten!
2. "Homemade Meatloaf" - comfort food and oh so delish.
3. Your first (real) name - kinda lends a certain credibility to your posts (like Duncan)
Hope that helps - good luck for post #14.
|
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 15
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - 3:25 am: | |
The above poster is full of crap. Ignore his foolisheness.
that is what straw wrote. he called me full of crap and foolish. For the record Lucifer means bringer of light. |
Crazyguggenheim
Citizen
Username: Crazyguggenheim
Post Number: 819
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - 7:27 am: | |
Call me crazy, but you should take that as a compliment |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page