Tuesday, February 11, 2014


Rather than posting part  #2 tomorrow I am double posting today.

Back to Council shenanigans. All five of the Ordinances presented for second reading were approved for the Business meeting and all accepted there with only the two relating to the creation of TWO Deputy Police Director receiving any no votes.

An unlikely combination of Reid and Williams voted the way I would have; Reid because he felt that the creating of another salaried position with a high 5 to low 6figure salary was an unnecessary expense. I cannot speak for Williams but I am sure that her vote was on sound fiduciary principles. It must be frustrating to be rejected when you are right.

My objection to these two Ordinances is my sense of a dead fish odor. This is a position that for at least 6 years was filled by one man who also held the title of Director of Public Affairs and Safety. While there were objections to his overall performance there was never any public outcry except after one stupid episode for his replacement.

All of a sudden after the Council rejected approval for the Mayor’s nominations for the Director of Public Affairs & Safety as well as the nominee for Police Director; we now have a three person bureaucracy replacing a single individual. Oh yes the Mayor’s recommendation  as Police Director was approved but the Council’s resolution also noted that he was to take over the responsibilities  of the Department Director.

Not only do I question the legality of that "appointment" since the Council can only approve the Mayor’s recommendation for Administrative appointments; it cannot make any appointment.
No one has given an adequate explanation for this Ordinance. Till there is a logical justifying documentation this administration is starting out under a cloud.  Yes there often must be compromises between Administration and Council but never surrender.

Two of the three Resolutions on the Mayors appointments passed as part of the Consent Agenda.  The resolution appointing Charles Tyndale as PMUA Commissioner succeeding Toliver was approved by a 4:3 vote with the Council’s right wing (from the audience view) voting "no" as its usual block.

The rest of the Resolutions were treated in a cavalier fashion with,  irrespective of funds involved, most being placed on the consent agenda. That included one authorizing the submission to the County of the Community Block Grant Program year 40 (2014-2015) Funding Priorities until someone pointed out that there was $2,625,893.15 in requests involved.  Could it have been possible that some had not read in detail their packet? That would be possible in OZ but of course not in Plainfield.



  1. I hope Plainfield does not have a payroll clerk processing anything in 2014. A service like Paychex or ADP can do the entire payroll efficiently and at a lower cost than a payroll staff.

  2. I see two more "Dawg" teasers Doc? Are you just seeing who reads the fine print?

  3. 2:14PN, Glad that at least you are reading the fine print. No it is not a test. It is a statement of fact and is a teaser. The clarification is a fortnight away.
    If anyone knows and writes I will publicly announce.

  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.