Farewell Dark City....
11 years ago
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Bettencourt wins, Niz loses, Peabody needs to be spending less time in courtrooms
First of all, hello to the folks who sometimes read this blog.
I have been VERY inattentive to this space and can't promise I will do any better in the near future. All I can say is when I have something to say I will try and find the time to say it.
A few stories of late have me thinking about Peabody...
-----
Bettencourt winning his pension is a terrible miscarriage of justice. The idea that he was not going to be able to somehow profit from his illegal activities is really besides the point. He broke the law and he did it at work... using work computers... and knowledge he could only illegally obtain through his position as a police officer. The fact that he simply was doing it to be a giant snoop and a big-shot know-it-all is really of no concern to me. This simply smacks of one public servant helping another one. Seriously can you even begin to say that what he did has no connection to his job? And THAT is the legal stance of whether or not someone should be allowed to keep their pension after they commit such a crime.
And spare me your comments about 'his poor family' and 'all his good deeds' because I'm sure that many of the people he had arrested in his career were equally 'good citizens' who happened to also be criminals. Just like he is.
-----
The good news is that even when the City does some REALLY STUPID STUFF... such as having the City Solicitor advising public employees to NOT TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH IN A DEPOSITION (what the heck was he thinking?) the TRUTH of the matter comes out and an idiot like Niz loses BIG TIME.
I would say that in a normal world NOT telling the whole truth to the general public concerning the 'transition' (read FIRING) of an employee - under the thought that the employee might salvage a little of his good(?) name - I would say this was a thoughtful thing to do. It happens everyday in the private sector. Someone gets called into the bosses office and is given 2 or 3 weeks to find a new position and 'move on' in good standing... or be let go if he/she decided not to go.
So here the administration of the schools tried to protect the long storied career of a man some hold in high esteem by NOT acknowledging serious misdeeds and just saying it was time for a change.
But being the type of person he is, Coach Niz couldn't do the right thing and instead of accepting responsibility for his poor choices and bad actions... decided to blame everybody but himself. And at the trial the truth came out and it looks like his reputation will never be the same.
At least he lost. Maybe he will quit politics completely and do us all a favor.
-----
Is anyone else tired of the same old Salem News rant about EVERYONE WHO WORKS IN PUBLIC SERVICE IS PAID TOO MUCH AND DOES NOTHING!!! The latest "outrage" is a woman who has been working for the teachers union for many years and yet is allowed to maintain her standing as a public school teacher (since she is representing them.) The idea is that she can still log the time as if she was working AS a teacher when it comes to her pension. The Salem News is typically in a giant snit about how unfair this is to the public.
Except that this is part of a contract that was agreed to by both the union and the administration (representing the public) many years ago. The idea that people today are not happy with it is, frankly, too bad. I can't sign a contract with someone and then change the rules after the fact.
Suppose I signed a year long lease for $1000/month. But after the first month the landlord calls and tells me he isn't making enough profit and wants me to pay $2000... SORRY MAC! A contract is a contract. I don't know why it was scene as a good idea to allow this 20+ years ago, but both sides felt it was good and they agreed to it.
-----
I will try and be a little more active on the blog. I may or may not be successful. Leave a comment or not. If you have an idea, add it as a comment and I'll try to get to it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Hey PI - good to have your voice back. Its always insightful and I appreciate your thoughtful posts.
With that said, I do disagree with you on public employee pay status. I think the issue that bothers people here is that while private sector employees are either laid-off or clinging onto their jobs (with many taking pay cuts or reduced benefit packages), the city goes out and gives EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE a raise each of the past 2 years. And what did the city get back? Nominal cost reduction to their benefit packages.
And this occurs against a backdrop of tax increases (albeit nominal) and user fee increases (significant - like the bus fee increase).
While I would never argue against someone making a decent living, there was no reason to offer these types of across the board raises during this recession.
In addition, while I consider myself a huge proponent of the school system, I do find it difficult to understand why we're paying elementary school principals $100k+ a year in salary. They only manage a staff of 20-30 people and get at least 8 weeks off a year (from what I can count). Doesn't that seem a little excessive for the position to you?
It does to me....now granted we can argue how private salaries haven't kept pace with where they should be; but that is a much broader argument. Shouldn't the goal be to have public sector compensation (total compensation) be in-line with private sector compensation?
In response to Bettencourt getting his pension I've decided to print a letter dated September 19, 2008 in the Salem News. As you will see I'm in favor of his getting his pension while others were doing no more or less than he did from 1970 to this ,alledged or not, intrusion of computer generated score inquiries . To the editor: In response to retired police officer Robert Marron's letter in Wednesday's paper ["Bettencourt doesn't deserve pension."Sept. 17]: I'd like to remind every one that while we were police officers,every time there was an exam taken and the department was waiting for the results, certain were directly and indirectly part of the same thing happening up until this Bettencourt case exposure. Some of these officers are now in the higher ranks working today. One now retired high ranking officer was supposed to be "in the know" by virtue of having someone very close to him who worked for the state. Another high ranking officer had a relative well known in Peabody political circles who worked for the state and made the same type of inquiries [regarding civil service scores]before computers were in use by the department. There seems to be some hypocrisy by certain past and present members of the department when it comes to remembering what went on during and after our working years. I do agree with the law as shown, but not the kicking while down, of Edward Bettencourt. I ask that those who rose in rank to set aside the issues that led up to all this happening Then they should ask themselves if they aren't being hypocrites for having played a part in this over the years. See you all at the next yearly union breakfast. Will be interested to see if everyone has had some clarity of conscience. Harry Birmingham Plaistow , N.H. [Editors note: Harry Birmingham is a retired Peabody police officer.] Copyright 1999-2008 cnhi,inc
On line thirteen after the word - certain - the word officers was not shown -- Harry Birmingham
I've always wondered why peabody teachers were the lowest paid in the area. It looks the reason is that the person who they pay to represent them in their contract discussions carved out a sweetrheart deal for herself and sold them down the river. It all makes sense now.
Some comments on the comments:
Concerning the school principals: I am not really 100% sure exactly what these folks do. But from what I do know, they are not taking off 2 months during the summer. Most of the admin staff does not get that type of a break but instead are working to either close out or start up the school year.
This might lead to the next statement - teachers work some tiny amount of hours (based on people assuming teachers only work 1) in the school and 2) while students are seated at their desks.) From what I have seen, many if not most of the teachers are working pretty darn hard for their money - much more than most people actually think.
Raise for public employees... while I think that the public employees have negotiated to receive better benefits in exchange for lesser compensation, I think the unions are mostly corrupt and ONLY interested in what is good for the UNION (and not the union membership) and certainly seen to NOT CARE what the public perception looks like! Look at Salem and the Police Union -- they will not even allow the members to VOTE on the issue because the UNION fears the members might vote to give something back to the City during a time of economic troubles for the whole world!?
Unions are basically stupid and act only in the self interest of THE UNION. Certainly they do NOT give a hoot about their members.
To Mr. Birmingham:
While I do not say that you are wrong about the despicable actions of police officers while in the employ of the Peabody Police, I hardly think the proper response should be "Oh yeah? Well other people do it too!"
I wonder how many people have been pulled over by police officers for speeding with the excuse of "well everyone else is speeding too!?!"
Would you say this is JUSTIFIABLE for their actions? What about shoplifting? I mean why stop there! Why not breaking and entering! Surely everyone does that! Or maybe armed robbery! Come on... you know everyone has done that at one time or another!
So to answer the unasked question... I have NOT actually ever stolen someone's social security number and illegally entered it into a private secure system and pretended to be someone else all so that I could see the scores of these peoples tests.
And if I was stupid enough to think that it was OK - EVEN THOUGH I WAS A COP AND SHOULD KNOW BETTER THAN MOST, RIGHT FROM WRONG - my best defense would not be... "well somebody else did it too!"
5 year olds can come up with better excuses than that.
BTW: You would never get any crap from me regarding spelling/grammar on this blog. If you can get your point across... THAT is the important part of the post.
To Anon 8:42
To those in the private sector who do not have the wages of some public employees instead of complaining about it, why don't you fight for better pay??? Then consumers (everyone is a consumer) can complain that your private sector wages drive prices higher. I think this happens but you just don't know it. Or choose to ignore it. We all pay for the high salaries (and waste) made in the private sector but why blame the free market when we can kick a public employee around???
And why don't public employees get matching 401K contributions like the private sector? Or at least do what private sector does, employers match social security tax dollar for dollar (7% to 7%).
Heck, public employers don't match a penny for what public employees contribute. A teacher pays 11% of their salary yearly. Imagine a city paying 11% equally to match. You'd be a millionaire in no time and can live off the interest.
The maximum cost of living increase for a Mass. pension is $360 a year, and only by legislature approval.
Yikes, what a windfall!
Not likely public employees will see these kind of raises again in their lifetime.
The real reason city budgets are broke is health care costs. They are obscene for everyone! If health care costs rose only 2 to 3% yearly for the past 20 years, we would have a happy world and public employees would not be the scapegoats they have become.
To Insider Re: Bettencourt
He lost his livelihood forever. This would have hurt if he were a young cop, but he was old enough to collect his pension. Are you age discriminating???
Fire the guy for the misdmeanor (like he was), but to deny a pension for life does not fit the misdemeanor. And why are just public employees subject to loss of pension? Do convicted criminals lose their social security benefits? (answer: No, especially not for a misdemeanor). Public employees are held to higher standards but everyone whines when they have a better health plan.
PI , The point I was trying to make ,among others, was that these same high up past/present police officials are the ones who should have thought about their own involvement[s] before running off at the mouth being that they are the hypocrites . Its always easier to kick someone when they are down especially if that person was a union head that spoke many a truth at negotiation sessions and else where. When anyone who has taken part in what has happened and made the terrible remarks/actions and then ran for cover has to be considered a hypocrite in my book. Laws have to be upheld but then too the hypocrite[s] should be held accountable as well. I do agree with you that because someone else did it doesn't make it right for you or any one else to do. That alone seems to prove the point I've tried making. Human nature has its failings no doubt but the biblical casting of the stones is best given to those with out sin[s]. Thank you for your personal open response and I welcome this exchange of thought and deeds with you. So, until next time --Harry
I agree that health care costs are bankrupting municipal budgets. But employee plan type, low contribution rate & lifetime benefits to those health care plans are also part of the problem.
The rule of thumb when I was younger was public employee's had better benefits in lieu of the better pay offered by the private sector. That's no longer the case - the private sector currently pays more and has better benefits.
BTW - very few private companies offer a 401k match anymore and are required by law to match SSI payments (otherwise that would have also ended years ago).
I don't begrudge any employee from making a living nor do I blame the union/employee for driving towards the best deal. The problem is management. Let's face it...we continually elect buffoons who's primary focus is getting elected, not ensuring long-term financial sustainability.
Good case in point is why would we even consider giving a raise to non-union employees the past 2 years? The problem with raises is they become fixed costs that you need to support over time. If Bonfanti was concerned with the taxpayer, he would have offered bonuses instead. Many companies use this mechanism to keep employees happy while maintaining your fixed costs. Its like offering a 1yr raise and then you need to work for your next years raise. This would have been much more palatable than offering giving a 3% raise each of the last 2 years.
As for your pension, my violin is out. There are so many rules that are specifically geared to maximizing your pension benefit that our do-nothing legislators are actually discussing pension reform for the first time. I'll gladly take this over anything offered within the private sector. Its not even close.
Still whining about the high taxes and wasteful spending in Peabody? Check out today's Globe. Peabody is $1,117 below the State average real estate tax.
Some comparisons:
Lynnfield - $6,917
Middleton - $5,672
Beverly - $5,006
Danvers - $4,577
Salem - 4,390
Lynn - $3,466
Peabody - $3,273
You get what you pay for folks. Suck it up or step it up and get real.
You can't compare average tax bill from city to city. Tax bill is based upon home evaluation (so Lynnfield will obviously be higher than Peabody).
What you have to do is compare tax rate. This gives you a much better idea of where Peabody stands in comparison with other towns.
BTW....I agree with you regarding you get what you pay for. But wouldn't it also be nice if we had compentent financial management to go with that or is that too much to ask for?
I’d suggest a different metric for town-to-town comparisons than the previous poster, and that would be the average tax bill per household, or per person. The tax rate itself is totally an artificial (and therefore relatively meaningless) construct, because the city/town knows what the aggregate property value is, and what it wants/needs to spend, and then sets the tax rate to get there. It’s just an algebra problem.
The tax bill, on the other hand, is a real measure of how much the household must pay to get the services delivered by the city or town – regressive because it’s based not on what you make, but on what your property is worth. (There is a bit of correlation between your income and your property worth (richer people own more valuable properties) but this isn’t 100%. You might have owned a home for 40 years that is now worth a LOT, but not be in a high-income bracket.) There are some economies of scale in play here – the smaller the town, the more (relatively) the residents pay for services (which is why regionalization often makes sense, although it flies in the face of the Town Sovereignty at Any Cost mentality around here) but some of this is negated by the fact that bigger, denser communities start to have costlier social problems to deal with – and school and police costs (to name just two) are therefore higher.
Wow, Anon at 8/22 8:11 am!
I hope you will continue to participate on this blog! Your comments are spot-on and really give the reader something to ponder!
I would like to see a better comparison of how local governments compare. City budget per person.
I.e if City X has a $100M budget and 50K citizens there efficiency would be at $2000 per ca pita. I would like to see this as a comparison.
Well I looked for something like what you are asking for...
Municipal Budget / Residents
But I can't seem to find a listing of budgets. Maybe by going to each individual city or town... but no listing in one place.
The number of residents is easy to find.
Of course, it would also only be an approximate measure as some governments allocate budgets differently than others and you would need to have lots of specific knowledge about each one to be able to compare them accurately.
Post a Comment