Yeah, I was at the meeting tonight. It was crazy. Apparently there’s money in special accounts dedicated to specific costs, like Police and Firefighter salaries, but they aren’t using that money. NOOOO, they’re using money from the general fund to pay salaries, you know, the account that the state says will be in deficit by next year. WT_?!
In all fairness to Miller, she seems to have questioned this practice months time ago (I was there) and everyone criticized her. But tonight Robyn jumped on the bandwagon, questioning the practice and demanding answers. She sounded like Miller, but no one criticized her. Leicht tried to say it didn’t matter (“you’re not making new money”) but he ended-up throwing his arms up in frustration, saying “go ahead, wave your magic wand”. In the end they did vote to move $100,000.00 from special account for the road dept. (the gas tax fund) to the road dept. (to purchase road salt?)
The funny thing is that Robyn finally got religion on the budget only because she didn’t want to give the new trustees reasons to criticize her. (Too bad she wasn’t as concerned about the opinions of the voters)!
As to the difference in the numbers quoted in the Vindy (deficit) and the B’dman News (surplus), the Vindy's number is limited to the general fund while the B News' number includes money held in restricted funds. But no one explained that at the meeting.
While I agree with TUG that the former trustees fumbled the math, its also true the state audit was forced on the them to some extent. The unions don’t trust Leicht and insist there’s plenty of money. The trustees needed an outside, credible third-party to confirm what Leicht has been saying for years. Even so, some in the union still insist Leicht is hiding cash. It’s clear this issue is not going away. The trustees should get the unions to do their own independent audit as soon as possible.
I also agree with the sentiments expressed in this editorial. Talk about “unity” might suffice on the campaign trail but now that the show’s over it's time to come up with real solutions to our problems. CALEA certification won’t do it, nor will empty campaign rhetoric.
@ ubotherme: Clemente filed bankruptcy in March, Chapter 11. Reasons cited for the filing: rising fuel prices, rising liability insurance costs, rising employee health insurance costs, and shrinking revenue due insurance companies reducing payments and more customers without insurance. The companies that are making it have been forced to cut costs.
“either it's a good idea or it's not.” Like I said it’s a gamble. There’s only one way to know whether it’ll work or not, and that’s to do it and see. Personally I think it would be irresponsible to gamble with taxpayer’s money. Maybe if we has a surplus and could afford to take a hit of a couple hundred grand…, but not when we’re running a deficit. (BTW the deficit is real, and borrowing money has never been part of the plan). But again, if you’re convinced an ambulance service is such a good deal then why not do it yourself? HA!
No shot? Perhaps, but at least I’m taking the time to discuss the issues and learn a few things. I don’t see any other candidates/trustees making the effort. And at least with me you know where I stand. Besides, win or lose I intend to continue the discussion. Until then…
@ foxtrot: I think I’m unique as the only candidate to offer a plan on the revenue side. Even before I became a candidate I suggested starting a towing service. As compared to the ambulance service there’s less start-up cost, less liability exposure, more secure revenue source, and less personnel expense. (You don’t see any tow companies going bankrupt do you? Quite the opposite!).
BTW I’m not a wealthy individual and I pay my fair share of taxes. All unions need to understand that many people in the community have lost a significant portion of their incomes and have been force you to work "on the cheap". Public employees should not be immune from the economic downturn. Wages and benefits need to be brought in line with our budgetary reality.
@ NoBS: Yeah, I read the ambulance proposal, and everything else I could find on the subject. Sorry, I’m not convinced it will turn a profit. More and more people are going without insurance, and the proposal is that we would not seek collections from township residents. That’s different from the “For-Profits”. Besides, the start-up costs are prohibitive. Maybe if we had some extra cash lying around it might be something to consider. But to do it now, with the township going into the new year in deficit, it would be irresponsible to gamble with taxpayers’ funds on such a venture. (Funny thing is, when we had the money, the unions insisted we paid it out in increased salaries and benefits).
If “BOARDMAN TOWNSHIP ALREADY HAS ALL THE EMPLOYEES THEY NEED”, then why all the OT? How can we get “more work out of existing employees” without paying even more OT? Like SkyKing said, “If the fire dept is short staffed now and this is the reason for all the overtime- where are we going to get the people to run the ambulance?” And what about those OSHA regs, if they apply to the firefighters would they also apply to the Ambulance Service Workers?
BTW, could you give a link to the OSHA regs you have referred to.
Thanks.
@ ubotherme: I’m not opposed to part time policemen.
As to the ambulance service, if you’re so convinced it will be profitable, why not start your own company. Get some investors, mortgage your house, take out a loan, and start it up. Or do you only gamble with taxpayer’s money?
“Why can Boardman not hire "qualified" part-time firefighters to supplement its full-time staff, limit the overtime and keep all three stations open? If the township could hire the additional manpower through the use of part-time employees, this should address the OSHA concerns you have raised. These part time employees could fill the slots of full time positions as people retire or are on sick leave until those employees return to work.
Also, a small staff of qualified volunteer firefighters could be used for weekends and during periods when the fire dept handles a higher volume of calls.”
That’s my question too (and many others). We have a serious budget crisis in Boardman. Those who say Leicht is hiding money and lying about the budget are wrong. (Where’s the proof?). We can get the budget in line, comply with OSA standards, AND reduce OT at the BFD with part-timers. If ShyKing and I (and many others) are wrong in this belief, show us why.
@ Apollo: Hey man, don’t know if you know but at the meeting yesterday the trustees tabled a motion to adopt DRS’s $80,000.00 bid and asked the Police Chief to solicit other bids. It was all because of your girl Miller. Maybe you should contact the Chief and give him some tips on how to proceed. I’m sure he would appreciate any assistance you could give him in this regard.
@ rex: Exactly my point.
@ ubotherme: Well, of course if my employer thought he could save money with part-timers and volunteers he wouldn’t be waiting for you to “volunteer”, he would just do it. I certainly couldn’t stop him (no employment contract). The township, however, can’t “just do it” because of the contract with the union. Question is, when the contract comes up for re-negotiation will YOU stand in the way of the township saving money? If so, why?
I have no axe to grind against the FD. I do have an ax to grind against unnecessary OT. HA!
@ NoBS: OK, I follow you. 9-5res work only 5 days a week and the FD works 7 days a week. But the pay period isn’t weeks, its 21 days. We’re counting days not weeks. And the way the contract reads no one firemen is supposed to work (on average) eight hours every day for seven days every week. That time is spread out over several individuals, unless we’re talk’en additional (extra contractual) OT.
OSHA/NFPA standards are one thing. Contract language is another. The agreement with the union is governed by the contract not by OSHA/NFPA standards. But I understand your concern. Safety is a high priority, but so is getting the budget in line. I’m confident we can do both, we can operate at the highest safety standards and in-budget but we can’t do it without cooperation. And it’s probably going to mean bringing in part-timers at a reduced pay-rate, and maybe re-working the way we do fire prevention. I know this isn’t something the union wants but it seems the best solution under the circumstances. I would certainly like to hear any ideas you may have in this regard.
Yes, you can expect me to scrutinize all departments with an eye towards providing the best service to the community at a cost the budget can sustain. I don’t hate the BFD. I’m focusing on the FD only because the problems there are clear. Too much OT, closing stations, way over budget. We have to work together to get this resolved, and the sooner the better. Are you with me?
What do Boardmanites want from township government?
Yeah, I was at the meeting tonight. It was crazy. Apparently there’s money in special accounts dedicated to specific costs, like Police and Firefighter salaries, but they aren’t using that money. NOOOO, they’re using money from the general fund to pay salaries, you know, the account that the state says will be in deficit by next year. WT_?!
In all fairness to Miller, she seems to have questioned this practice months time ago (I was there) and everyone criticized her. But tonight Robyn jumped on the bandwagon, questioning the practice and demanding answers. She sounded like Miller, but no one criticized her. Leicht tried to say it didn’t matter (“you’re not making new money”) but he ended-up throwing his arms up in frustration, saying “go ahead, wave your magic wand”. In the end they did vote to move $100,000.00 from special account for the road dept. (the gas tax fund) to the road dept. (to purchase road salt?)
The funny thing is that Robyn finally got religion on the budget only because she didn’t want to give the new trustees reasons to criticize her. (Too bad she wasn’t as concerned about the opinions of the voters)!
As to the difference in the numbers quoted in the Vindy (deficit) and the B’dman News (surplus), the Vindy's number is limited to the general fund while the B News' number includes money held in restricted funds. But no one explained that at the meeting.
November 9, 2009 at 9:34 p.m. permalink suggest removal
What do Boardmanites want from township government?
While I agree with TUG that the former trustees fumbled the math, its also true the state audit was forced on the them to some extent. The unions don’t trust Leicht and insist there’s plenty of money. The trustees needed an outside, credible third-party to confirm what Leicht has been saying for years. Even so, some in the union still insist Leicht is hiding cash. It’s clear this issue is not going away. The trustees should get the unions to do their own independent audit as soon as possible.
November 8, 2009 at 8:36 p.m. permalink suggest removal
What do Boardmanites want from township government?
I also agree with the sentiments expressed in this editorial. Talk about “unity” might suffice on the campaign trail but now that the show’s over it's time to come up with real solutions to our problems. CALEA certification won’t do it, nor will empty campaign rhetoric.
November 8, 2009 at 11:29 a.m. permalink suggest removal
FINAL: Gallitto, Miller ousted in Boardman
I would like to congratulate the winners and wish them the best of luck in the up-coming term.
Gary Rosati
November 4, 2009 at 7:11 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ ubotherme: Clemente filed bankruptcy in March, Chapter 11. Reasons cited for the filing: rising fuel prices, rising liability insurance costs, rising employee health insurance costs, and shrinking revenue due insurance companies reducing payments and more customers without insurance. The companies that are making it have been forced to cut costs.
“either it's a good idea or it's not.” Like I said it’s a gamble. There’s only one way to know whether it’ll work or not, and that’s to do it and see. Personally I think it would be irresponsible to gamble with taxpayer’s money. Maybe if we has a surplus and could afford to take a hit of a couple hundred grand…, but not when we’re running a deficit. (BTW the deficit is real, and borrowing money has never been part of the plan). But again, if you’re convinced an ambulance service is such a good deal then why not do it yourself? HA!
No shot? Perhaps, but at least I’m taking the time to discuss the issues and learn a few things. I don’t see any other candidates/trustees making the effort. And at least with me you know where I stand. Besides, win or lose I intend to continue the discussion. Until then…
November 2, 2009 at 1:27 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ foxtrot: I think I’m unique as the only candidate to offer a plan on the revenue side. Even before I became a candidate I suggested starting a towing service. As compared to the ambulance service there’s less start-up cost, less liability exposure, more secure revenue source, and less personnel expense. (You don’t see any tow companies going bankrupt do you? Quite the opposite!).
BTW I’m not a wealthy individual and I pay my fair share of taxes. All unions need to understand that many people in the community have lost a significant portion of their incomes and have been force you to work "on the cheap". Public employees should not be immune from the economic downturn. Wages and benefits need to be brought in line with our budgetary reality.
November 1, 2009 at 10:53 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ NoBS: Yeah, I read the ambulance proposal, and everything else I could find on the subject. Sorry, I’m not convinced it will turn a profit. More and more people are going without insurance, and the proposal is that we would not seek collections from township residents. That’s different from the “For-Profits”. Besides, the start-up costs are prohibitive. Maybe if we had some extra cash lying around it might be something to consider. But to do it now, with the township going into the new year in deficit, it would be irresponsible to gamble with taxpayers’ funds on such a venture. (Funny thing is, when we had the money, the unions insisted we paid it out in increased salaries and benefits).
If “BOARDMAN TOWNSHIP ALREADY HAS ALL THE EMPLOYEES THEY NEED”, then why all the OT? How can we get “more work out of existing employees” without paying even more OT? Like SkyKing said, “If the fire dept is short staffed now and this is the reason for all the overtime- where are we going to get the people to run the ambulance?” And what about those OSHA regs, if they apply to the firefighters would they also apply to the Ambulance Service Workers?
BTW, could you give a link to the OSHA regs you have referred to.
Thanks.
@ ubotherme: I’m not opposed to part time policemen.
As to the ambulance service, if you’re so convinced it will be profitable, why not start your own company. Get some investors, mortgage your house, take out a loan, and start it up. Or do you only gamble with taxpayer’s money?
November 1, 2009 at 5:31 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ ubotherme & NoBS:
“Why can Boardman not hire "qualified" part-time firefighters to supplement its full-time staff, limit the overtime and keep all three stations open? If the township could hire the additional manpower through the use of part-time employees, this should address the OSHA concerns you have raised. These part time employees could fill the slots of full time positions as people retire or are on sick leave until those employees return to work.
Also, a small staff of qualified volunteer firefighters could be used for weekends and during periods when the fire dept handles a higher volume of calls.”
That’s my question too (and many others). We have a serious budget crisis in Boardman. Those who say Leicht is hiding money and lying about the budget are wrong. (Where’s the proof?). We can get the budget in line, comply with OSA standards, AND reduce OT at the BFD with part-timers. If ShyKing and I (and many others) are wrong in this belief, show us why.
October 31, 2009 at 8:44 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ Apollo: Hey man, don’t know if you know but at the meeting yesterday the trustees tabled a motion to adopt DRS’s $80,000.00 bid and asked the Police Chief to solicit other bids. It was all because of your girl Miller. Maybe you should contact the Chief and give him some tips on how to proceed. I’m sure he would appreciate any assistance you could give him in this regard.
@ rex: Exactly my point.
@ ubotherme: Well, of course if my employer thought he could save money with part-timers and volunteers he wouldn’t be waiting for you to “volunteer”, he would just do it. I certainly couldn’t stop him (no employment contract). The township, however, can’t “just do it” because of the contract with the union. Question is, when the contract comes up for re-negotiation will YOU stand in the way of the township saving money? If so, why?
I have no axe to grind against the FD. I do have an ax to grind against unnecessary OT. HA!
October 29, 2009 at 10:40 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Miller, Gallitto must work to solve Boardman’s crisis
@ NoBS: OK, I follow you. 9-5res work only 5 days a week and the FD works 7 days a week. But the pay period isn’t weeks, its 21 days. We’re counting days not weeks. And the way the contract reads no one firemen is supposed to work (on average) eight hours every day for seven days every week. That time is spread out over several individuals, unless we’re talk’en additional (extra contractual) OT.
OSHA/NFPA standards are one thing. Contract language is another. The agreement with the union is governed by the contract not by OSHA/NFPA standards. But I understand your concern. Safety is a high priority, but so is getting the budget in line. I’m confident we can do both, we can operate at the highest safety standards and in-budget but we can’t do it without cooperation. And it’s probably going to mean bringing in part-timers at a reduced pay-rate, and maybe re-working the way we do fire prevention. I know this isn’t something the union wants but it seems the best solution under the circumstances. I would certainly like to hear any ideas you may have in this regard.
Yes, you can expect me to scrutinize all departments with an eye towards providing the best service to the community at a cost the budget can sustain. I don’t hate the BFD. I’m focusing on the FD only because the problems there are clear. Too much OT, closing stations, way over budget. We have to work together to get this resolved, and the sooner the better. Are you with me?
October 27, 2009 at 9:35 a.m. permalink suggest removal