FAIRWELL TO THE CHIEF ?

FAIRWELL TO THE CHIEF ?

An interesting point was made as the BoS were discussing the police dept budget. One of the reasons that this budget had ballooned is that it was anticipating an administrative chief; which means the chief would not do patrol duty. This would require a patrolman on duty with the chief. They called Chief Bucknell a working chief; which means that in addition to being a patrol officer 40+ hours per week she had to take care of all the administrative duties as well. This must be why people usually had to set an appointment with Chief Bucknell. With Officer Pilone I can usually just stop by the station and he can chat. I have to wonder if it’s worth an extra $50,000.00 so I can sit down at will and talk with the chief about what I wrote on my blog.

Charlie said that in the case of a working chief the administrative duties usually took a back seat to the duties of serving the people’s safety needs. Charlie may have just inadvertently revealed why the police dept was in such disorder. Perhaps this is why Chief Bucknell could rarely take time off and had to put in many unpaid hours of overtime. Now the BoS wants to fire the chief because she was a working chief. They also mentioned that the new chief would have to be a working chief as well. I guess in a few years we’ll be doing another ten thousand dollar report to find the house is still in disorder and we have to fire another chief.

By now you’ve heard that the BoS voted to hire a part time interim chief. I can’t recall the guys name and it really doesn’t matter. I guess this interim chief's main mission is to figure out how to get rid of Chief Bucknell without it looking like the BoS are trying to railroad her. They said this would take 3 to 6 months and cost about $750.00 a week for this part time position. Of course we will still be paying Chief Bucknell her full time salary while she is on administrative leave; and God only knows how much it will cost to settle any law suit.

This interim chief really has his work cut out for him. He has to take a report that could not show the Attorney General or the District Attorney any actionable offences against the chief, and find a way to use it to fire her. News flash BoS; it will always look like you’re trying to railroad the chief because you are railroading her. Have the guts to either fire her and take the consequences or swallow your pride bring her back. But don’t make the town spend any more money to support your foolishness.

It was unclear to me if we as citizens could stop this train wreck. The way the BoS was talking is that it’s a fait accompli and regardless of what happens at the special town meeting they think it’s a done deal. Although I don’t know how they will fund this fiasco if we vote it down. It seems that if this BoS wants to do something they don’t let anything get in their way. Maybe the only way to stop this train wreck is to throw this BoS off of the train.  

KevinZurrin

 

BACK TO THE BASICS

BACK TO THE BASICS

Well it seems we are getting preoccupied with the chief issues as though this is the only issue that we will be voting on at the two upcoming town meetings. We can banter back and forth about the tools and equipment the officers need to protect them and the town. However, all this will be decided at the town meetings. We the people choose the budget items and we do have the power to reject any line item. We have several budgets to consider and the Chief, whoever that may be, will have to make do with whatever the town approves for the police dept. budget. If that becomes a problem then we can choose to not fund the entire department.

SPECIAL TOWN MEETING

The BoS will be asking us to give them permission to spend $15,000.00-$30,000.00 to hire a new interim Chief to investigate the Chief that is on administrative leave. When this article comes up at the special town meeting we can simply vote it down. We need to tell the BoS that we aren’t going to spend any more money on their screw up. I can’t for the life of me understand why the BoS would want us to pay up to $30,000.00 to investigate a matter that can be investigated in an unbiased impartial manner for free. Perhaps the BoS doesn’t want a truly impartial investigation. Regardless, we the people do not have to fund stupidity.

We will be asked to approve $10,000.00 to do an operational audit on the water company. This is more than a 400% increase over last year’s water company audit budget. This operational audit will only tell us what the Finance committee has told us already. Because of one employee’s nonfeasance the town lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax revenue. We have an audit scheduled with Scanlon & Associates which will satisfy the state requirement, do we really need more?

          Without town approval the BoS asked the personnel director to work over the budgeted $6,000.00. In fact they are asking the town for another $2.800.00 to pay for hours that he worked which were not budgeted for. They will also ask that we increase the personnel director’s budget to $9,500.00 per year. When Charlie Flynn was pitching the Finance committee on this article and increase he made a gaffe. We all know a gaffe is when a politician accidentally tells the truth. Charlie said that we need to increase this budget item and pay the extra $2,800.00 for the following reason. “Ordinarily this job should be done by the BoS; but because the BoS did this job so poorly we needed to hire a personnel director”. As unbelievable as it sounds Charlie Flynn’s argument is that because the BoS couldn’t do its job we need to hire someone to do it for them. Maybe we should pay the personnel director from the BoS’s salary. Or perhaps we should just replace this BoS with people who can actually do the job.

          Then we have the water company articles. Not only are the water commissioners asking us to come up with $7,842.50 in addition to the $79,720.00 subsidy from last year, but at the annual town meeting they’ll be asking us to take over the entire $117,000.00 debt service. Do these people really think the citizens of Egremont are that stupid?

          We have a lot of issues to deal with at the two town meetings on the 7^th of May; but the main objective is to get as many people out to the meetings as possible. There is strength in numbers. These meetings are too important to let apathy allow this small group of people who have been running this town to win. It’s time for the citizens of Egremont to step up and get involved. It’s time for the citizens of Egremont to make a stand. I hope to see you all at the two town meetings on May 7^th at 6:00 pm and 7:00 pm at Mt. Everett HS; then the election on May 14^th at the North Egremont Fire Station.

KevinZurrin

Battle of the Budgets

Officer Pilone

In regard to your comment that we were lied to; I don’t think that we were lied to; as much as there are two different plans for the Egremont Police Dept. I was just looking over the two budgets that were submitted to the FC. It looks like your budget was $350,576.00 and Chief Bucknell's was 297,356.00. It seems to me that the Chiefs budget is only slightly over last year’s budget which is exactly what she stated. The documents will bear out this fact. Your plan on the other hand reflects quite a significant increase. I’m not saying there is anything wrong with that; I’m just saying that the plans are different and the cost of these plans reflect that difference.

It’s clear that you and Chief Bucknell have vastly different visions for the town of Egremont. However, these options have to be discussed with the people at the town meeting. Neither plan has to be approved by the voters. If the town doesn’t agree with the plan for the police dept, the people can choose to not fund the dept. entirely. The police do not work for Charlie Flynn or the BoS; they work for the people of the town of Egremont. Perhaps you should consider how your plan might change in the event that it is rejected by the town. If your plan is voted down at the ATM it could mean that the EPD goes unfunded regardless of any promises by any selectman.

I’m in the process of going through all the numbers so I can discuss them with the readers before the two town meetings. Of course I will give my take on these numbers, but the numbers will be based on the documents presented by you and Chief Bucknell. I do however plan on sending the raw figures in PDF form to all the readers so they can draw their own conclusions. When the people do come out to vote on these issues they will be well informed on the details. These two town meetings will be held on May 7, 2013 starting at 6:00 pm. at the Mt. Everett High School.

When we spoke at the station last week you mentioned that the hiring of an interim chief to investigate Chief Bucknell was unnecessary. You said there were independent outside agencies that could do the investigation at no cost to the town. Because this matter will be voted on at the special town meeting before the annual town meeting I would ask you to share this information with the readers. I thought your suggestion made a lot more sense than the BoS’s plan to spend up to $30,000.00 to replace you and hire a third chief. This fiasco has cost the town so much already I think the town would be very interested in knowing how this situation could be dealt with at little or no cost to the town.

THE BAIT AND SWITCH

Jeremy

          Thank you for your respectful comment. I hope that if your other officers decide to post, even anonymously, that they will maintain the same decorum. I don’t disagree with your numbers. However, you have to understand that we were told that the hiring of the second police officer would not significantly increase the budget. By your own words it was sold as not negatively impacting the budget; this is a fact and a real truth. I was on the finance committee that voted for it and I remember the deliberations well.

Here’s my problem, Life’s a pitch and then they buy. We are sold one thing and then after we buy we are told that the terms of sale have changed. It’s called a bait and switch and it is illegal; at least in the private sector. For instance, we were told that if we allowed the water users to use the town’s credit to buy the water company, the taxpayers would not have to pay one thin dime. To date we have already burdened the taxpayers with over a half million in subsidies. To add insult to injury the taxpayers are now being asked to pay another 1.17 million to relieve the debt for the users. We were told that adding an extra officer would not significantly increase the police budget. Now we are being told that the budget will have to be increased by a significant amount. This is a fact and a real truth. Why you can’t understand this is beyond me.

You ask a good question with your bottom line which I would like to address. Perhaps the town should reconsider if we want a 24/7 police dept. This issue has come up in the past and the town voted yes. However, with the costs involved in maintaining a full time police force constantly ballooning the town may have to revisit this issue. Some people feel that a town this size does not need a full time police presence. I was in favor of the full time police force and the new station when it was sold at a reasonable price. However, the terms of the sale are changing and now I am on the fence. If the budget is going to increase too much then I might go with someone who suggested that we eliminate the police force and turn the new station into a community center. You see, anytime the terms and conditions of a sale are changed the agreement can be canceled.

KevinZurrin

WATER COMPANY/POLICE DEPT BUDGET

          Well the finance committee, (FC), took a stand in regard to the police and water company budgets. Not only did they not vote to recommend these budgets; they level funded the police dept. budget and they actually reduced the water company, (WC) budget. My hat’s off the finance committee. I certainly hope the town votes to approve the FC’s recommendation. This is the only way to get the spending in check. This is a great example of how our system works. The finance committee does the research and votes to recommend specific actions to the townspeople. Then the citizens can make a better decision when they vote at the annual town meeting. I’ll get into the details of this move and the rationale behind it.

          As you know the water company has been a budgetary concern for a long time. After much discussion the finance committee decided to recommend that we cut the budget in very specific areas. The main area is in wages which caused an automatic cut in the insurance. The FC cannot tell the water commissioners how to spend the monies that are allocated for the WC. However, the voters can. Based on recommendations found in the Sullivan Report the FC voted to reduce one employee position to part time. It is assumed that this is Jack Muskrat’s position. By reducing this position to part time the job no longer requires the town to pay for insurance. The overall savings is in excess of $20,000.00. This will reduce the subsidy that the taxpayers have to pay. Jack’s semi/retirement has been discussed for several years. If the town votes the recommendations of the FC on this issue perhaps Jack’s semi/retirement may finally happen.

          The police dept. budget has ballooned to an outrageous level in the last few years. We were told that the hiring of two new officers would not significantly increase the budget. We were told that the part time officers were actually going to be working part time; instead of almost full time in some cases. I don’t know if this is the case but I do know that the acting chief presented a budget that was more than $50,000.00 above last year’s budget. This is where the FC drew the line. They recommended that the town vote to level fund the police budget and the department would have to adjust their spending to last year’s level. Many people commented that the FC needed to get a spine and I guess they listened. If the townspeople back the FC recommendations then the town will be well on its way to fiscal responsibility.

Remember, the selectmen and FC members can only recommend the town take certain action; we the people have to step up and make the decisions to put the town’s finances in order. We do this by showing up for the annual town meeting and voting. The only vote that doesn’t count is the vote that isn’t cast. I hope to see you at both the annual town meeting and the special town meeting. It all starts at 6:00 pm on the 7^th of May 2013 at the Mt Everett High School. I know I’ll be there, will you?