Mangin for Mayor!

[Guest TownHallKid]

you tell 'em Jim!

To the Publisher:

Everyone in Kearny is talking about the recent violent crimes that have been all over the newspapers. Every day, it seems we read about another incident, or a neighbor tells us about someone’s house or car that was broken into. I’ve lived here all my life, and I can’t remember a time when crime in Kearny was the number one gripe — knocking high taxes out of the top spot.

Crime and taxes are linked though. More police officers mean higher taxes. In fact, at $14 million, the budget for police salaries is the single largest item in the municipal budget. In just the last two years, this account has increased by $2.3 million — a 20-percent jump in just two years.

Taxpayers may think that for these extra tax dollars, we’re getting more police officers; but that’s not the case. Instead of paying for more police protection, we’re paying for “past” police protection in the form of retroactive salary payments because contracts weren’t settled on time.

You’d think that by increasing the police salary budget by 20 percent in two years, we’d at least feel a little more secure. But recent newspaper articles about violent crime tell a different story.

It’s time the Mayor and Town Council re-think their policy of putting off contract settlements. With Kearny taxes as high as they are, we’ve paid for the right to feel safe.

Jim Mangin

Kearny

[RonD]

you tell 'em Jim!

To the Publisher:

  Everyone in Kearny is talking about the recent violent crimes that have been all over the newspapers. Every day, it seems we read about another incident, or a neighbor tells us about someone’s house or car that was broken into. I’ve lived here all my life, and I can’t remember a time when crime in Kearny was the number one gripe — knocking high taxes out of the top spot.

  Crime and taxes are linked though. More police officers mean higher taxes. In fact, at $14 million, the budget for police salaries is the single largest item in the municipal budget. In just the last two years, this account has increased by $2.3 million — a 20-percent jump in just two years.

  Taxpayers may think that for these extra tax dollars, we’re getting more police officers; but that’s not the case. Instead of paying for more police protection, we’re paying for “past” police protection in the form of retroactive salary payments because contracts weren’t settled on time.

  You’d think that by increasing the police salary budget by 20 percent in two years, we’d at least feel a little more secure. But recent newspaper articles about violent crime tell a different story.

  It’s time the Mayor and Town Council re-think their policy of putting off contract settlements. With Kearny taxes as high as they are, we’ve paid for the right to feel safe.

Jim Mangin

Kearny

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is a spin on the old, "pay me now or pay me later" commercial. The officers are getting no more today than they would have gotten had the contracts been settled in the year the negotiations started. If one officer , had the contract been setled earlier, was to receive raises of, say, $2000, $1500 and $1000 for the last three years, they are now getting retro pay of $4500. There are no penalties or interest added to the figures. In fact, the taxpayers have probably saved a few cents based on inflation. If any harm has been done it is the issue of morale among the affected officers by not getting their increases in a timely manner.

I can't help but wonder if the writer, as a management employee of his company, would expedite contract settlements with his employees for high percentage increases just to get it over with or if he would hold out and continue negotiations for the benefit of his company and stockholders. What would you say if the Mayor and Council accepted the unions first demands just to bring an early end to negotiations as the writer suggests?

Finally, equating taxes with safety is wrong. We now live in a community in NJ were we pay less than $2500 a year in total property taxes and the crime rate is very low. It's the people that make up the community that matter. You can have an officer on every corner and still have felonies happen.

[Guest Guest]

This is a spin on the old, "pay me now or pay me later" commercial. The officers are getting no more today than they would have gotten had the contracts been settled in the year the negotiations started. If one officer , had the contract been setled earlier, was to receive raises of, say, $2000, $1500 and $1000 for the last three years, they are now getting retro pay of $4500. There are no penalties or interest added to the figures. In fact,  the taxpayers have probably saved a few cents based on inflation. If any harm has been done it is the issue of morale among the affected officers by not getting their increases in a timely manner.

I can't help but wonder if the writer, as a management employee of his company, would expedite contract settlements with his employees for high percentage increases just to get it over with or if he would hold out and continue negotiations for the benefit of his company and stockholders. What would you say if the Mayor and Council accepted the unions first demands just to bring an early end to negotiations as the writer suggests?

Finally, equating taxes with safety is wrong. We now live in a community in NJ were we pay less than $2500 a year in total property taxes and the crime rate is very low. It's the people that make up the community that matter. You can have an officer on every corner and still have felonies happen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I tend to agree with Mr. Mangin... unfortuneately my vote for him in the last election didn't matter, but I would vote all over for him. It's people like him who care about our town. He is a long time Kearny resident who like me has seen it go from bad to worse. Granted Kearny and the surrounding towns have always had their share of problems and issues with petty crimes, but come on. In the last two or three years all you hear about is murder, shootings, muggings, etc... It is getting way out of hand, and the current Mayor and council don't give a damn. Jim Mangin is a caring, understanding man who cares about his community, and you have no reason to question his "management skills" at his company of employ. Have you ever gone to his "company", and needed the help of a "manager??? Jim is always very pleasant, and his years of customer service skills along with his management skills show what type of person he is...

Way to go Jim!!!! only wish you had more luck getting a council seat, oh to heck with it, run for Mayor next time around and I am sure the way things are going now, you'll beat Santos....

[Guest Glad I left]

It would be nice to see Santos knocked out of office. Then he could spend all his time in the county with all the people he never liked. But now their all good buddies. When the County put it's support behind Magin they were the evil Hudson county machine. What are they now Alberto? People, ask your self this, what has Alberto really done for Kearny? I know this!!! he has done a lot for himself. Keep paying your taxes, you don't need that money, what would you do with the extra cash any way?

[RonD]

I tend to agree with Mr. Mangin... unfortuneately my vote for him in the last election didn't matter, but I would vote all over for him.  It's people like him who care about our town.  He is a long time Kearny resident who like me has seen it go from bad to worse.  Granted Kearny and the surrounding towns have always had their share of problems and issues with petty crimes, but come on.  In the last two or three years all you hear about is murder, shootings, muggings, etc...  It is getting way out of hand, and the current Mayor and council don't give a damn.  Jim Mangin is a caring, understanding man who cares about his community, and you have no reason to question his "management skills" at his company of employ.  Have you ever gone to his "company", and needed the help of a "manager??? Jim is always very pleasant, and his years of customer service skills along with his management skills show what type of person he is... 

Way to go Jim!!!!  only wish you had more luck getting a council seat, oh to heck with it, run for Mayor next time around and I am sure the way things are going now, you'll beat Santos....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never questioned Jim's ability as a manager. I asked if he would do what he proposes the Mayor and Town Council do. Would he sacrifice the company (town) and its stockholders (taxpayers) for the employees (police officers) by approving the first offer put on the table. I think not? That was the topic, right?

[Strife767]

what has Alberto really done for Kearny? I know this!!! he has done a lot for himself. Keep paying your taxes, you don't need that money, what would you do with the extra cash any way?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You do realize that Santos would be making a lot more money had he remained an attorney instead of running for mayor in the first place, right?

[Guest Glad I left]

You do realize that Santos would be making a lot more money had he remained an attorney instead of running for mayor in the first place, right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If that was the case why is he the Mayor. People don't run for these positions for the six thousand a year. Maybe he wasn't that good at the practice of Law. But he has secured the position of clerk to the free holders. So what has he done? I know your taxes have gone up every year since the Mayor has been in office and now he is padding his pension with the second position of clerk. Seems he has done more for Alberto. Think!

[Guest Glad I left]

I never questioned Jim's ability as a manager. I asked if he would do what he proposes the Mayor and Town Council do. Would he sacrifice the company (town) and its stockholders (taxpayers) for the employees (police officers) by approving the first offer put on the table. I think not? That was the topic, right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron, he never said anything about taking the first proposal from the union. He thinks five years to settle contract negotiations is a bit much. That's not really in the tax payers interest either.

[Guest Guest]

I tend to agree with Mr. Mangin... unfortuneately my vote for him in the last election didn't matter, but I would vote all over for him.  It's people like him who care about our town.  He is a long time Kearny resident who like me has seen it go from bad to worse.  Granted Kearny and the surrounding towns have always had their share of problems and issues with petty crimes, but come on.  In the last two or three years all you hear about is murder, shootings, muggings, etc...  It is getting way out of hand, and the current Mayor and council don't give a damn.  Jim Mangin is a caring, understanding man who cares about his community, and you have no reason to question his "management skills" at his company of employ.  Have you ever gone to his "company", and needed the help of a "manager??? Jim is always very pleasant, and his years of customer service skills along with his management skills show what type of person he is... 

Way to go Jim!!!!  only wish you had more luck getting a council seat, oh to heck with it, run for Mayor next time around and I am sure the way things are going now, you'll beat Santos....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is ridiculous. "All you hear about is murder . . ." That's not all I hear about. And if you're going to make that kind of statement, then be prepared to say what you think the mayor should be doing different that would change it. It's ridiculous to say that Santos and the council "don't give a damn." Why do people say stuipid things like that? What's their real beef and their real agenda?

Mangin's campaign last time he ran was libelous. There's no reason for that sort of politicking here. If he has a specific plan, or his supporters do, let them put it forward. Attack politics has no place in Kearny.

As for caring about Kearny, Al Santos could be making a lot more money practicing law full time. He took the mayor's job because he cares about the town. There's nothing wrong with managing the local Shop-Rite, but if we're going to measure demonstrated commitment to the town, Santos comes out far ahead of Mangin and just about anyone else I can think of in any town, not just Kearny.

[Guest Guest]

This is ridiculous. "All you hear about is murder . . ." That's not all I hear about. And if you're going to make that kind of statement, then be prepared to say what you think the mayor should be doing different that would change it. It's ridiculous to say that Santos and the council "don't give a damn." Why do people say stuipid things like that? What's their real beef and their real agenda?

Mangin's campaign last time he ran was libelous. There's no reason for that sort of politicking here. If he has a specific plan, or his supporters do, let them put it forward. Attack politics has no place in Kearny.

As for caring about Kearny, Al Santos could be making a lot more money practicing law full time. He took the mayor's job because he cares about the town. There's nothing wrong with managing the local Shop-Rite, but if we're going to measure demonstrated commitment to the town, Santos comes out far ahead of Mangin and just about anyone else I can think of in any town, not just Kearny.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The above is from a loyal kool aid drinker.

[RonD]

Ron, he never said anything about taking the first proposal from the union. He thinks five years to settle contract negotiations is a bit much. That's not really in the tax payers interest either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree, five years is a long time, but what were the reasons and who was at fault? If the town leaders were to blame for delaying the process, why wasn't the case taken to mediation or arbitration by the union leadership?

Now, can anyone complete this sentence, "That's not really in the tax payers interest either because".....

[Guest Guest]

I agree, five years is a long time, but what were the reasons and who was at fault? If the town leaders were to blame for delaying the process, why wasn't the case taken to mediation or arbitration by the union leadership?

Now, can anyone complete this sentence, "That's not really in the tax payers interest either because".....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps it's because the Mediator/Arbitration process takes THAT long. Perhaps it's because the Town blows off meetings with the Arbitrators just as it does with the Unions. Perhaps YOU shouldnt be so quick to blame everyone BUT Santos and D"arco for the nonsense that goes on in this town.

[Strife767]

If that was the case why is he the Mayor.

This has been answered before here, but don't take our word for it. Why don't you ask him? He's quite accessible in my experience.

[Guest Guest]

Perhaps it's because the Mediator/Arbitration process takes THAT long.  Perhaps it's because the Town blows off meetings with the Arbitrators just as it does with the Unions.  Perhaps YOU shouldnt be so quick to blame everyone BUT Santos and D"arco for the nonsense that goes on in this town.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't let Ron get to you, he thinks Santos likes him.

[RonD]

Perhaps it's because the Mediator/Arbitration process takes THAT long.  Perhaps it's because the Town blows off meetings with the Arbitrators just as it does with the Unions.  Perhaps YOU shouldnt be so quick to blame everyone BUT Santos and D"arco for the nonsense that goes on in this town.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Perhaps" you're grasping at straws. Anyone with an understanding of the arbitration process knows that it does not take five years to reach a decision as you have insinuated. They also know, because of the vast difference between the two, that there is no such thing as a mediator/arbitration process. While mediation, by definition, is a facilitory process meant to bring the parties to an agreeable end, arbitration can be likened to a court with the arbitrator having the final, unchallengeable word. I also can say without hesitation, having been involved in these type of proceedings in the past, that an arbitrator can, without one party present, dictate a final settlement based on the data given them. So much for your theory about the town blowing off meetings.

I never said the Mayor or Town Administrator were not to blame for the delay in settlement. In fact, I did at one point ask, "what were the reasons and who was at fault?" I would like someone to explain to us all, if this is true, what they or the town would have to gain by a delay.

[RonD]

Don't let Ron get to you, he thinks Santos likes him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, there you go . Now you've gotten me all upset.

[Guest Guest]

Oh, there you go . Now you've gotten me all upset.   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It took you a while but l knew I could count on you for that come back. But don't worry mr santos really does like you. In Toms river that is....

[Guest Guest]

This has been answered before here, but don't take our word for it. Why don't you ask him? He's quite accessible in my experience.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll bet he is.

[Guest Guest]

"Perhaps" you're grasping at straws. Anyone with an understanding of the arbitration process knows that it does not take five years to reach a decision as you have insinuated. They also know, because of the vast difference between the two, that there is no such thing as a mediator/arbitration process. While mediation, by definition, is a facilitory process meant to bring the parties to an agreeable end, arbitration can be likened to a court with the arbitrator having the final, unchallengeable word. I also can say without hesitation, having been involved in these type of proceedings in the past, that an arbitrator can, without one party present, dictate a final settlement based on the data given them. So much for your theory about the town blowing off meetings. 

I never said the Mayor or Town Administrator were not to blame for the delay in settlement. In fact, I did at one point ask, "what were the reasons and who was at fault?" I would like someone to explain to us all, if this is true, what they or the town would have to gain by a delay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, which town department do YOU work for?? Because the town did EXACTLY that in both the PD and FD process, under both Czech and now D'Arco. BOTH times the contract problems have gone on for extended periods, the Unions have been involved in the Arbitration Process, and at the final hour, the Town gives in and comes forward with an agreement both sides can live with, mainly because the Town knows that they will be on the losing end of any binding Arbitration because the positions they take are so off-center. Under both Czech, and now D'Arco the town has attempted to void contracts that have taken literally decades to evolve. The Town HAS in fact blown off meetings, to the point that in one, the arbitrator told the rep from the town, that if the TA missed one more meeting that he would rule 100% in favor of the Union, and let the town appeal the decision afterwards. The Town and D'Arco have taken the position with the past few contracts that they will Dictate, rather than Negotiate. With the FD everything was held up because of the 24 hour shifts (The FF's, not the officers, that is another issue entirely). With the PD, the contract was SETTLED in July of 05, with the Memo of Agreement signed by the Town and the Union..yet d'arco STILL tried changing the language AFTER it had been agreed on, witht the end result that the Town paid for another 5-6 months of retro that they needn't have if the Town treough Joe D'arco has just abided by the agreement they made in the first place.

[RonD]

It took you a while but l knew I could count on you for that come back. But don't worry mr santos really does like you. In Toms river that is....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, it's Berkeley Township, with all the other retired folks, but you're close enough. That was a good one, though, "mr santos really does like you. In Toms river that is....". It's good to know I'm missed (not).

Well, I'd like to continue this banter, but we're off the the beach to give the dogs a good run and get an early start on our tans before all you Bennies invade the area. Have a great day at work up there.

[RonD]

So, which town department do YOU work for??  Because the town did EXACTLY that in both the PD and FD process, under both Czech and now D'Arco.  BOTH times the contract problems have gone on for extended periods, the Unions have been involved in the Arbitration Process, and at the final hour, the Town gives in and comes forward with an agreement both sides can live with, mainly because the Town knows that they will be on the losing end of any binding Arbitration because the positions they take are so off-center.  Under both Czech, and now D'Arco the town has attempted to void contracts that have taken literally decades to evolve.  The Town HAS in fact blown off meetings, to the point that in one, the arbitrator told the rep from the town, that if the TA missed one more meeting that he would rule 100% in favor of the Union, and let the town appeal the decision afterwards.  The Town and D'Arco have taken the position with the past few contracts that they will Dictate, rather than Negotiate.  With the FD everything was held up because of the 24 hour shifts (The FF's, not the officers, that is another issue entirely).  With the PD, the contract was SETTLED in July of 05, with the Memo of Agreement signed by the Town and the Union..yet d'arco STILL tried changing the language AFTER it had been agreed on, witht the end result that the Town paid for another 5-6 months of retro that they needn't have if the Town treough Joe D'arco has just abided by the agreement they made in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never worked for the town, do you? So, you agree with everything I said except, "So much for your theory about the town blowing off meetings". My point is, if the town did ignore meetings, why did the union wait so long to act upon it?

Again, with the assumption that the town had to pay "for another 5-6 months of retro that they needn't have". If the contract had been enacted on time the affected employees would have gotten their raises up front rather than in a lump sum retroactively. They still got the same money either way. There was no added financial burden on the town.

[Guest Mac]

The is no added financial burden to the town IF the town saves the money they should have been paying the PD or FD. Who thinks they actually did that?

If 100 employees should have been getting an additional $2000 a year in 2004, 2005 & 2006 thats $200,000 a year or $600,000 over the three years. Did the town take the money they should have been paying in salaries every pay day & save it knowing they would eventually have to pay the employees? Or did they wait until they were forced to pay & then have to find the entire amount?

I never worked for the town, do you? So, you agree with everything I said except, "So much for your theory about the town blowing off meetings". My point is, if the town did ignore meetings, why did the union wait so long to act upon it?

Again, with the assumption that the town had to pay "for another 5-6 months of retro that they needn't have". If the contract had been enacted on time the affected employees would have gotten their raises up front rather than in a lump sum retroactively. They still got the same money either way. There was no added financial burden on the town.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[RonD]

The is no added financial burden to the town IF the town saves the money they should have been paying the PD or FD.  Who thinks they actually did that?

If 100 employees should have been getting an additional $2000 a year in 2004, 2005 & 2006 thats $200,000 a year or $600,000 over the three years.  Did the town take the money they should have been paying in salaries every pay day & save it knowing they would eventually have to pay the employees?  Or did they wait until they were forced to pay & then have to find the entire amount?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what you're saying is there should have been a line item in the budget for those years titled, " Maybe PD & FD Salary Increase Money- $200,000". Well, that just can't be done. You can not budget this year for what you MAY have to pay three years down the road. There are rules to the budgetary process you know.

And what difference would it make? The end result would still be that the taxpayers would have to come up with the $600,000. If you reread my first post on the topic you will get a full explanation.

[Guest Guest]

This is ridiculous. "All you hear about is murder . . ." That's not all I hear about. And if you're going to make that kind of statement, then be prepared to say what you think the mayor should be doing different that would change it. It's ridiculous to say that Santos and the council "don't give a damn." Why do people say stuipid things like that? What's their real beef and their real agenda?

Mangin's campaign last time he ran was libelous. There's no reason for that sort of politicking here. If he has a specific plan, or his supporters do, let them put it forward. Attack politics has no place in Kearny.

As for caring about Kearny, Al Santos could be making a lot more money practicing law full time. He took the mayor's job because he cares about the town. There's nothing wrong with managing the local Shop-Rite, but if we're going to measure demonstrated commitment to the town, Santos comes out far ahead of Mangin and just about anyone else I can think of in any town, not just Kearny.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mangin's campaign last time he ran was libelous.

In what way?

[Guest Squad 51]

The is no added financial burden to the town IF the town saves the money they should have been paying the PD or FD.  Who thinks they actually did that?

If 100 employees should have been getting an additional $2000 a year in 2004, 2005 & 2006 thats $200,000 a year or $600,000 over the three years.  Did the town take the money they should have been paying in salaries every pay day & save it knowing they would eventually have to pay the employees?  Or did they wait until they were forced to pay & then have to find the entire amount?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Find the entire amount---from our wallets

!!!

What a bunch of elected hosebags.

Keep puttin' 'em in folks