A previous post titled, "City Council May Be Taking Control" has generated a terrific thread of over 26 comments and revealed a deep-seeded amount of anger and resentment toward the pension deal that has gutted the Allentown Police Dept. through early retirements while almost bankrupting the city.
In an extensive article in Sunday's The Morning Call, Lehigh District Attorney, Jim Martin, throws fuel on the fire by stating that Allentown's down-sized, less experienced police department is a public safety issue. Martin makes the point that since 2005 there were 59 murders in the city, 29 of which have gone usolved. D.A. Martin states that 20 of the retirees came from the city's Criminal Investigation Division and the Vice and Intelligence Unit, leaving the investigation division with six detectives, half the 2005 amount -- and five of those detectives have less than one year in the unit, Martin said.
I am encouraged by this blog's many posters over the past few days who seem to agree: They're madder than wet hens as my grandmother used to say, and to my surprise they also seem to have a very long collective memory for the people who got us in to this mess in the first place, beginning with Roy Afflerbach and the four "yes" votes of city council.
The pension debacle cost former Mayor Roy Afflerbach a second term; he didn't stay around to live in the havoc that he wrought.
Even with mayor Afflerbach's pandering to the FOP, we could have been saved if only we had had an independent and courageous city council...one who was willing to vote down the pension and reopen negotiations.
Here's how the Allentown City Council of 2005 voted on the Police Pension Issue....
[Yes] Julio Guridy
[Yes] Dave Howells
[Yes] Dave Bausch
[Yes] Lou Hershman
[No] Gail Hoover
[No] Tom Burke
[Not at Meeting] Marty Valasquez
Two of them, Guridy and Howells, still sit on council. Hoover chose not to run again. Hershman and Bausch were defeated in their next elections. And in one of the greatest injustices I've ever seen, Tom Burke, was not re-elected to city council.
As the police pension issue continues to stay in the headlines over the next few months, the voters will continue to be reminded of who stood up and who let them down. What will be very interesting is to see how the city council of 2008-2009 handles the issue.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
34 comments:
Don't be lulled by The Morning Call into perceiving Lehigh County D.A. James Martin as the concerned and civic-minded good guy here. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Martin battled with Afflerbach over turf issues; Martin battled with then Police Chief Kuhns over turf issues; and Martin is battling with current Mayor Pawlowski over turf issues. Martin may not know much but he's an absolute master at protecting his turf, and his buddies, many (many) of whom are APD cops, active and/or "retired" and now working for him. Everything Martin has been spewing to The Morning Call lately about the police has a political motivation and that is to lay the ground work for Ed Pawlowski not getting reelected. The best thing that could happen for Allentown and Lehigh County would be for someone to run against Jim Martin for D.A. and beat him. Then and only then will we have a shot at having a mayor, a city council, a police force, and a Chief Law Enforcement Officer all on the same team, regardless of political party.
pam, i believe these last two posts need more research. city council hired a lawyer and took the agreement to court. they were prevailed upon, by none other than candidate pawlowski, to sign off on the court challenge, and let the city "move forward"
i disagree with the city councilman who said "the deed is done" it's not. it is an open wound and i think a lot of litigation on the people's part is warranted here.
It should be noted that Mike Molivinski lost the Allentown mayoral race to Ed Pawlowski in 2005 and he may have his eye on the mayor's job again. In Mike's world, everything in Allentown that needs fixing was somehow broken by none other than Ed Pawlowski. I think it's really a stretch (and a personal vendetta-driven stretch at that) to blame Ed Pawlowski for the police pension debacle.
pam, i am worried less about "how" city council handles the police pension issue than "if" they bother to address it at all.
we have all been raised on president kennedy's book on political courage. but in this instance, to "move forward in harmony" or some such blather would represent a great act of political cowardice.
anon 5:16, aka anon 4:16, aka bill villa, you certainly are an authority on personal vendetta's, and i do criticize ed pawlowski often, but i always comment using my name. i was told by lou hershman, that ed pawlowski suggested the dem's drop the lawsuit, at that time it was thought less officers would avail themselves to the retirement package.
to my knowledge the police and city council made a couple of concessions, one of which was that council would no longer challenge the former contract and that the matter was forever closed. a new contract is under negotiation, as the current one is nearing expiration.
"Anon 5:16, aka anon 4:16, aka bill villa,"
I agree completely with anons 5:16, 4:16, 5:14, and 5:41 whoever they are ...
If my memory serves correctly, Hershman lost in the primary for city controller (he didn't seek re-election to council.. his term expired) and Bausch lost in the general election. Maybe I misread the post Pam, but I think you claimed those two lost in their respective primaries. Point is that neither of them survived their decisions when they faced voters again. To which I say good.
Mad as a wet Hen is a good description. And I agree, we all lost out when Tom Burke failed to get back on Council.
As far as people responsible for making our city less safe, add the police officers who abused overtime to pump up there Retirements. We are paying for your greed in more ways than one. To serve and protect surely did not mean to take as much as you can get and run for the Hills.
Their actions tarnish the whole force, as does the Union who set up a plan to create a massive incentive to retire and nearly bankrupt the city. Just because the Administration and Council was dumb enough to screw us all by signing off, does not relieve you of a good portion of the responsibility for this sad state of affairs!
Pam,
The pension deal that was negotiated by Afflerbach with the FOP and tacitly endorsed through the total silence of every prominent city Democrat including Ed Pawlowski locked the city into the doomsday scenario it now faces.
Scott Armstrong
Hello...
"Deed is done" means that we have to move forward on what we can control vs. what we cannot. And I mean doing things that make sure this does not happen again or can be legally reversed.
While simultaneously deciding what you want to do in the next election (which is more than a year away), what can you do now to insure the FOP does not ask and get a sweetheart deal again, and what can be done to make sure city hall negotiations intelligently and forceably.
Send your emails to everyone, including me, demanding good and fair negotiation!
I cannot wait to see what is brought to us, good or bad, because this time the decisions will not be as quick or unresearched.
Best regards,
Michael Donovan
Because it will cause hardship far into the future it is worth reminding everyone over and over again what has transpired. It is never wise to forget history.
Scott Armstrong
MM,
The effort by council to hire a lawyer to challenge the pension was, I believe, after four of them voted to approve it, which brings to mind the expression, "Too Little, Too Late".
I appreciate you bringing to my attention the chronology and circumstances of the Bausch, Hershman losses.
I am currently out of town, posting from a remote location, using someone else's computer, so my research capabilities are limited. I have corrected the post.
Anon 5:14
It is true that the "deed is done", and although it may not be possible for it to be undone, it can be mitigated.
We must make it clear to city council that we expect them to servie the wellfare of the citizens of Allentown in this matter.
"Con",
Now question that this is going to be tough issue for council. There's going to be tremendous pressure on them from all the players involved.
We'll see if they have the courage you speak of, to take it on.
MM,
No question that council was lulled into a false sense of security by being told that few officers would actually retire. It's hard to believe they accepted such a story.
gsb,
Thanks for the information. As pointed out in my comment to MM,
I'm working from a "remote location". I have corrected the post.
And yes, the bottom line is both Bausch and Hershman are no longer on council.
This current council seems to offer the best hope we've had in some time for an independent legislative body.
Bill,
It takes a lot to surprise me when it comes to politics, especially Allentown politics, but I was stunned when Tom Burke lost his council seat. It is one of the worst decisioins I've ever seen Allentown voters make, and that's saying something.
According to John Brinson's recent op-ed, it is illegal for overtime to be considered in the pension calcuations. We'll see how this plays out at the new contract moves forward.
Scott,
This pension is going to be front page news until a new contract is negotiated. It is important for everyone to be paying attention.
As far as the past, many people, both Democrat and Republican, remained silent while the pension deal was made. I'm hoping that doesn't happen a second time.
Pam,
The fact that not a single Democrat took issue with the pension deal allowed the Afflerbach Administration to paint our (Republican) concerns as merely partisan. Of course we were right but the silence allowed too many to dismiss our warning.
Pam, I beat this "dead horse"
because it is an important point and illustrates the larger problem that the city's voters have allowed a Democrat Machine to take control of the city.
Scott Armstrong
"The fact that not a single Democrat took issue with the pension deal allowed the Afflerbach Administration to paint our (Republican) concerns as merely partisan."
Neglecting of course that one opponent was a Democrat (Hoover) and one supporter was a Republican (Bausch). And city voters might vote Republican if the candidates didn't include Bill Heydt (can we say retread?) or if there was a full slate of republicans running for council (2007). How can you blame voters when the options on the Republican side don't include a full slate in the last election? If we want good gov't, we need competition. A political machine only exists where no viable opposition exists.
a wise political "machine" would have immediately sensed the danger in such a bad policy . . . and offered political cover to city councilpeople to vote against it.
one contributing factor here is that there is/was no machine in place and we have all these city council people effectively winging it.
Scott, why assume that the Dem Machine is still supportive of a crybaby no guts mayor. This guy is a disappointment to all who helped him get elected. I don't expect to see the Dems suppport his re-election campaign at all. But who will run, R or D, beside Tony? Time for Tom to take control, I say, and I am a D.
"If we want good gov't, we need competition. A political machine only exists where no viable opposition exists."
If the Dems don't put up a candidate against Jim Martin for Lehigh County DA in 2011, it will be the THIRD TIME Jim Martin has maintained control over his political machine, UN-OPPOSED. Get with it Dems.
What council did or didn’t do on the pension issue is not central to my point. Those who spoke out against the proposed contract, myself, Vic Mazziotti, Dean Browning, Bob Lovett, Charlie Theil, and Steve Bodnar were not on council, were speaking as city Republicans. The city Democrats remained silent, not one took issue with the contract, not one.
As to offering quality slates the city Republicns offered a stellar group in 05, this ticket included Tom Burke, Steve Bodnar, Kim Beitler, and Charlie Theil. All were exceptionally well qualified people. All were soundly rejected by the city’s voters who apparently were more concerned with supporting the party rather than any notion of good government.
We are now all reaping the bitter harvest of that act.
Scott Armstrong
Anon 10:12
Some very good Republicans have either lost their seats, as in Tom Burke, or not been elected, as in Charlie Thiel.
It's very hard to get quality candidates to run when they've watched very qualified Republicans go down in defeat before them.
The voter registration edge in Allentown practically precludes a Republican from winning again in the city.
When a political party holds such a lock on the electorate and is the majority party, their elected officials have a moral obligation to govern responsibly. That was not the case during the previous police pension debate. We'll see if it the case this time around.
yes, blame democracy. Last I checked Charlie Dent and Pat Browne have always done well in the city. Yes their districts currently go out of the city, but they used to be state house members. Charlie was entirely in the city. Pat's went outside the city but he won the city portions overwhelmingly.
Stop blaming voters. Democracy is a good thing.
Anon 8:59
Charlie and Pat are now well-established incumbents with high name recognition and good constituent service.
I venture that if they were today, new, unknown candidates, running in their districts for the first time under the current voter registration numbers, they would not be able to pull their previous
numbers.
Democrats: get a candidate to run, and win, against Jim Martin for DA in 2011.
Good posts, Pam. I wish I had your optimism about City Council taking control and Allentonians having long memories. I recently sat in a 5 hour? meeting to hear the discussion on community policing. I thought perhaps I'd hear something "new". But, indeed it's just an everything old is "new again' approach. I listened to council ask its questions and I also watched and listened to those that spoke and my, perhaps overly simplistic, view of council and the meeting is that we are destined to relive our past.
All I find myself asking is why, as Allentonians, don't we deserve better? Why do we tolerate so much inaction and blatant violations of morality from our city officials and why aren't more people angry?
It takes time to pay attention and perhaps our illustrious mayor has lulled us into a power point stupor where it becomes almost detrimental to your health to pay attention.
I suppose I sound like an angry Allentonian; which I guess is better than indifferent. Since I've worked in customer service for so long I strongly believe that how people are treated is in direct correlation to their continued business. When people are unhappy with your business, a small percentage of customers will complain (giving the company an opportunity to win them back), a large percentage of people "just leave".
How many Allentonians are "just leaving" and how many would go if given the chance?
kim. . . mentially i "left" many years ago. i hold out no hope this this group or any other will be able to turn things around.
i no longer live here as much as i am garaged here.
Kim,
Thanks for your thoughtful post. Your long-term involvement in trying to make the city a better place, certainly gives weight and credibility to your observations.
I am determined to stay optimistic, at least through the next several months. This council has the opportunity to become an effective legislative body and truly improve the future of the city.
We'll see if they rise to that challenge.
Anon 5:26,
Many understand how you feel. A lot of discouraging things are happening, but if we all give up, then it truly is hopeless.
Post a Comment