Pandering, Patronage, Playgrounds and Palughi
The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
Whether it is through the state budget, county budget, or local school budget, many New Jersey politicians and administrators seem motivated to increase our tax burden, which in turn, supports a virulent system of patronage and pandering.
When a budget proposal fails, more often than not, the dissenters object to an unacceptable level of extravagant spending within that proposal. However, too few of our elected and appointed officials pursue honest assessments of income and need vs. expenditures and luxury.
What perpetuates “the political system” that continues to waste our tax dollars? The answer just might be a question of motivation.
Governor Corzine enjoyed enthusiastic support from state labor unions during his run for office. His relationship with these large unions has undoubtedly influenced the recent budget woes at the state level. The ability of organized labor to deliver large voting blocks of support to a candidate creates mutual loyalty and motivates some politicians to raise taxes, rather than negotiate union contract demands or cut nonessential wages or personnel.
Senator Joe Kyrillos recently awarded a grant to Hazlet. Our township received $50,000 for playground equipment. The baseball fields in our parks are in terrible shape. The tennis and basketball courts at Leocadia Court and Beers Street are unplayable. The hockey rink near the swim club needs a new surface. Although there are several parks in town that could have used an upgrade in playground equipment, Veterans Park now has new playground equipment within steps of its existing jungle gyms and swing sets. The township’s recreation department wanted to use the grant money toward something Hazlet needed, but “the political system” dictated its use.
What motivated Senator Kyrillos to allocate state tax dollars for which we had not asked, in order to fund a project for which we had no need?
Anthony Palughi, a key witness in the recent corruption trial of Raymond O’Grady, former mayor of Middletown and former director of the Monmouth County Central Motor Pool, candidly explained his experience as a beneficiary of wasteful spending.
Monmouth County employed Palughi from 1986 until his arrest in 2004. During those eighteen years, the county promoted him from his “entry level” position as director of the motor pool – to assistant highway supervisor – to superintendent of bridges, where he was earning $92,000 per year. Without even a high school education, Palughi knew he was overtly under qualified for these positions, but two former county freeholders and one former county administrator assured Palughi that he would not need to manage any aspect of the county’s public works. As a county employee, Palughi had one responsibility: to “take care of Harry [Larrison].” Defense attorney Kevin Roe asked Palughi how he got the job as director of the motor pool, to which he answered, “Like everyone else before me got it; through the political system.”
Most of the politicians who served on boards that had approved Pulighi’s appointments are now retired, or are awaiting trial or sentencing. Monmouth County voters elected one of them to higher office.
Will the testimony of her former/fellow county cronies motivate Amy Handlin to act more conscientiously regarding the state’s budget?
After three years of passing the school budget by an average margin of 11%, Hazlet voters defeated this year’s proposal by a margin of 34%. When this proposed budget failed, the responsibility fell to the Hazlet Township Committee to review the proposal and mandate which items to cut. They found $650,000 in cuts, many of which were the extra items with which the school board seemed to have padded the budget. If the school board is not happy with the township’s decision, “the political system” lets them appeal to the state, which has the authority to approve the original budget proposal; the same proposal that Hazlet voters soundly rejected. In that case, the negative response to the 2006-2007 school budget proposal would not likely motivate the Hazlet Board of Education to include less padding and pandering in their 2007-2008 school budget proposal.
I agreed with Hazlet School Superintendent Renae LaPrete’s assessment that, with this being the only government budget that citizens vote on directly, Hazlet voters took the opportunity to express their frustration with higher taxes. Ms. LaPrete had a point; “the political system” that motivates civil servants to squander our tax money is rather frustrating.
If voters diligently object to officials who submit and legitimize irresponsible budgets, we just might motivate the offending bureaucrats and politicians to stop their systematic abuse of our money.
Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net. All of Rich Kohler’s columns are available online at http://middleroadhazlet.blogspot.com/.
By Rich Kohler
Whether it is through the state budget, county budget, or local school budget, many New Jersey politicians and administrators seem motivated to increase our tax burden, which in turn, supports a virulent system of patronage and pandering.
When a budget proposal fails, more often than not, the dissenters object to an unacceptable level of extravagant spending within that proposal. However, too few of our elected and appointed officials pursue honest assessments of income and need vs. expenditures and luxury.
What perpetuates “the political system” that continues to waste our tax dollars? The answer just might be a question of motivation.
Governor Corzine enjoyed enthusiastic support from state labor unions during his run for office. His relationship with these large unions has undoubtedly influenced the recent budget woes at the state level. The ability of organized labor to deliver large voting blocks of support to a candidate creates mutual loyalty and motivates some politicians to raise taxes, rather than negotiate union contract demands or cut nonessential wages or personnel.
Senator Joe Kyrillos recently awarded a grant to Hazlet. Our township received $50,000 for playground equipment. The baseball fields in our parks are in terrible shape. The tennis and basketball courts at Leocadia Court and Beers Street are unplayable. The hockey rink near the swim club needs a new surface. Although there are several parks in town that could have used an upgrade in playground equipment, Veterans Park now has new playground equipment within steps of its existing jungle gyms and swing sets. The township’s recreation department wanted to use the grant money toward something Hazlet needed, but “the political system” dictated its use.
What motivated Senator Kyrillos to allocate state tax dollars for which we had not asked, in order to fund a project for which we had no need?
Anthony Palughi, a key witness in the recent corruption trial of Raymond O’Grady, former mayor of Middletown and former director of the Monmouth County Central Motor Pool, candidly explained his experience as a beneficiary of wasteful spending.
Monmouth County employed Palughi from 1986 until his arrest in 2004. During those eighteen years, the county promoted him from his “entry level” position as director of the motor pool – to assistant highway supervisor – to superintendent of bridges, where he was earning $92,000 per year. Without even a high school education, Palughi knew he was overtly under qualified for these positions, but two former county freeholders and one former county administrator assured Palughi that he would not need to manage any aspect of the county’s public works. As a county employee, Palughi had one responsibility: to “take care of Harry [Larrison].” Defense attorney Kevin Roe asked Palughi how he got the job as director of the motor pool, to which he answered, “Like everyone else before me got it; through the political system.”
Most of the politicians who served on boards that had approved Pulighi’s appointments are now retired, or are awaiting trial or sentencing. Monmouth County voters elected one of them to higher office.
Will the testimony of her former/fellow county cronies motivate Amy Handlin to act more conscientiously regarding the state’s budget?
After three years of passing the school budget by an average margin of 11%, Hazlet voters defeated this year’s proposal by a margin of 34%. When this proposed budget failed, the responsibility fell to the Hazlet Township Committee to review the proposal and mandate which items to cut. They found $650,000 in cuts, many of which were the extra items with which the school board seemed to have padded the budget. If the school board is not happy with the township’s decision, “the political system” lets them appeal to the state, which has the authority to approve the original budget proposal; the same proposal that Hazlet voters soundly rejected. In that case, the negative response to the 2006-2007 school budget proposal would not likely motivate the Hazlet Board of Education to include less padding and pandering in their 2007-2008 school budget proposal.
I agreed with Hazlet School Superintendent Renae LaPrete’s assessment that, with this being the only government budget that citizens vote on directly, Hazlet voters took the opportunity to express their frustration with higher taxes. Ms. LaPrete had a point; “the political system” that motivates civil servants to squander our tax money is rather frustrating.
If voters diligently object to officials who submit and legitimize irresponsible budgets, we just might motivate the offending bureaucrats and politicians to stop their systematic abuse of our money.
Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net. All of Rich Kohler’s columns are available online at http://middleroadhazlet.blogspot.com/.
posted by Rich Kohler at 9:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home