HAMMONTON BLOG

Watching the meeting, I got the impression that the wiring had to be done within a few days.  Councilman Wuillerman kept putting pressure on Vitalo and Marino that if they didn't pass this right then and there, all work on the building would stop.   Then the mayor showed up and joined in on the rush job politicking.

Looks like it was just to ensure they could hire their buddy.

Typical politics from the HF crew.

Anonymous wrote:

---

I guess the Democrats are desparate to avoid discussing the important issues.  The most important issue in town is how Hammonton First is lowering the record levels of debt that the Republicans and Democrats left when HF took office.

The Democrats claim they can save money.  They can't.  As an example, HF was able to reject a one bid contract last year which later was awarded for $50,000 less.  HF voted to reject the one bid contract.  Anthony Falcone and Jimmy Bertino voted to waste the $50,000.

=====

#R101-2006 Reject Bid Pleasant Street Reconstruction

RESOLUTION # 101-2006

RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR PLEASANT STREET ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION

WHEREAS, the Town of Hammonton did advertise for competitive bids for the Pleasant

Street Roadway Reconstruction on June 7, 2006; and

WHEREAS, only one bid was received from Asphalt Paving Systems in the amount of

$773,995.00 for Scenario #1; and

WHEREAS, the bid was in excess of the amount appropriated for the project; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Hammonton did reserve the right to reject all bids;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF

HAMMONTON IN THE COUNTY OF ATLANTIC AND STATE OF NEW JERSEY that the bid submitted by

Asphalt Paving Systems is rejected;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bidder shall be returned bid bonds or other

forms of security submitted.

Motion by Councilperson Wuillermin, seconded by Councilperson Colasurdo, the

resolution be adopted.

ROLL CALL

Councilpersons:

Bertino - No

Colasurdo - Yes

Falcone - No

Massarelli - Yes

S. Lewis - Yes

Wuillermin - Yes

Mayor DiDonato - Yes

Mayor DiDonato declared the motion carried.

---

The resolution says that one of the reasons the bid was rejected was because the amount was in excess of what was appropriated! Falcone voted to spend even more money than was originally intended for the project! No wonder this guy ran up record debt!

Admin wrote:

---

Desperately trying to change the subject aren't you!!!!

Mr. Falcone understood the bidding laws and was trying to prevent the town from further expenses that would come from a challenge by the contractor. The bid that came in was below the engineer's estimate. The town had slightly underfunded the project. Bidding laws state that a bid can only be rejected if there is a sunbstantial difference between the bid and the reserved funds. At a subsequent council meeting they only added 1.7% to the funds for the project which by no stretch of the imagination is a substantial difference. Fortunately the contractor decided not to challenge saying "it is obvious they don't want me to do the work, I will work elsewhere." This contractor has done a lot of work for this town before and always ends up doing a lot extra for the town. In the subsequent bid only 1 of 9 bids came in lower than the bid of the original contractor and there was a defficiency on the job in the paving of the road.

The vote that day was not to save the town money, it was a matter of law.

We will now have to see over the years if we really saved any money since the base paving on the road failed the independent testing. Will our 6% savings be wiped out because the road will not last. Only time will tell.

But, I do find it interesting that your response to the pressure put on the rest of council is to change the subject and bring up totally unrelated subjects.

How would Anthony Falcone have voted on this issue? We may never know, but his vote based on the law in the example you just brought up gives us a goo indication.

---

When the job was rebid, the town saved $50,000 thanks to the efforts of the Mayor and the Hammonton First councilpeople who voted to save money.


The job is complete and the work looks wonderful.  This is how you keep taxes down.  Just like in your personal finances, you save some money here, you save some money there, and in total you save a lot.  In the government's case, you can save a lot fast.

SO JIm . Let me get this right . you are in favor of awarding one bid contracts.  and if you are the voice of the dems . That mean the dems are for one bid contracts. WOW .  Don't take it personal it was not about your company it was about saving money.  And maybe it did not work. but you have to get bids on everything that's how you run a responsible town.  I would like to know how the rest of the dems feel about this.

Admin wrote:

---

The following is an excerpt from a recent article in the Hammonton News.

The mayor's brother, Steve DiDonato, is heading the building committee for the project. Steve DiDonato met recently with municipal department heads here to go over their technology requests for the interior of the building.

"We will be wiring this building when it is 100 percent complete for all data needs. So when the building is 100 percent complete, which will probably be sometime in March, we will go in then and wire the building. That's the beauty of this building. With the wire chases that are there and with the drop ceilings, we can always have access to our electrical outlets, additional data, computers," Steve DiDonato said. "There's a phenomenal design to this building."

A technology plan for the building is being prepared, Steve DiDonato said, and it is expected to be presented to Town Council later this month.

What has us confused is why there was so much pressure on council to hire an Asst Technician for the Town Hall wiring at the September 10 special meeting. The discussion went on for over an hour with valid concerns being brought up by Jerry Vitalo, Anthony Marino and Rock Colasurdo.

At one point Ed Wuillermin accused the three of trying to stop progress on the new town hall.

If plans always called for the wiring to be done after the building was finished, it seems reasonable thet council could have waited at least 2 weeks for the next meeting and discussed the questions in committee. The concerns raised by the other members of council could have been reviewed.
Why did we have to rush into this deal?

---

This is the subject of this thread, let's stick to this.

You would have to ask the Town Clerk and the engineer that question. Are you questioning their actions now?

Isn't it a conflict for council members to approve improvements to the properties of their largest contributor?

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Part of the cost of the project was paid for with New Jersey Department of Transportation grant money. The State set the standards that the contractor had to live up to.  They State inspected the road and signed off on it as passing.

Why would Jim MacLane try to say that the road was not done properly?

Jim, don't you work for the bidder of the one bid contract?  Gee, you really should have said the fact is that the State was happy and it was a quality job.  It can give the appearance that it is sour grapes that HF didn't give the contract to the guy you work for.  It's okay, he can still bid on more contracts and I am sure he does quality work also.  In government however, the lowest bidder wins.  That is just the way it is to protect the taxpayers.

---

Wouldn't it be a conflict of interest for a councilman to vote on a contract for his campaign manager's company?

---

I guess the Democrats are afraid to take on the important issues.  They ust like to tax and spend.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Part of the cost of the project was paid for with New Jersey Department of Transportation grant money. The State set the standards that the contractor had to live up to.  They State inspected the road and signed off on it as passing.

Why would Jim MacLane try to say that the road was not done properly?

Jim, don't you work for the bidder of the one bid contract?  Gee, you really should have said the fact is that the State was happy and it was a quality job.  It can give the appearance that it is sour grapes that HF didn't give the contract to the guy you work for.  It's okay, he can still bid on more contracts and I am sure he does quality work also.  In government however, the lowest bidder wins.  That is just the way it is to protect the taxpayers.

---

Wouldn't it be a conflict of interest for a councilman to vote on a contract for his campaign manager's company?

---

I think that the cost cutting the Hammonton First employed when they came to office was just in the nick of time.  The Democrats and Republicans kept screaming for more spending.  Jimmy Bertino even motioned for a tax increase! 

To let the same people back into office that ran the debt to record levels before Hammonton First came into office would invite a repeat of past problems.

Also, I feel it is definately an issue if the Democrats were to vote to give their campaign manager a large government contract.

Hey I saw this on tv the other week!  The way it was playing out, I thought they had to have those wires done within days of the meeting.

Why did they tell that town employee that it was all his fault, then they told him he couldn't have time to see the plans?

Why did they keep telling the Republicans that "they'd be stopping progress" if they waited to see a plan for the project?

Why did Ed Wuillerman keep demanding that they vote right then and there when the Republicans and Rocky just wanted to see some actual numbers on the project?

Anonymous wrote:

---

---

Why would Falcone not want to re-bid this contract?  It is totally within the law, expecially since it was above the amount appropriated and the town had reserved the right to re-bid.

The councilpeople who voted YES to re-bid protected the taxpayers interests.  The councilpeople who voted NO and wanted to give out the extra $50K over the amount appropriated showed they don't care how much of the taxpayer's hard earned money they spend.  They are tax and spenders!

---

No you are wrong, it was not within the law to reject the bid. Here is the law:

40A:11-13.2  Rejection of bids; reasons.

 

21.A contracting unit may reject all bids for any of the following reasons:

a.The lowest bid substantially exceeds the cost estimates for the goods or services;

b.The lowest bid substantially exceeds the contracting unit's appropriation for the goods or services;

c.The governing body of the contracting unit decides to abandon the project for provision or performance of the goods or services;

d.The contracting unit wants to substantially revise the specifications for the goods or services;

e.The purposes or provisions or both of P.L.1971, c.198 (C.40A:11-1 et seq.) are being violated;

f.The governing body of the contracting unit decides to use the State authorized contract pursuant to section 12 of P.L.1971, c.198 (C.40A:11-12).

L.1999,c.440,s.21.

If you notice the terminology in the law it requires substantial difference between the bid amount and the amount put forward by the town. The difference in this case was 1.7% which is not substantial. We can not ignore the laws. What does that say about a political party who ignores the law.

And there is no way you can draw any conclusion that anyone who voted No on rejecting the bid wanted to spend any extra amount of money. No one, including HF knew how the rebid would come out. Remember, only 1 out of 9 bids came out lower than the first bid. If for some reason that company did not bid, the project would have cost us more. What would you be saying then? HF lucked out. But we will still see if the town saved any money since the testing showed the base paving to be defective.

Anonymous wrote:

---

SO JIm . Let me get this right . you are in favor of awarding one bid contracts. and if you are the voice of the dems . That mean the dems are for one bid contracts. WOW . Don't take it personal it was not about your company it was about saving money. And maybe it did not work. but you have to get bids on everything that's how you run a responsible town. I would like to know how the rest of the dems feel about this.

---

 How many companies were asked to bid on the moving of the old town hall???  How many bids were asked on the purchase of new trees downtown?  

Admin wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Anonymous wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Why would Falcone not want to re-bid this contract? It is totally within the law, expecially since it was above the amount appropriated and the town had reserved the right to re-bid.

The councilpeople who voted YES to re-bid protected the taxpayers interests. The councilpeople who voted NO and wanted to give out the extra $50K over the amount appropriated showed they don't care how much of the taxpayer's hard earned money they spend. They are tax and spenders!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No you are wrong, it was not within the law to reject the bid. Here is the law:

40A:11-13.2 Rejection of bids; reasons.


21.A contracting unit may reject all bids for any of the following reasons:

a.The lowest bid substantially exceeds the cost estimates for the goods or services;

b.The lowest bid substantially exceeds the contracting unit's appropriation for the goods or services;

c.The governing body of the contracting unit decides to abandon the project for provision or performance of the goods or services;

d.The contracting unit wants to substantially revise the specifications for the goods or services;

e.The purposes or provisions or both of P.L.1971, c.198 (C.40A:11-1 et seq.) are being violated;

f.The governing body of the contracting unit decides to use the State authorized contract pursuant to section 12 of P.L.1971, c.198 (C.40A:11-12).

L.1999,c.440,s.21.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim MacLane, if you look at items a & b that you posted, the bid your company put in exceeded the amount appropriated and also exceeded the amount the town's professional engineers estimated. In those cases, it is allowed to be rejected.

To most people $50,000 is a lot of money. You might not think it's a big deal, but to a lot of people that is a ton of money.

Is this a situation where you are just mad that your company wasn't awarded the contract? It's a free country. The taxpayers are free to get multiple bidders to keep prices down. Your company is free to keep bidding and winning contracts. That's the American way.

It has absolutetly nothing to do with the company I work for not getting the bid. If you think that project was so important to us, don't you think we would have bid the second time also????
Look again at A&B!!! The law says substantial difference.

As for the wire chases damaging the brick, don't take us for fools!!! Are you trying to insult the intelligence of the people of Hammonton. The wire chases are on the interior of the building. They have nothing to do with the exterior and not a single brick would ever have to be moved for the chases. And it was explained at the meeting that there are plenty of chases in the building with plenty of empty space. That was also in the report by Steve DiDonato. So it had nothing to do with double checking. HF needed to push this through quickly for some reason and Ed Wuillermin took the lead. Someday we will find out why and how much it will cost the taxpayers.

Admin wrote:

---

It has absolutetly nothing to do with the company I work for not getting the bid. If you think that project was so important to us, don't you think we would have bid the second time also????
Look

---

You don't consider $50,000 to be a substantial amount of money?  To most Hammontonians, that is a lot of money.  I think that the majority of taxpayers would be happy the government did not pay $50,000 extra.

You guys should put a clock showing how much time has passed since Eddie Wuillerman threatened Republican councilment with "stopping progress" and still no work being done on the wiring he was in such a hurry to pass.

By my calculation its already been close to a month.  Guess Hammonton First just had to give out another patronage job before people caught on to it.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Admin wrote:

---

You Just don't get it!!!! It is the difference between the bid and the amount of money the town had appropriated for the project. That was less tahn $13,500. On a $762,000 project, that is not substantial. It has nothing to do with the rebid!!!!

---

Jim, you don't realize that to the average Hammontonian, $13,500 is a lot of money. Also, in the re-bid, it turned out the town saved overall $50,000. By not bonding that extra $50,000, Hammonton First saved the taxpayers and their children, over $100,000 when you add in interest that would have had to have been paid.

This is an example of how you lower the debt levels from the highest levels in the town's history. That is how your candidate, Anthony Falcone, and the Republicans led by Jimmy Bertino left the condition of the town when Hammonton First took office on January 1, 2006.

Both your parties said the Mayor lied on your blogs when he told everyone the debt was at record levels and their was almost no savings left. Now we see that the Mayor was telling the truth. HF had to put cost cutting measures in place to lower the debt and raise surplus. These steps have been chipping away at the problem.

---

You still don't understand that we are not talking about what it means to any one particular person or to the average citizen. We are talking rules of law. Do you think a judge will say that "according to the law a 1.6% difference is not a substantial difference, but I'll make an exception in this case because John Smith who lives in Hammonton thinks it is a big difference"?
And it is a true shame that the financing Hammonton First would have done would have cost the town 100% interest. Even I think they are better at finances than that.

We all agree with lowering the debt. There is no argument there. It is fortunate for the town that the contractor did not challenge the rejection, because that allowed the rebid and the town did save money. If that one new contractor did not bid or if there was a challenge to the original bid, the whole process would have cost the town more money overall. And it is unfortunate that by coming in with a lower bid, we also have a road that failed independent testing, which means we have a substandard road.

There is no lie here. Reread the blog. We disagreed with the Mayor's statement that the debt has been lowered and we have given proof that it is not. Time did not stop at Dec. 31, 2006. Time is still moving and our figures came from the same report the Mayor qouted.

The year the debt went down, Anthony Falcone was still on council. He helped, along with the rest of council, lower the debt. But after he left council, the debt went right back up. We need Anthony's leadership back on council to put us back in the right direction. And Anthony needs help from Mike Ammirato and Robin Ripa to join with him and hopefully make this happen as quickly as possible without putting a strain on the Hammonton taxpayer.

The arguement had nothing to do with saving $50,000, that option was not even on the table yet. He argued that the town government should be bound by the same laws every other person and municipality are governed by. But HF chose to ignore the law and put the town in a dangerous situation. Luckily it did nothappen, but should our elected officials put us in that position? Are our elected officials above the law?

And on the real subject of this thread, should our elected officials lie to get their own agendas pushed through council?

Well its been another day and they still haven't started working on the network wiring.  Chalk up another 24 hours that it hasn't started.

Jim, there is no need to go round and round. You can see from the documentation of the vote that the town's professionals looked into the matter. They explained that the bid was in excess of the amount appropriated for the project and the town was within it's right to reject the bid. Mayor DiDonato, and the majority of council by a vote of 5-2 took the professional's advice and re-bid the contract.

It's always good that HF brings in highly qualified people and gets their opinion. In this case the town ultimately saved $50,000. Jim, it is admirable that you feel that you wanted your company to win this contract. This is just a case where the council felt they needed to save the taxpayer's money.

ITS BEEN ANOTHER 24 HOURS THAT THE TOWN HALL WIRING HAS NOT BEGUN!  EDDIE WUILLERMAN DEMANDED THAT REPUBLICANS VOTE OR THEY WOULD STOP PROGRESS AND HURT HAMMONTON.

WHEN WILL YOU HANG THE WIRES, MR. WUILLERMAN?

THE CLOCK IS STILL TICKING!

Anonymous wrote:

---

It was already explained that the wiring contractor had to be involved now so as to make sure the wire chases were big enough.  The last thing you want to do is tear into walls after the fact.  That just wastes money. 

HF has been dealing with the record debt they were left by the 2005 council, led on the Republican side by Jimmy Bertino & on the Democrat side by Anthony Falcone.  They voted for just about evey bond that passed their way and raised the debt by almost 50% according to the numbers the admin has posted.  What a mess. 

Good thing HF is working to chip away at that debt and also raising the surplus.  All this with NO TAX INCREASE!

---

Why would anybody put Falcone up to run again?  He raised taxes.  He voted to increase the amount of debt to record levels.  HF has had to deal with his mess.  I won't get fooled again!  There is no way I would vote for Falcone.

Penza showed Jacobus was wrong again. Remember when MacLane wrote the Letter to the Editor saying Jacobus was not telling the truth about the schools? That was a good one too. Penza has explained that the reason the school & town didn't have a tax increase was because of Jerry Vitalo, Anthony Marino and Jimmy Bertino. The school didnt know what they were doing but Jerry Vitalo helped them figure it out.

The following is an excerpt from a recent article in the Hammonton News.

The mayor's brother, Steve DiDonato, is heading the building committee for the project. Steve DiDonato met recently with municipal department heads here to go over their technology requests for the interior of the building.

"We will be wiring this building when it is 100 percent complete for all data needs. So when the building is 100 percent complete, which will probably be sometime in March, we will go in then and wire the building. That's the beauty of this building. With the wire chases that are there and with the drop ceilings, we can always have access to our electrical outlets, additional data, computers," Steve DiDonato said. "There's a phenomenal design to this building."

A technology plan for the building is being prepared, Steve DiDonato said, and it is expected to be presented to Town Council later this month.

What has us confused is why there was so much pressure on council to hire an Asst Technician for the Town Hall wiring at the September 10 special meeting. The discussion went on for over an hour with valid concerns being brought up by Jerry Vitalo, Anthony Marino and Rock Colasurdo.

At one point Ed Wuillermin accused the three of trying to stop progress on the new town hall.

If plans always called for the wiring to be done after the building was finished, it seems reasonable thet council could have waited at least 2 weeks for the next meeting and discussed the questions in committee. The concerns raised by the other members of council could have been reviewed.
Why did we have to rush into this deal?

Are you saying that we hired the technician to do things that were not discussed at the council meeting? What you are saying is not what was approved by council.

Here is the motion that was approved by council:

After further discussion it was on motion by Councilperson Colasurdo, seconded by Councilperson
Massarelli, award contract to Systems for You to perform wiring in new town hall at a cost of $85.00 per drop
which includes all cabling and all appliances. And work off a plan that is developed by Nick DeStefano, Town
Computer Tech, and in the event at end of wiring that Nick needs assistance in moving equipment into new
building authorize Nick to use Systems for You at $75.00 per hour moving cost providing that council approve
anticipated total cost of same. Current authorization total not to exceed $12,370.00 in conformance with
recommendation of Administrator, Assistant Clerk and Accountant. Nick DeStefano to meet with department
heads and Town Administrator to develop the plan to be approved by Town Council.


Now you are saying we are already paying this guy when all that was approved was to start with the wiring. Steve DiDonato stated in the meeting that the chases were already in the plans and there was plenty of room in those chases for future expansion.
Who is spending these funds without council approval???
Has there been a purchase order written for this unauthorized work???
If there is, who signed it???
What was to be gained by hiding this information from the members of council????

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

It was already explained that the wiring contractor had to be involved now so as to make sure the wire chases were big enough.  The last thing you want to do is tear into walls after the fact.  That just wastes money. 

HF has been dealing with the record debt they were left by the 2005 council, led on the Republican side by Jimmy Bertino & on the Democrat side by Anthony Falcone.  They voted for just about evey bond that passed their way and raised the debt by almost 50% according to the numbers the admin has posted.  What a mess. 

Good thing HF is working to chip away at that debt and also raising the surplus.  All this with NO TAX INCREASE!

---

These wire chases allow near features in the future to be added.  Who knows what computer technologies will be added in the next 30 years?  These chases allow wiring to be added without breaking into walls.

It was important to have the wiring contractor review the chases, their size and position.  That is happening now so that no mistakes are made later.

It's just a little planning ahead which saves the taxpayers down the road.  It's always good to plan ahead... but I realize why the Dems are against that... they have never done it before!

---

Boy I am sure glad Hammonton First is in charge of the town hall rather than the idiot who doesn't seem to understand why you want to work on these wire chases now.  The last thing you want to do is rip up walls in the future.  Look at what happened at the school.  Poor planning and now according to Joe Giralo we have to spend thousands of dollars to fix the gym floor since the roof leaks so badly.

i wonder how high my taxes go if the dems get into office the three of them will spend money like it is water and giving themselves raises and borrowing like crazy

Anonymous wrote:

---

i wonder how high my taxes go if the dems get into office the three of them will spend money like it is water and giving themselves raises and borrowing like crazy

---

I don't recall any Councilmen asking for a raise. You must be thinking of HF who gives the solicitor a $10,000 raise he didn't even ask for and the Town Accountant a $7,600 raise which was a 18% raise when all the other employees got 2.3%.

Anonymous wrote:

---

HF is probably planning to give council members a raise as one of their last acts during the December meeting.

---

No, actually, HF's councilpeople has accepted $0 for pay and also $0 for benefits for two years. On the other hand, ask Anthony Falcone how much he pocketed in his last month on council.

Once again HF got a job for one of their cronies. They must have owed him a favor. This technician works for KMD and Vision properties and now for the Town. They will funnel as much work to him as possible, whether it is approved or not. Let's see how many change orders this guy puts in. It's the Old Town Hall move all over again. Maybe they'll hire another band to play the day the wiring starts.

Anthony Falcone works one job and will get one pension. I assume you work a job and will have a retirement package when you retire too. And Anthony is not retiring early. He is already 60 years old, so where do you get early retirement from?
You keep throwing darts to see what will stick, well your lies don't stick. Anthony has worked for years to get to the position he is in and for that you want to belittle him. Shame on you and your jealousy.

Yes he did. He worked two jobs and got paid at both of them.
He will not get 2 pensions, he will get one pension that will be based on his annual salary to include the council salary.
We agree that there are peopl on both sides of the aisle that abuse the pension system and the loopholes need to be closed, but Anthony is not one of those abusing the system. When on council he works two jobs, he should get paid for both jobs.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Actually, Falcone can collect multiple pensions if he can get elected back to council. One of the big issues with the State is that the Pension program is bankrupt because it is so lucrative. There have been articles written explaining that some people are getting 3 & 4 pensions at the same time. All Falcone has to do is get elected for the prescribed number of times and he picks up a second pension. In addition, as you pointed out, he did take both the State insurance benefits as well as the town's insurance cash buyout, plus his State salary, plus the a salary from the town, the last time he was on council.

---

The pension program is in it's terrible state because of Christy Whitman raided it to spend, spend, spend.  She basically put an IOU.  The problem is that IOU was billed to the taxpayer.  Just like HF is doing, they're borrowing money left and right so that it'll appear that "All's Good."

Can Anthony Falcone return the extra healthcare insurance from the Hammonton taxpayers since he will already be getting a good healthcare from the state of NJ?

Anonymous wrote:

---

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

Actually, Falcone can collect multiple pensions if he can get elected back to council. One of the big issues with the State is that the Pension program is bankrupt because it is so lucrative. There have been articles written explaining that some people are getting 3 & 4 pensions at the same time. All Falcone has to do is get elected for the prescribed number of times and he picks up a second pension. In addition, as you pointed out, he did take both the State insurance benefits as well as the town's insurance cash buyout, plus his State salary, plus the a salary from the town, the last time he was on council.

---

At least HF is lowering the debt in Hammonton from the record levels of the end of 2005 which they inherited.

But you do have a point. What Whitman did with the pensions was bad. You can't promise people multiple pensions when you have no way of paying for them. Although it sounds mean to say "no," you have to do it because the taxpayers just cannot afford this sort of thing.

 

---

 My point is that she raided it.  The money in the pensions should go for what they were for pensions not to be funneled for other things.  Taxpayer money should be used for what it is intended for.  Grants should be used for what it is intended for.  There's no such thing as free money. 

I think it would be a good idea that all current & future council people agree if health insurance is provided by another government entity, they will not stick it to the taxpayers twice for very expensive health insurance.

I don't think we need a law, it can be an unwritten deal agreed to by any elected official.

Anonymous wrote:

---

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

 

I think it would be a good idea that all current & future council people agree if health insurance is provided by another government entity, they will not stick it to the taxpayers twice for very expensive health insurance.

I don't think we need a law, it can be an unwritten deal agreed to by any elected official.

 

---

Unwritten deals mean nothing in Hammonton.   Laws should be in WRITING.  There have been too many "unwritten deals" the last 2 years. Enough is enough.  Respect the law, follow it, enforce it.

 

 

 

---

 

ITS BEEN ANOTHER 24 HOURS THAT THE TOWN HALL WIRING HAS NOT BEGUN! EDDIE WUILLERMAN DEMANDED THAT REPUBLICANS VOTE OR THEY WOULD STOP PROGRESS AND HURT HAMMONTON.

WHEN WILL YOU HANG THE WIRES, MR. WUILLERMAN?

THE CLOCK IS STILL TICKING!

It's all good, so they say. Do you trust that's true? If so we wouldn't be seeing all the lawsuits and investigations. "where's the dirt?" the people of Hammonton have a right to know."where's the 16,000.00 dollars from the airport?" looks like the taxpayers are once again being taken for a ride, while the me firsters are flying high. Me thinks the party is just about over. Can't wait.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

I agree ........ collecting double health insurance benefits should not be allowed. It should also be written into law...clearly spelled out. There is so much tax money being collected and spent so poorly by politicians enriching themselves and / or their friends or relatives it is troubling at all levels of government.

---

What you are saying is that somehow we should write a law so that public employees are banned from receiving the compensation they were promised when hired even though this is done every day in the private sector. You should be penalized for trying to better yourself just because you work in the government. In the private sector, buyouts are offered all of the time because it saves the company money. If both spouses work, sometimes they will accept both insurances just to make sure all expenses are covered and it usually pays for most deductables too. This way there are no out of pocket expenses at all and the company has to pay for the whole insurance bill. Other times the family will decide to take the buyout which saves the company a lot of money because it is less than what it would cost them for the insurance. The public sector offers the same thing but you want to makie the rules different. This is America and we can't pick and choose when we want to do it one way and when we want to change the rulles. There are laws to be followed.

---

You so silly!!!!  We living in Hammonton under the reign of terror we like to refer to as Hammonton First.   There's only one law to follow; it's called the we the self annointed elite of your town tells you to do this or else we will make your life miserable like we are.    Here's me giggling at you; if you really were the powerhouse movers and shakers you think you are you'd leave this 42 square miles and go some place where you really could be a powerhouse mover and shaker.   Sorry you're just a bunch of over grown spoiled brats that need a good slap on the butts.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

Actually, Falcone can collect multiple pensions if he can get elected back to council. One of the big issues with the State is that the Pension program is bankrupt because it is so lucrative. There have been articles written explaining that some people are getting 3 & 4 pensions at the same time. All Falcone has to do is get elected for the prescribed number of times and he picks up a second pension. In addition, as you pointed out, he did take both the State insurance benefits as well as the town's insurance cash buyout, plus his State salary, plus the a salary from the town, the last time he was on council.

---

At least HF is lowering the debt in Hammonton from the record levels of the end of 2005 which they inherited.

But you do have a point. What Whitman did with the pensions was bad. You can't promise people multiple pensions when you have no way of paying for them. Although it sounds mean to say "no," you have to do it because the taxpayers just cannot afford this sort of thing.

 

---

 My point is that she raided it.  The money in the pensions should go for what they were for pensions not to be funneled for other things.  Taxpayer money should be used for what it is intended for.  Grants should be used for what it is intended for.  There's no such thing as free money. 

---

I agree. I don't think taxpayer money was intended from Hammonton taxpayers to pay Anthony Falcone a cash buyout to not accept government insurance while he was already getting government insurance anyway. No matter how you slice it, the taxpayers were paying twice. This is from a guy who claims he will save us money?

---

Anthony Falcone was wrong for pocketing thousands of dollars in the last month he was on council. It seems he must have known the Hammonton taxpayers wouldn't have been happy because he waited until after he lost his election to Jimmy Curcio. The taxpayers were already giving him insurance benefits. You can't collect double benefits so there was no need for him to pocket more cash. If he does this sort of thing, why would we think he has changed his ways from spending money like crazy?

---

Why doesn't Anthony Falcone give the money back? He already was getting government health insurance!

The following is an excerpt from a recent article in the Hammonton News.

The mayor's brother, Steve DiDonato, is heading the building committee for the project. Steve DiDonato met recently with municipal department heads here to go over their technology requests for the interior of the building.

"We will be wiring this building when it is 100 percent complete for all data needs. So when the building is 100 percent complete, which will probably be sometime in March, we will go in then and wire the building. That's the beauty of this building. With the wire chases that are there and with the drop ceilings, we can always have access to our electrical outlets, additional data, computers," Steve DiDonato said. "There's a phenomenal design to this building."

A technology plan for the building is being prepared, Steve DiDonato said, and it is expected to be presented to Town Council later this month.

What has us confused is why there was so much pressure on council to hire an Asst Technician for the Town Hall wiring at the September 10 special meeting. The discussion went on for over an hour with valid concerns being brought up by Jerry Vitalo, Anthony Marino and Rock Colasurdo.

At one point Ed Wuillermin accused the three of trying to stop progress on the new town hall.

If plans always called for the wiring to be done after the building was finished, it seems reasonable thet council could have waited at least 2 weeks for the next meeting and discussed the questions in committee. The concerns raised by the other members of council could have been reviewed.
Why did we have to rush into this deal?

I find it interesting that HF continually changes the subject.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

Actually, Falcone can collect multiple pensions if he can get elected back to council. One of the big issues with the State is that the Pension program is bankrupt because it is so lucrative. There have been articles written explaining that some people are getting 3 & 4 pensions at the same time. All Falcone has to do is get elected for the prescribed number of times and he picks up a second pension. In addition, as you pointed out, he did take both the State insurance benefits as well as the town's insurance cash buyout, plus his State salary, plus the a salary from the town, the last time he was on council.

---

At least HF is lowering the debt in Hammonton from the record levels of the end of 2005 which they inherited.

But you do have a point. What Whitman did with the pensions was bad. You can't promise people multiple pensions when you have no way of paying for them. Although it sounds mean to say "no," you have to do it because the taxpayers just cannot afford this sort of thing.

 

---

 My point is that she raided it.  The money in the pensions should go for what they were for pensions not to be funneled for other things.  Taxpayer money should be used for what it is intended for.  Grants should be used for what it is intended for.  There's no such thing as free money. 

---

I agree. I don't think taxpayer money was intended from Hammonton taxpayers to pay Anthony Falcone a cash buyout to not accept government insurance while he was already getting government insurance anyway. No matter how you slice it, the taxpayers were paying twice. This is from a guy who claims he will save us money?

---

Anthony Falcone was wrong for pocketing thousands of dollars in the last month he was on council. It seems he must have known the Hammonton taxpayers wouldn't have been happy because he waited until after he lost his election to Jimmy Curcio. The taxpayers were already giving him insurance benefits. You can't collect double benefits so there was no need for him to pocket more cash. If he does this sort of thing, why would we think he has changed his ways from spending money like crazy?

---

Why doesn't Anthony Falcone give the money back? He already was getting government health insurance!

---

I'm surprised the Democrats don't speak out even more about the failings of the 2005 town council. That was the council that voted to increase Hammonton's debt to the highest in history. It was the year before HF came into office and was led on the Democrats side by none other than Anthony Falcone. He should answer why he voted to skyrocket our debt. It is a good thing HF went in the following year and lowered the debt.

I guess the Dems feel is was a bad idea to bring that issue up since Falcone was one of the guys spending all the money.

By the way, why are the Democrats continually arguing about the wiring contractor? Don't they know he's already been on site? Don't they know the reason to have this move forward was so they could double-check things before putting up walls. The whole purpose of the wiring chases is to make sure to be able to pull wires for future services easily. But you want to double-check with the people pulling the wires to make sure that you have proper sizes and positions. Even when you feel it is a great design like this building, it is always good to double-check your work... that is how you build a great building!

"If he's a cheat at one thing, he'll cheat at anything"  from a recent international news story about a corrupt government official.... could just as well be about the mayor and his crew.

John D. and Ed W. have been proven to be habitual liars, from false claims to misinformation, they will say and do anything just to get their way!

They have wasted tens of thousands of tax dollars.  What an insult to every Hammonton taxpayer and honest citizen just because they believed that rules do not apply to their actions!

Anonymous wrote:

---

During the last council meeting on sept. 24, did you see the mayor's brother tell everyone that the computer company he and the mayor selected for the job will not be doing any of the computer wiring until after the building is completed next year.

What happened to his urgent need to get this work done?

It seems that the mayor's personal computer company either can not or will not meet the basic requirements for working on a union construction job site like every other contractor doing work on the new town hall.

---

"If he's a cheat at one thing, he'll cheat at anything"  from a recent international news story about a corrupt government official.... could just as well be about the mayor and his crew.

John D. and Ed W. have been proven to be habitual liars, from false claims to misinformation, they will say and do anything just to get their way!

They have wasted tens of thousands of tax dollars.  What an insult to every Hammonton taxpayer and honest citizen just because they believed that rules do not apply to their actions!

Use all the pretty colors you want. Here are the facts.

1. In 2005, the year before HF came to office, the Democrats led by Anthony Falcone worked with the Republicans to vote to raise the debt to the highest levels in Hammonton's history.

2. They raised the debt more in that one year than had ever been done before.

3. HF has LOWERED the debt.

4. When HF said the debt was high and the surplus was near zero, just like now these same people called HF liars. Now we know from the auditor's report it was the truth. Now that they have been caught as the liars, the Democrats just change their lies to new ones. I guess that is a certain North Jersey out-of-towner who switches from Republican to Democrat on a reguilar basis that is telling them to do this.

5. HF lowered the debt and raised surplus.

6. HF has had no tax increases for two years at the municipal level. The school even had no tax increase this year.

7. In 2006, when HF was trying to save money to fix these problems, Anthony Falcone demanded to pocket over $10,000 from the taxpayers.

DEMOCRAT LEADERS---- YOU ARE QUICK TO CALL HF LIARS WHEN IT IS YOU WHO HAVE BEEN CAUGHT IN THE LIES.

ANTHONY FALCONE ISN'T EVEN CAMPAIGNING WITH YOU. I GUESS HE WON'T ANSWER QUESTIONS SINCE HE DOESN'T HAVE THE TIME TO TELL HAMMONTONIANS THE TRUTH.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Use all the pretty colors you want. Here are the facts.

1. In 2005, the year before HF came to office, the Democrats led by Anthony Falcone worked with the Republicans to vote to raise the debt to the highest levels in Hammonton's history. You used to say Anthony was useless now you are giving him credit for LEADING the entire council, make up your mind. And it was not the Dems who led the vote for this debt. It was the Republicans with the vote to bond the new Town Hall at 11th Street. That is what drove the debt so high.

2. They raised the debt more in that one year than had ever been done before. True. Bonding for a new town hall would have that effect.

3. HF has LOWERED the debt. and as soon as Anthony was no longer on council Hammonton First raised the debt right back up to the highest in history. And there is still time left in this year to make a new high, let's see if that happens.

4. When HF said the debt was high and the surplus was near zero, just like now these same people called HF liars. Now we know from the auditor's report it was the truth. Now that they have been caught as the liars, the Democrats just change their lies to new ones. I guess that is a certain North Jersey out-of-towner who switches from Republican to Democrat on a reguilar basis that is telling them to do this. If HF believed that the debt was so high, why did they bring it right back up to that level this year? As far as the surplus, they were using a particular date, we were refering to the whole year, semantics. How do you switch from R to D on a regular basis? And yes, he is of the same opinion. That is why he switched!

5. HF lowered the debt and raised surplus. Already answered

6. HF has had no tax increases for two years at the municipal level. The school even had no tax increase this year. Agreed, however we disagree with the means used to do this.

7. In 2006, when HF was trying to save money to fix these problems, Anthony Falcone demanded to pocket over $10,000 from the taxpayers. What do you mean demanded? Anthony had several choices, he could accept the insurance coverage and thereby cost the Town over $18,000. By doing so he would have made things easier on his family because all deductibles and copays would have probably been covered by the secondary insurance. He can take the buyout offered by the town which saves the town 50% of the cost of the insurance. Or he can return the money to the town. Anthony is a hard working man who makes a good salary in his postition, but he is not as wealthy as some current members of council to be able to refuse part of his salary. He chose the second option to save the town close to $10,000. He compromised down the middle and still provided for his family. He is a man of integrity who stands by his choice. 

---

The Democrats are all campaigning together, knocking on doors, attending events, meeting the people. Because of family commitments, all 3 may not always be together, but the campaign is a united one and the Team is working hard.

Anonymous wrote:

---

---

By the way, why are the Democrats continually arguing about the wiring contractor? Don't they know he's already been on site? Don't they know the reason to have this move forward was so they could double-check things before putting up walls. The whole purpose of the wiring chases is to make sure to be able to pull wires for future services easily. But you want to double-check with the people pulling the wires to make sure that you have proper sizes and positions. Even when you feel it is a great design like this building, it is always good to double-check your work... that is how you build a great building!

---

The Democrats will continually speak up if they see something wrong.  You do a "great building" by listening to ALL THE PEOPLE and not shoving things down taxpayer's throats.  The Hammonton First administration CAN NOT BE TRUSTED.