We know what it says, we just don't care

Lack of adherence to vehicle ordinance driving us crazy

City of Trenton Ordinance 10-007 was passed passed by the governing body on January 21, 2010. It was signed by then Mayor Douglas Palmer on January 25, 2010. It has been the law of the city since then.

That ordinance reads in part:

Passenger Motor Vehicle use

A. It is the policy of the City of Trenton that the cost of purchasing, leasing, maintaining, insuring and fueling non-specialized passenger automobiles for use by civilian public employees be reduced to the greatest extent compatible with the safe and efficient provision of municipal services. To that end, it shall be the duty of the Business Administrator forthwith to enforce the restrictions on on the acquisition, maintenance and assignment of non-specialized passenger motor vehicles as set forth below as of the effective date of this Ordinance. 

The ordinance goes on to enumerate various things the BA is responsible to submit to the Mayor and City Council including, under items number 3 and 4: 

3. For each vehicle listed, the name, office, or position or employment or agency of each person who has been or is currently assigned or otherwise permitted to operate it shall be set forth, stating the date or date range of each person's usage of that vehicle. 

4. For each non-specialized passenger vehicle on the list, the Business Administrator shall provide a concise explanation as to the purpose served by continuing the City's ownership and maintenance of the vehicle and by not requiring the assigned user or users to use personal vehicles on a reimbursement basis. 

 We've written about the abuse of the unnecessary vehicle fleet before. You can read it here, here and here.

For at least the third time in four years, we requested the vehicle list AND the "concise explanation" as to why it is better for the city to own maintain the specific vehicles than reimburse the employee for using their personal cars.

The initial response was a general inventory of vehicles and where they were assigned. But there was no explanation given as to why it is a good idea for the city to maintain the fleet. We reminded the City Clerk's office that the response to the OPRA request was incomplete and asked for the explanation to be provided.

This is the response we received:

"According to the Department of Public Works; The City of Trenton limits the assignment of vehicles to personnel depending upon their daily responsibilities and necessity to respond during emergencies.  Under the direction of the Business Administrator, each department Director reviews their respective employees’ assigned tasks to determine and establish the vehicle use limits based on the same.  Directors are also assigned vehicles which are used at their discretion."

 Thanks, but that is not what we asked for.

Mr. Mayor, Mr. BA, Ms. Chief of Staff, and Mr. Council President:

Does the Administration and/or the Governing Body of the City of Trenton ever intend to follow the procedures spelled out in plain English regarding the non-specialized passenger vehicle fleet? It is, after all, the law!

For all the lip service given to new beginnings, accountability and such, to date, on at least this one matter, you are no better than either of the two Administrations/Councils to come before you.

Enough already

This situation about Paul Harris, the vehicle accident, whether or not he had permission to drive a city vehicle, etc. has gone on too long.

It seems pretty clear that a city vehicle had been repaired at the request and with the knowledge of the BA's office...specifically his assistant, John Seigle.

While it is quite plausible that Mr. Harris used the vehicle without formal, written permission, it does not seem likely that he did so without anyone's knowledge and assumed approval. The set up of the offices in which the vehicle keys are kept (in a lockbox) is such that it would be hard to obtain them during the work day without someone taking notice.

The amount of misinformation, misdirection and miss-appropriation of city resources, while par for THIS administration, is way beyond what is acceptable.

Both of the local dailies have reported on this. The Trentonian, the Times (twice) and Trentonian columnist L. A. Parker has commented on the matter.

It certainly appears that, as Mr. Parker puts it, Mr. Harris was made the scapegoat in an episode that points up several failings of Trenton City Government:

1. The city has way too many vehicles than are needed.
2. There are minimal policies and procedures governing who uses these vehicles, when and for what reasons.
3. There is lax adherence to the policies that do exist.
4. There is no adherence to the 2010 ordinance that was meant to rein in the abuses and costs of maintaining the fleet of passenger vehicles.
5. The city has failed to provide accurate information in this matter: either the inventory dated June 30, 2012 is incorrect or the statements that BA Sam Hutchinson did not like the "Crown Vic" he had been assigned is flat out wrong. This document says he was assigned a Chevy Caprice.
6. The vehicle in the police report, has a license plate number matching one that was "unassigned" at the time of the June inventory. Just like the Saturn that Mr. Harris had been driving around in for a few months and that it is claimed Mr. Hutchinson desired over the "Crown Vic (Chevy Caprice?)". The Ford Escape was, in effect, a "pool car" available to anyone needing a city vehicle to do city business (such as dropping off another employee to pick up a recently repaired auto).

Kevin Moriarty discusses this kind of "casual corruption" thoroughly in his blog post from the other day.

We suggest that the Administration rescind its disciplinary action against Mr. Harris, immediately (or whatever the proper action is according to the Civil Service rules.)

We also suggest that the Administration make immediate plans to reduce the current passenger vehicle fleet and adopt a straight up reimbursement policy/procedure for business use of a personal vehicle.

Do as I say, not as I do

On Thursday, June 9, the city business administrator announced a new policy regarding who could take home city vehicles and why.

From: Colin Cherry [mailto:ccherry@trentonnj.org]


Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 4:47 PM

To: Seigle, John; McKithen, Marc; Rubino, Joseph; Burzachiello, Ralph; 'jjuniack@trentonpolice.net'; 'qbashir@aol.com'; Thompson, Cleveland; Rousseau, David; Denson, Walter; Jones, Nathaniel; Roberts, Anthony

Cc: 'jgnandt@trentonpolice.net'; 'eberry@trentonnj.org'

Subject: Take Home Vehicle Policy

Importance: High

Good afternoon,

Per the direction of the Business Administrator, the following is to be in effect this coming Monday, June 13, 2011 until further notice.

No passenger vehicle (including those assigned to Department Directors) is to be operated outside of business hours. This means that no vehicle should be “taken home”.

The only exceptions to this policy are those employees who work non-standard schedules and require a vehicle to be “on call”. In such cases, the vehicle must be specialized and necessary for the conduct of City business (for example, a water utility van with equipment inside).

All other vehicles are to be parked in their respective lots – that is a Department lot if applicable, the City Hall lot otherwise – at the close of the business day. After the close of business on Monday any vehicle for which the employee has not received special dispensation from the Business Administrator which is found to not be parked as directed will be considered to be in misuse. The Office of the Business Administrator will be forced to assume that the employee has the intention of depriving the City of Trenton of the proper use of that vehicle and all appropriate action will be taken to ensure that it is returned.

Thank you and please ensure that you communicate this directive clearly to your employees.

__________________

Colin Cherry

City of Trenton

Management Assistant

319 East State Street

Trenton, NJ 08608

(609) 989-3532

ccherry@trentonnj.org

All well and good.  After all, it merely conforms (somewhat) to the intent of ordinance 10-007 passed in January of 2010 and limiting the "take home" use of city passenger vehicles.

One little problem, on Monday evening, June 13, 2011 guess who had a city vehicle parked across the street from his Trenton apartment.  Why, none other than Mr. Eric Berry, Business Administrator for the city of Trenton.

I guess his job puts him above and beyond the reach of his own new policy.

Nice one, Mr. Berry.  Way to go.  You obviously care more about what you can get out of the taxpayers' pockets than what you can do to clean up the cess pool that is city hall.

Stupid is as stupid does...

...and says.

The following are direct excerpts from online stories regarding Trenton Chief of Staff/Deputy Mayor Paul Sigmund's lack of a valid driver's license when he was stopped for speeding in a city owned vehicle. Links to the full article are provide.

From the Trentonian: 


“It’s true that I don’t have a New Jersey’s license. I’ve been to DMV a couple of times but you need like six forms of identification to get a license. I will take care of it. And in regards to California, I have a permit that allows me to drive to work. I thought I could drive in New Jersey,” Sigmund said.


Sigmund attempted to explain his admitted mistake.

“I was totally lost in thought, rushing back to work because I had this great idea about improving our school system. I’ll tell you about it soon.”

Sigmund, in March, assured the Trentonian that he had “taken care of” his California problems, stemming from two unpaid tickets, and then promised to not drive a city car until he could show proof of rectification.

“I thought everything had been taken care of. I thought all of the restrictions had been lifted,” Sigmund said.
 
Again, from the Trentonian:
 
Mayor Tony Mack today said his Chief of Staff Paul Sigmund should not have been behind the wheel of a city-owned vehicle last weekend when he racked up tickets for speeding and driving without a license.

“In hindsight, Paul should not have been given a city car and he should not have been behind the wheel of a vehicle,” Mack said.

Mack said he had “no idea of how this occurred,” referring to Sigmund being issued the Trenton government Ford Escape without having a valid license.

Mack made one other statement, saying that he and Acting Police Director Joseph Juniak never discussed whether Sigmund should get a city vehicle.

“I didn’t speak to Juniak about this,” Mack said.



From the Times:

“My understanding, both from California and New Jersey, was that my license was valid,” Sigmund said yesterday.


He acknowledged he was speeding, saying he was “lost in thought” at the time of the stop and was unaware of how fast he was going.

During a press conference yesterday introducing former state treasurer David Rousseau as Trenton’s new finance adviser, Mack cited personnel issues in refusing to discuss whether he knew of Sigmund’s license status. But Sigmund said he told Mack about the issue earlier, when he believed he had it fixed.

“I brought it right to Tony’s attention the second I found out about it,” Sigmund said.

Sigmund said he drove to work yesterday morning, but would be leaving his sports utility vehicle at City Hall and finding another way home.

That pretty much says it all, doesn't it?