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.

Listen up!

Some notes for Council President Paul Pintella and the administration:

Point number one (from the City Ordinances):

§ A316-2. Rules.
The following rules shall govern the Council and its meetings:
RULE I
Governing Rules
Except as may be provided in the Charter, questions of order, the organization and the conduct of business of the Council shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order in all cases to which they are applicable, and in which they are not inconsistent with these rules.

Get a copy of the book and learn how to properly conduct a meeting.

Point number two (also from the city ordinances, note especially the italicized section):

§ 2-9. Removal.
A. Pursuant to the Charter, N.J.S.A. 40:69A-37 and 40:69A-43:
(1) The Mayor, in his/her discretion, may remove any department head after notice and an opportunity to be heard. Prior to removing a department head, the Mayor shall first file written notice of his/her intention with the Council, and such removal shall become effective on the 20th day after the filing of the notice, unless prior thereto the Council shall have adopted a resolution by a two-thirds vote of the whole number of the Council disapproving the removal.
(2) The Council may, for cause, remove any municipal officer other than the Mayor or a member of Council.
(3) The Council shall consider notices under Subsection A(1) above and motions under Subsection A(2) above only after notice and an opportunity to be heard are given to the affected officer. The Clerk shall forthwith cause a copy of the notice or motion, as the case may be, together with a statement of the charges involved and notice of the time and place fixed for hearing to be served personally, or by registered mail, upon the officer affected. The hearing shall be held not less than 10 days nor more than 15 days after the date of such service. The hearing shall be open to the public.

B. Pursuant to the Charter, Council may veto a removal under Subsection A(1) above, by a two-thirds vote of the Council and may adopt or defeat a motion under Subsection A(2) above, by a majority vote of the Council.

Take heed that you can and should consider the removal of any municipal officer who consistently ignores the reasonable requests for information made by you and/or your colleagues on behalf of the citizens of Trenton you were elected to serve.

(Are you paying attention Ms. Feigenbaum, Ms. Haynes, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Santiago?)

Now you’ve got one day to become familiar with Roberts Rules of Order and the Administration has one day to gather the information requested last month by Mr. Coston. Let’s see if you all can manage to come together on Tuesday and get the City’s business done in an intelligent and meaningful manner.