Council Cuts $125K from Police Overtime Budget
The township council spent two hours Thursday night trying to figure out who authorized a policy change in 2012 that caused overtime costs to jump $187K
The Mahwah Township Council voted in front of a packed audience Thursday night to cut $100,000 from the 2013 police overtime budget, effectively reversing a policy decision that required police officers to be present at Tuesday night court proceedings.
A large part of the budget hearing on Thursday night was spent trying to determine who authorized a policy change in January 2012 that required police officers to attend court proceedings on Tuesday nights for the tickets they write out. During several rounds of questioning from council members, Police Chief Jim Batelli, Municipal Prosecutor Dennis Harraka, and Mayor Bill Laforet all denied approving the policy switch.
Laforet said that in a contract negotiation with the PBA in late 2011, he discussed changing another police court overtime procedure. According to Laforet, previously, police were paid a minimum of two hours of overtime for appearing in court, and for four hours of overtime if they were in court for any amount of time over two hours. Laforet said he negotiated with the PBA to knock down this “automatic two-four” rule, so that officers are paid for the amount of time they are in court, but did not negotiate a return to a policy asking officers to attend every court hearing.
Harraka told the council that he does not require the officers’ presence on Tuesday nights, since any cases that would require police testimony to be settled could be moved to Thursday nights, when officers are specifically summoned to court.
Some officials and members of the public expressed concerns that reversing the policy would lead to a drop in morale in the police department, and in turn a drop in tickets written, and revenue earned by the township from paid summonses.
According to officials, Mahwah spent about $237,490 on Tuesday court overtime in 2012, and made about $500,000 from ticket revenue, though council members disputed how much of that revenue was actually realized by the township.
After two hours of discussion Thursday night, the council voted to decrease the overtime budget to the PD by $100,000, to be taken from Tuesday night court appearances.
The council also voted to support a $25,000 budget reduction based on a recommendation from Batelli on how security procedures at court hearings could be changed to cut costs. According to council members, a separate township court committee would need to approve that change before it could go into effect.
Thursday night’s questioning was prompted by an increase in police overtime costs in 2012. According to township officials, OT in 2011 cost the township $327,000, and $514,000 in 2012.
The council made several changes to the proposed 2013 budget Thursday night that they said would decrease the municipal tax increase from 4.9% to about 3.5%. Continue to check Patch for details on other changes to the proposed budget the council voted on Thursday night.
Submit your questions or news tips to jessica.mazzola@patch.com. And, remember to sign up for Patch's daily newsletter, and get updates on Facebook and Twitter.
In This article
-
Mahwah Township
475 Corporate Dr, Mahwah, NJ -
Mahwah Police Department
221 Franklin Tpke, Mahwah, NJ -
-
Mona Lot
8:27 am on Friday, March 22, 2013
It just amazes me that a simple question was asked of three town employees and a yes or no reply was all that was needed and all but one (the prosecutor) danced and fumbled their way through questioning by the council,as of this post(if it gets posted) there is still no definitive answer to the question"who authorized the police to be at Tuesday night court).Make one wonder what else goes on in our town that no one is held accountable for."Frightening"
GRNM
8:27 am on Friday, March 22, 2013
OT was up 187k in 2012 due to the court appearance policy (funny that no one approved it or noticed it for a full year). The policy has been changed back and they're going to reduce the OT budget by roughly 53% (100k), Did anyone mention why they still need the remaining 87k?
Ralph
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
It was noticed and money had to be shifted from other departments to pay for it during the year. That raised a red flag that something needed to be looked at which it was during this year's budget. Also your numbers are vastly incorrect. The Police Department still has approx. $370,000 in OT budgeted to their department, more then they actually spent in 2011 when they didnt appear in court. The prosecutor has stated that he does not need them there on Tuesday nights so why are we paying them to be there. OT is needed in the police department as well as other departments and that has been recognized. And if you really want to lay blame, just look at the month the OT started to go up (December 2011 thru all of 2012). Hey wasn't that the month that the new Mayor was sworn in? Too bad that no one will take the responsibility for making the decision but the handwriting is on the wall.
its real
8:27 am on Friday, March 22, 2013
Williams is so anti police that he forget to mention that the dpw overtime is more than the average cop - oops harry youre prejudice is showing - so much for saying you support the taxpayers. the truth is clear
TommyB
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
I' m sure the money removed from pd overtime budget won't actually be a savings to taxpayers...the council will opt to by more unnecessary fire apparatus. Like "it's real" said, council seems very ine sided
Mona Lot
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
TommyBcareful what you wish for,"unnecessary fire apparatus" I hope to God that it never happens but if that piece of "unnecessary fire apparatus" never showed up in your driveway when your house was on fire you would be the the first one to complain about the FD not doing their job,oh and by the way the" volunteer" FD does not have a 5 million dollar buget item in the township budget like some other departments.
Phil Lipper
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
The reduction in the police budget was the least of the irresponsible things they did last night. They decided (against the CFO's advice) to raid towns reserves instead of getting the spending under control. Then councilman Jandris proposed that the rest of the council like him not take their $7,000 per year salary, that was laughed off. To top off the night the council decided to vote down the outsourcing the recycling even though it would save over $500k. Their rationale? its not guarateed that the saving would occur. Maybe they need to remember that this budget and any budget is based upon projections and nothing is guaranteed, including the revenue side of the ledger.
Gilligan
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Mr. Lipper, are you the Professor? I haven't heard anything so smart since the Professor tried to fix our radio on the Island. I will disagree with you on one point. There are two guarantees. We WILL pay the Council $52,500 for their annual stipends and we will pay Lisa's benefits for the rest of her life.....guaranteed.
Bob Lockwood
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
Does the public deserve an answer as to who directed the police officers to start attending Tuesday night court to "support the prosecutor"? The prosecutor, Dennis Harraka, clearly stated that he did not need their support to conduct summons plea bargans. He also stated that he did not request their support. This unrequested support took the court system from $43K in the black to $34K in the red. Net loss of $77K. Do we deserve an answer?
Gilligan
2:48 am on Sunday, March 24, 2013
It appears that Mr.Lockwood is lost at sea with the rest of us without his calculator. I borrowed Mr. Howell's calculator. The real story of the court Police over time is this. $512,000 in revenue minus $267,000 in court overtime expense directly related to those summonses that generated the revenue equals PROFIT for the Town of $245,000. The other OT incurred by the Police Department had noting to do with the court. Taxpayers of Mahwah, do not believe the fuzzy math of Williams, Roth, Sbarro, Lisa, et al. It is 100% incorrect. We should be looking for whomever authorized the additional OT...and giving them a medal!!
Ralph
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Mr Gilligan, I'm not quite sure if Mr. Howell's calculator has anything to do with the real issue here. Yes, there was $512,000 in revenue generated by the over abundance of tickets written by the MPD. Now why were those tickets written? Well if we write more we can spend time in court on Tuesday night and sit around and get at least 2 hours of OT added to our extremely large salaries. lets remember that overtime at time and a half is a lot more expensive when your salary is over $100,000 a year like the majority of the MPD. But the procutor said he didnt need the officers in court on Tuesdays? So I ask then why were they there? Now if the revenue goes down because the MPD writes less tickets but the OT also goes down then its not a losing proposition. Funny how the amount of tickets went up by over 2000 a year when the MPD realized that they can pad their wallets on OT. I think Gilligan you have spent too much time in the island sun. Maybe you should consult with the Professor and not use Mr. Howells calculator anymore.
Mona Lot
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
WEP
Im not sticking up for the police however the OT in question was only for Tuesday night court appearances,because you can't give exact figures for overtime during the year an approx figure is used for OT other than Tuesday night court.
Its real
Williams is doing his job he was elected for,and OT for DPW is for unexpected time not time that can be eliminated because its not needed,I don't think its fair of you to assume he is anti police.
WHAT?
3:30 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
The numbers in the above article imply that the town spent roughly $238,000.00 in OT expenses to make $500,000.00 in ticket revenue. That is not what I took away from the meeting - my understanding was that with the other costs incurred as a result of the increase in tickets, it ended up costing the taxpayers of Mahwah over $70,000. So ask yourself two questions, why would the council cut the OT for 2013 if this ticket blitz was such an amazing money maker - they wouldn't. And secondly, why is no one being held accountable? It is up to you, the voters of Mahwah to PAY ATTENTION and then hold elected officials accountable when you vote!
T-Bird 148
11:50 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
WHY you ask? Political retribution! If Mr. Roth was so interested in being the "steward" of the municipal budget why did he vote NO to the proposal for outsourcing the township's recycling which was to save the town an estimated $500,000???
james joseph
11:50 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
I think Mr. "What" that the answer to that is obvious from the well choreographed circus by Roth, William and Lisa 'township lifetime medical benefits" Digulio in front of resident parents and our children at last nights meeting. You want to talk about gimmicky numbers and budgeting, listen to the Roth, Williams special "political agenda calculator" on either cost saving proposals that would benefit the Township with "significant" savings for the future. Congratulations to the standing council excluding Mr. Jandris, you are all true Washington "type" politicians! Not for the taxpayer as you state but for your special interests and personal gain! Mr. Lockwood, go back to your internet "Tea Party" blogs instead of being the public operative of the Mahwah defunct Republican "good ol boy" Club! By the way, thanks for the Mall, Mr. Roth and have the guts to leave this up with your Mona Lot, What, Ralph etc..
lori dorie
11:50 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
Phil lipper. When Mr Jandris asked the council members to surrender their $7000.00 yearly salary did he also ask the same of Mayor Laforet regarding his $17,000.00 yearly salary?
Mark Case
11:50 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
Math is simple here $512K in revenue $267K in unnecessary overtime cost net to the Twp is $245K. Eliminate un-necessary overtime net to the Twp is $512K!
Gilligan
2:48 am on Sunday, March 24, 2013
Mr. Case, you must be drinking some of the rum the professor made in his homemade still. You eliminate the OT and the revenue does not stay the same. Besides legitimately needing the Police in court to testify in contested cases (and earning OT) to prosecute those cases,mthe OT serves as an incentive to generate summonses. Eliminate the OT and you will see the revenue go away.
Mona Lot
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Are you that naive,these figures you mention,do you really believe that the PD will continue to generate 512K without the overtime compensation?,look at past history what happened when police presence at court was deleted,the revenue went down considerably.
treehugger
11:50 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
williams and roth refuse to return their council salaries to the taxpayers but take money from seniors who are on a fixed income. Chuck Jandris only Councilman willing to do the right thing. Time for a new council president one who can lead
Mona Lot
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Hey tree hogger,get off the senior citizen kick,do really believe that the council members should do all the work and take all the responsibility for running our town should do it for nothing?. Mr. Jandris was just grand standing to try and take some heat away from the Mayor about his (the mayor) responsibility for authorizing OT for the PD. By the way hugger we have 7 council members not just william and roth,you have forgotten Speich,degulio and sabarra and larson.
WHAT?
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Gilligan, if the ticket revenue in 2013 drops that will be proof that the 2011 and 2012 ticket writing increase was driven by someone wanting to increase officers
paychecks. And, once again, who approved that? Why is no answer acceptable? Did you attend the meeting? Did you hear that in order to handle the big increase in ticket volume that the town had to hire another clerk? That was some of why this resulted in a net loss, as quoted at the meeting and in Sat.'s Record, of $75,000. Mark Case is almost right, if the unnecessary Tuesday OT goes away then more of the revenue goes to the town but not all.
In business, if you had an budget overage of this size, especially without authorization, you would be fired. Here, no one is in trouble and the police OT budget for 2013 still went up.
Our police officers are fantastic. This is a management question. Is anyone looking at monthly budget variance reports??? I am sick and tired of my taxes going up and up. This unnecessary and unauthorized OT is a perfect example of an expenditure needlessly costing the taxpayers.If anything, this blip up in tickets is political -the Mayor and Police Chief are best buddies. The Mayor gets sworn in and the ticket blitz begins. Coincidence?
Mark Case
5:17 am on Monday, March 25, 2013
Gilligan, first you want to give a medal to the overtime authorizer who broke the law by spending money without approval and is now lying to cover it up. Nice. Then you suggest that without overtime summonses will drop off. Certainly the outstanding members of the MPD who are sworn to enforce the laws must find that offensive. Lastly you must have attended a different Council meeting. Everything reported said the Council kept Thurs night and all other required overtime in the budget. Only Tue was cut. It was unnecessary! You may have spent too much time in the sun.
karen costanzo
5:21 am on Saturday, March 30, 2013
Well said Ralph! I'm sure the ticket writing has decreased a lot esp over st patricks day weekend, only 2 or 3 tickets were written over the entire weekend. Wonder if the council has a clue about that? I know if I didn't perform my job, I would be out the door!!