Point Pleasant Beach Police Department Cuts Budget, Averts Layoffs
Beach Council approves police chief's budget cuts and PBA concessions, avoiding layoffs
Three Point Pleasant Beach police officers will keep their jobs, now that the police department has cut its budget request by $60,000.
The Point Pleasant Beach Council on Tuesday night accepted a combination of police department budget cuts and police union concessions that produced enough of a savings to avoid the need to possibly lay off three officers.
Mayor Vincent Barrella said Police Chief Kevin O'Hara is asking for $465,000 instead of his original budget request of $525,000.
He said he did not know if O'Hara would have been willing to make the budget cut of about $60,000 if he wasn't facing possible layoffs.
The request is part of a proposed municipal budget of about $11.6 million that council introduced on Tuesday night.
The budget also calls for other employees, outside the police department, to take 17 unpaid furlough days.
At the Feb. 15 meeting, four council members, Michael Corbally, Frank Rizzo, Sean Hennessy and Jeffrey Dyer, voted to authorize the borough to alert the state that it may lay off three police officers.
Officers Kyle Boturla, Paschal Drew and Scott Nase would lose their jobs if the borough laid off three officers because they have the least seniority.
O'Hara, who spoke out against layoffs right after the February meeting, said last night that the council had moved towards possible layoffs without talking to him first.
"I was in total shock at the last meeting," O'Hara said. "No one had come to me to ask for a lower budget."
He said he ran into a similar scenario with Rizzo on an unrelated matter he brought up at the meeting last night.
"For some reason, they don't want to talk," O'Hara said, adding that it's frustrating for him to sit at council meetings and hear council members raise issues related to the police department for the first time without talking to him first.
"I just don't understand that," O'Hara said.
He said that he had originally requested $365,000 to hire special police officers, $40,000 for parking enforcement and $120,000 for projected overtime costs. Those costs amount to $525,000.
"The $60,000 came from that lump sum," he said. "It's not coming from overtime because if our officers work overtime, they have to be paid."
On Wednesday, O'Hara said "We will have more special officers' shifts in 2011 than we had in 2010 but, not as many as we had originally budgeted for. This cut in the budget still leaves the department with more shift coverage than last year which should amount to an increase in violations being issued."
On Tuesday night, O'Hara had said his reduced budget means the department will buy less supplies and equipment, compared to what they could have purchased under his original budget request.
O'Hara had also said on Tuesday night that when the staffing levels of special police officers drops, so does revenue. That's because fewer special police officers means fewer parking tickets and summonses, which means less revenue to the Municipal Court and, ultimately, to the borough.
For example, he said, pulling out some figures from his files, there was a decrease of about 3,285 tickets from 2009 to 2010.
"That's a direct result of us having a lower staffing level," he said.
The PBA concessions also include: no salary increases for this year; a one-year delay in scheduled step and longevity increases; elimination of officer-in-charge pay, which is paid to officers when they have to serve as shift supervisors, and elimination of tuition reimbursement except for "previous contractual obligations."
Local PBA President Marc Distelcamp said on Wednesday that the PBA concessions are worth about $140,000 which, when combined with the chief's department budget cuts of about $60,000, equals about $200,000.
Distelcamp said his estimate of $140,000 is only regarding the latest package of concessions.
"Around the middle of last year, we changed health plans, which saved the town about $600,000," he said. "We don't have dental or optical included. Most people don't know that. We also had three guys retire last year who weren't replaced."
At the Tuesday night meeting, Corbally said the police department had come up with "about $200,000 worth of cuts."
donnamaria adelizzi-diaz
8:12 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
what happene to the comment that was here earlier this morning?
Chief O'Hara
8:28 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
The above article is slightly misleading. We will have more special officers shifts in 2011 than we had in 2010 but, not as many as we had originally budgeted for. This cut in the budget still leaves the department with more shift coverage than last year which should amount to an increase in violations being issued.
Denise Di Stephan
9:02 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Chief, thanks for clarifying that. I revised story accordingly.
Vince Barrella
9:23 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
I believed back in February that there was no reason to proceed towards layoffs in order to solve the budget problem, and I still believe that today. Just as there is no way to know if the "threat" had any effect on the Chief's decision, there is also no way to know whether other reductions could have been worked out without that "threat," since the majority of the council chose to proceed towards layoffs.
One final note, if the goal of any member of the council was to force further concessions from the PBA (and I am not saying that was the goal of those voting for layoffs), that was not what happened. The union's concessions negotiated between representatives of the PBA, our administrator and myself were accepted by the council at this meeting exactly as agreed to by the PBA prior to the February 15 meeting.
We now need to immediately begin negotiations that will lead to long term contracts for 2012 and beyond with the PBA, Teamsters and TWU. I look forward to working with our Finance Committee chairman, our administrator and our three unions in getting those contracts ready for consideration as soon as possible.
Kevin Malone
10:54 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Glad this has seemingly worked out. Just goes to show you certain council members threaten the police for no reason. Nothing changed in the PBA's proposal at ALL!! Shows this is not about money at all because 60,000 in the budget is NOTHING in terms of this budget. Guess the council realized this was a fight they were not going to win and this proposal is BEYOND a great deal, yet council members have to grandstand and try to show that they have power......Take Councilman Rizzo for example, here's a guy that has nothing relevant to say and is negative about EVERYTHING. He has no idea how to run a police department or anything else for that matter, why do you think he was terminated from the code department. He attempts to create disfunction where there is none, pit people against each other, and make professionals appear stupid......I got news for you Frank the only one who looks stupid IS YOU!! Do the town a favor and disappear into retirement.
Joe Joe
11:30 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
How does 3 police officers EQUAL $60,000...
smoke and mirrors..
Joe Joe
11:43 am on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
The article should state what were the savings from the concessions by PBA. The last paragraph of the article... Otherwise, a very confusing article.
Tom
5:00 pm on Monday, March 21, 2011
I don't know what the real "savings" are, but all this was done without demonstrations and a work stoppage of ticket writing.WOW. Remember the police director talks?
Rich
2:49 am on Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Mayor and Council: the police dept. is THE LAST PLACE to even think about reducing funding.The quality of life, along with MILLIONS in property value, in this beautiful town are at stake. Ask the homeowners/taxpayers in a referendum (how much did that farce recall of the Mayor cost?) if they want less police protection.