Questions over take-home City vehicles have generated unprecedented reader comments, and the City Administrator has raised the question of senior staff needing these cars to respond to EMERGENCIES IN THE CITY.
With the City Administrator and the Public Safety/Police Director being two of the five for whom cars are requested and who live at considerable distances from Plainfield, the question arises about how safe Plainfielders are in this circumstance should an emergency actually arise that needed their immediate presence.
I have put a poll at the top of the right-hand column on this page posing the following question --
Would you feel safer if the City Administrator and Public Safety/Police Director lived in Plainfield instead of at a great distance?Any reader may vote and may check the current status of the poll (note that the poll only allows one vote apiece, so there can be no ballot-stuffing). Once you've voted, the tally view stays open. Reload the page to see a fresh tally.
- Yes
- No
- Not Sure
The poll will stay open until January 22.
You may also want to read today's Courier editorial: "Editorial: Don't insult public with car quest"
- Plainfield Today --
- (previous post): "Take-home city vehicles on Council agenda"
- (first post) "City vehicles: Who should get wheels and why?"
- Courier News --
- (today): "Editorial: Don't insult public with car quest"
- (yesterday): "Car privilege extended for two as controversy continues"
- (first story): "Officials, residents eye take-home vehicles as cost savings"
Posts
6 comments:
I don't think it matters because there is a second level of supervisory personnel who run the departments on a day-to-day basis. The department heads are in charge of adminstration. That is not emergency work.
To Anonymous 8:57 AM --
I would love to agree with you, but from Mr. Dashield's remarks it seems the Administration has little confidence in the people who actually do the day-to-day heavy lifting.
Note that the Administration has never said a word about a vehicle for the OEM Coordinator, who has day-to-day responsibility for emergency matters.
I think the OEM Coordinator definitely should have a city car, but has never had one in the past, and I frankly don't blame the administration for not ADDING such a new item to its budget request, under the current fiscal circumstances.
I think the City Council has better ways to waste its time (and ours) than haggling over non-issues like city cars for the City Administrator and Public Safety Director. Individuals in those positions have had city cars as long as I can remember, wherever they lived, and this reader feels safer knowing they can get here quickly in an emergency if necessary.
I haven't heard any Council member talking about giving up his/her City salary in the interest of saving taxpayer money. That would be a $70K budget decrease. Those like Mapp who are already covered by health benefits at their jobs shouldn't get City health benefits too--they don't need City benefits and that would also save us money.
I think too much time is being wasted on this issue - everyone has a cell phone and can be in constant contact in an emergency.
It's really a non-issue - besides how much longer will Director Hellwig even be there ? This is an issue for a new administration
With this Administration, I don't feel safe regardless of where a Director lived.
And I agree, too much time wasted on this subject. Regardless of public opinion, the Director will keep his car.
The problem is not residency requirements. Ther e are many parameters that influence where people live including schools, gangs, ambiance etc.
The Administration and Council should focus on, and delineate the conditions in which a car can be used.The City's responsibility should be limited to the persons actual on site availability for his/her city job. How they get there is their responsibility.
If Plainfield has a disaster plan or police emergency procedures shot be in writing to care for any eventuality.
Post a Comment