A continuation of the dialogue posted earlier:
Mark Messinger responds:
Just a typo (11.98 and 2.03 per thousand).
I appreciate you comparing crime statistics and salaries in North Plainfield to Plainfield.
And I thank you for demonstrating just how effective our police are. Our town has more than two miles of common border with the City of Plainfield, a major east/west highway running through it and, still, the compared crime rates are extremely disproportionate.
North Plainfield has a total of 45 sworn personnel (3 additional are in training). Plainfield has 152. Plainfield is approximately twice our size and population with nearly four times our police.
Clearly we are doing more with much less. When you have time, compare salaries within Somerset County and you will see that North Plainfield is not among the highest paid. (Please make sure the salaries are current and not pending contract negotiations)
This in no way is intended to start a dispute, I just want to make sure the readers have all the facts.
Emory Layne responds:
Mark -
I don’t understand your saying ‘just a typo’ concerning the per-thousand stats; I added up the individual categories for both communities myself, and it came out right.
You are definitely correct about North Plainfield’s pay scales and other Somerset County communities. However, we’ll probably just end up agreeing to disagree about how they get to the levels they are at; my main question concerned the process by which those levels are reached. If I were to learn that there’s a process involving quantification of labor, risk, calls, whatever, I would accept it without a further peep – but something I simply cannot accept is an explanation that resorts to emotion.
My mother was an elementary school teacher, and her pay scale throughout her career was way, way below the pay scale of other communities. Her effort expended to teach wasn’t any lower. There couldn’t be any debate as to the ‘value’ of her work. But unfortunately, the ‘explanation’ for teachers often comes down to a community having the available money to pay better.
Considering the long-term debt North Plainfield has carried and the massive increases in taxes over the last 12 years, I really don’t think North Plainfield qualifies as a “swimming in it” community, and that should, in my opinion, apply to teachers, borough hall employees and administrators as well as police and fire employees. Too many of us, in the non-government, non-union world, get laid off or go without raises because, well, that’s what happens. It affects us and our families no differently.
As an aside, the availability – or lack thereof -of data and statistics in this Internet Age sometimes amazes me. There is a great deal of information available concerning police, crime levels, and so forth, as we addressed in this conversation. Yet NOWHERE was I able to find any data concerning fire departments, such as number of calls, false alarms, rescues, accidents, ANYTHING. I would ASSUME that such information would be relevant to people when they decide on places to live, but I can’t find it anywhere. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated.
6 responses so far ↓
Mark Messinger // August 30, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
The typo was a decimal point unless more than 20% of North Plainfielders and over 100% of Plainfielders are victims of violent crime but the discussion of typos is not important and I did not intend to enter into a discussion on typos.
I could exlain the process that brought salaries to the level they are at now but it is too complicated and lengthy to write. Just rest assured that, if you want to maintain such a highly professional police force and attract the most qualified officers, maintaining a competitive salary schedule is second to none in importance.
As for the high taxes in North Plainfield, I don’t need to remind you or any of the readers where the finger points. We all know it is not at the Police.
Does anyone remember the 5 school construction referendums?
KW // August 30, 2008 at 9:28 pm |
I’ll leave it to Emory to clarify the per capita mathematics. But the DataUniverse link for North Plainfield’s 2006 stats is here, (violent crime 2.1 incidents per 1,000 residents) and the link for Plainfield’s 2006 stats is here (12.0 incidents per 1,000 residents). So, yes, Emory’s decimal points were in the wrong place in his first post.
But NO ONE is “resting assured” of anything without a good, hard look at the paper trail. If you don’t want to write up what happened when to lead to these salary levels, find someone who will.
As for the school construction referenda, more data/background needed. Probably we could start by digging in the Courier-News archives, and then dig further after we get the bare-bones of the story from there.
KW // August 30, 2008 at 9:45 pm |
Kicking it off…
$31M school bond up to voters
Courier News (Bridgewater, NJ) – May 15, 2000
Author: Courier News= Somerset County,
By SHAUN McCORMACK, Staff Writer
NORTH PLAINFIELD – Voters will decide Tuesday on a $31 million public school referendum – the Board of Education’s fifth school expansion proposal in three years.
District officials and students agree that projects listed under the newest construction proposal are long overdue, but voters in recent years have denied referendums of $49 million, $29.9 million and two for $18.5 million.
The proposed $31 million bond would be paid off over 30 years and cost taxpayers with a home assessed at $129,000 – the borough average – an estimated $16.56 per month, said Bernard F. Steinfelt, the district’s financial consultant.
Residents may not want to see their taxes increase, but Steinfelt said the public school problem will not go away if another referendum is defeated.
Board member Joel Kenderdine said the district has been forced to begin using trailers at some of the district’s schools to accommodate increasing enrollment, which is up 33.5 percent over the past decade.
The district’s space crunch could be worsened by the loss of two rooms at the borough community center used to house four kindergarten classes. The borough received approval from the State Green Acres Commission to use the classrooms on an emergency basis for two years. Mayor Janice Allen said the commission has informed her that the district won’t be allowed to continue using those rooms.
“It’s just another reason why passing this referendum is so important,” she said.
Under the newest proposal:
*East and West End schools would be changed from K-5 to K-4. The shift would create space for art, music and community activities. Three new full-day kindergarten classes would be added at each school .
*A 65,000 square-foot addition at Somerset School would house all of the district’s fifth-and sixth-grade classes and add 22 classrooms.
*Four classrooms and two science labs would be added at the high school .
Taxpayers can register their vote at East End School on Oneida Avenue, West End School on Green Brook Road, Stony Brook School or St. Peter’s Church, which are both on Grove Street.
Wesley Yang contributed to this report.
emorylayne // August 31, 2008 at 8:32 am |
Mr. Messinger, you’re right. Properly stated, the stats I referenced should have read “1,198 incidents of violent crime per 100,000 residents for Plainfield,” and “213 per 100,000 for North Plainfield.” But there’s something going on here that’s troubling, and saying “let’s stop at the typo” is a little too convenient.
Recently, you wrote that you “did not intend to enter into a discussion on typos,” and prior to that, wrote that I had not checked my facts, stating “This in no way is intended to start a dispute, I just want to make sure the readers have all the facts.” About those facts …
Your very first comment in this discussion referenced my typo, and it was an absolutely correct thing to point out … except I think you sidestepped the intent of the information by pointing out a goof. So just what ‘facts’ should all the residents and taxpayers be aware of? And why do you keep saying you don’t want to get into a discussion about it, yet keep pointing out things you don’t agree with, which is pretty much a way of ‘getting into the discussion?’
My point was to show — very simply — that the basis for determining police salaries is apparently not related to the risk factors involved. Even the numbers produced by the editor show a rate 6 times higher in Plainfield than North Plainfield.
Yet while I’m told that the concern here is that readers get “all the facts,” all it appears we’re getting is a selective interpretation.
Did I misread the statement, or did you draw and state a conclusion that the ‘lower’ violent crime rate in North Plainfield is because of the excellent protection provided by the North Plainfield police … contrasted against Plainfield’s? I certainly got that impression when you said “And I thank you for demonstrating just how effective our police are. Our town has more than two miles of common border with the City of Plainfield, a major east/west highway running through it and, still, the compared crime rates are extremely disproportionate.”
Am I allowed to draw the conclusion from these facts you present that you believe Plainfield’s police aren’t doing as good a job as North Plainfield’s and, thus, don’t deserve a pay scale like ours? I doubt you’d want that stated. And I don’t think the police in Plainfield would agree with you. Yet I can’t think of another interpretation of your statement. And if I ask you for clarification, it’s likely you’ll say it’s too lengthy or you don’t want to get into that conversation.
So I’m right back where I started from.
Gosh darn it, in my whole long life I’ve never had the opportunity to even imply that I deserve some level of compensation; there were always a series of performance benchmarks that applied to anyone and everyone. But in your own words, “Just rest assured that, if you want to maintain such a highly professional police force and attract the most qualified officers, maintaining a competitive salary schedule is second to none in importance.”
I’m left drawing the obvious conclusions again. Plainfield’s force is 20% less effective, 20% less professional, 20% less qualified? Or are my facts wrong about those pay scales as well?
I’m really, really interested in the facts related to how pay scales in police, fire and, for that matter, any union position paid by taxpayers are arrived at and structured. I don’t see a connection between the school budget situation (about which I’ve stated my belief all along that we were pretty much given the ‘choice’ of voting yes or voting yes) and the police and or fire and/or public works situations. Does the same person negotiate all these contracts? If he or she does, please, someone tell me what is factored into the equation before anyone is even hired?
In a peculiar way, you’ve brought me right back to the beginning.
I, like everyone else in North Plainfield, certainly want a “highly professional” police force, and fire department, and anyone we foot the bill for.
But I feel like you’re using the exact same argument that was presented concerning the five-vote school budget you referenced. Those of us who questioned the budget were told that “we didn’t care about the kids” if we voted against it, even though we only voted against it because we never had a clear idea of how it was reached in the first place.
Now, I’m getting that the current police etc. pay scales are necessary to maintain a highly professional police force, but no one will tell us how they’re arrived at. And if I state that I feel that it’s the same approach under a different heading, what, am I an anarchist who doesn’t support the police?
Hardly. I’m a taxpayer who simply wants to know why, over the years, someone earns a great deal more working at a job in North Plainfield than in a neighboring town, even though both employees put their lives on the line at times. And so far, the ‘best’ explanation I’m offered is “look at these other towns that pay like North Plainfield.”
I’m really sorry to offend anyone with hair-trigger sensitivities, but that still sounds like “Other people do it too,” which is exactly the topic that “Shovel, please” originally broached.
Don’t we, as taxpayers, deserve more than generalities?
KW // August 31, 2008 at 1:55 pm |
I was mulling over these two perspectives last night, and they’re both kind of circular, highlighting the difficulties identifying cause and effect relationships in statistical correlations.
On the one hand, Mr. Messinger suggests that the lower crime rates in North Plainfield (as compared to Plainfield) are caused by the presence and labor of higher-paid police officers.
On the other hand, Emory Layne seems to be probing the question of whether the lower crime rates indicate lower risks for the police officers, which would justify lower pay, if risk level is correlated with pay scale.
The underlying issue, of course, is the dollar one. Mr. Messinger, on behalf of himself and all the other cops, doesn’t want to see his payscale drop. Mr. Layne, on behalf of himself and all the other working-joe taxpayers, doesn’t want his family budget to be broken to pay taxes to pay the extra- high salaries of the police officers, (firefighters, schoolteachers, etc.) to maintain the budgets of those workers’ families.
If Mr. Layne and all the other residents were making $80,000 and up plus health care and pension benefits (unionized or not), then they might not begrudge the unionized public workers their fairly-adequate living wages and benefits.
But private sector wages are not doing so hot and benefits are pathetic – there’s no shortage of information (presented from the political right and left) about the collapse of the middle class and the simultaneous leap in the value of the fortunes claimed by the wealthiest.
Unions, while trying to get reorganized in the last few years, still represent a very small proportion of private sector workers.
In my view, what Mr. Messinger and Mr. Layne are conducting is a verbal skirmish in a class war, except that both are in the middle class, and they’re fighting over a few thousand dollars Emory would like to keep those dollars in his savings account, and Mark would like to get it in his paycheck. Both reasonable desires.
Meanwhile, the Fortune 500 families, headed by the CEOs (of all political stripes) who think stripping worker benefits, laying workers off, and outsourcing to low-wage countries are the best way to boost profit margins, look on in relief, and say to each other, “Thank GOD they’re not getting together to come find out why WE have all the money and get it back from us!”
In my opinion, that class war is already on, and much more worth fighting for the working class. The wealthiest are already subverting the democratic process to continue enriching themselves at taxpayer expense, and unless regular folks fight back, they’ll never slow down or stop that upward income-redistribution.
Seems to me it’s in both the public and the private sector workers best interests to spend some time making their own communities better with greater local government openness, accountability and responsiveness, and also spend some time collaborating and strategizing next steps to confront the external threat of those who advocate and implement public policies that promote wealth concentration at the expense of working people.
Happy Labor Day!
FD // October 11, 2009 at 7:33 pm |
I agree with Mr. Messinger to an extent. I feel that there is room for cutbacks on the police department but they are not from his cadre in Patrol Division. To pay for a police captain to make well over 140 K a yr and to have a fully paid for take home car which he drives approximately 200 mi a day is nonsensical and unpractical, especially when that captain got his job through political channels. On top of that North Plainfield, also maintains the position of records lieutenant which NO OTHER SOMERSET COUNTY COMMUNITY DOES