Thursday, October 18, 2007

Council and Patrolman's Union come to agreement!

A very light meeting on the 16th. where we had 1 item on the agenda. The agreement between the patrolman's union and the town. I would first like to say thanks to both sides for working diligently to keep the talks going. It's one thing to "draw a line in the sand" and another to carefully listen to each other's positions and to come to an agreement.

The patrolman will get an increase of 2.5%

They will have to pay in contributions for their heath care from 12% to 14%

These are the major components to the agreement.

The rest of the meeting? Click on the council link on the top right to get a viewing of the meeting.

12 comments:

notnavi said...

I find a little disturbing that the members of the evil axis, Coyle, Fairbanks, & Carney, berate the Town Admin for holding an elective office while serving as the Town Admin. As Town Council members THEY should know the charter and should have been aware of the situation that was discussed during the hiring process. So when they act so surprised they were either mugging for the cameras, or did not do their due diligence during the hiring process. Either way they were not doing their jobs they were elected to do.
As for setting presidence by allowing a Town Admin hold a public office, I believe Earl Rikker was the Town Admin while at the same time holding the office of Executive Councilor.

I agree that since the situation is not allowed by the charter the situation should be corrected and it was. The issue is that this situation was or should have been known during the hiring process and when evil axis tries to play dumb it is disingenuous at the very least.

Anonymous said...

Notnavi, I find it A LOT disturbing that you shamelessly resort to none truths and name calling in your embarrassingly lame attempt to support your vapid argument.
Notnavi, all you have accomplished through the foolishness contained in your post where you berate three of our towns most competent town councilors is to insult the collective intelligence of the majority of Derry's citizens and leave them hoping you don't happen to live in their neighborhood.

Mr. Stenhouse should have brought this circumstance to the fore if not during the interview process then certianly once he read the charter. You attempt to attach this dodge by Stenhouse on Coyle, Carney and Fairbanks?...lol!...have you no self respect?...LOL !! at you and others like you.

notnavi said...

Anonymous,
It's obvious that you did not understnad my comments. I'll try again to explain, I'll even type slower for you...
If you had paid attention to the meeting, Mr Stenhouse stated he did bring the situation up during the hiring process, none of the councilors disclaimed this statement, though Mr Carney stated he didn't remember this, though I would not call this an objection. So if you take it as fact that this was brought up during the process, ALL the councilors should have known that this was a violation of the charter and addressed it then, not when a member of the public brings it up.
My objection to the three councilors I mention is that they were the very vocal and implied they did not know of the situation, when clearly they did or should have and smacks of political grandstanding. If your going to burate someone for not knowing the charter before they were hired, you had better know it better than has been shown.
I await the explaination from the Council as a whole to why this situation was allowed when they all did know or should have known.

Anonymous said...

B.C
i know this is not on topic
any idea how many or which restaurants are online, with menus?
if they are out there reading it would be helpful for people like me i find it much easier to peruse a menus online and decide if i will order out/in.
Idea link it up to this blog i am sure this will generate more traffic for them!!! just a thought, something positive to bring to the town!!!!

BC said...

anon 1:12,
Yes I think thats a great idea. i will work on it.

Anonymous said...

NOTNAVI,

I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, BUT SADLY WE WILL NEVER HEAR AN EXPLANATION FROM THE COUNCILORS - THEY ARE ALREADY MOVING ON TO THERE NEXT TOWN-HUMILIATING GRAB FOR A HEADLINE. NOR WILL WE EVER HEAR ABOUT THE SPECIFIC 91A REQUEST THAT MR. BURTIS IS PULLING FOR MR. COYLE; THERE HAVE BEEN DOZENS OF OTHER 91A'S REQUESTED BY COYLE VIA BURTIS - WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE, WHY SHOULD THIS BE DIFFERENT?

IT'S A SHAME WE DON'T YET HAVE A PRESS THAT WILL ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS. THE LOCAL PAPERS COULD, OF COURSE, PUT IN A 91A REQUEST FOR ALL OF THE 91A REQUESTS FOR, PERHAPS THE 1-1/2 YEARS. SIDEBAR: IT APPEARS THAT COYLE AND FAIRBANKS HAVE WORN OUT THE DERRY NEWS AND THE NUTFIELD NEWS; THE FORMER ONLY RECENTLY COMING TO GRIPS WITH SOME FORM OF OBJECTIVITY. SO COYLE HAS MOVED ON TO THE UNION LEADER, A MOVE IN POLITICAL DESPERATION. THE DERRY NEWS, THOUGH, IS STILL CURRENTLY BEING LED AROUND BY MR. CARNEY.

FOR EXAMPLE, CARNEY HAS GRABBED TWO HEADLINES RECENTLY - ONE THAT SAYS WE ARE NOT MOVING FAST ENOUGH ON E-D, WE SHOULD HAVE HIRED SOMEONE BY NOW, HE SAYS. YET IN THIS WEEKS STORY MR. CARNEY SAYS THAT WE ARE HEADED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION; THE SEARCH SHOULD BE LARGER IN SCOPE. SPEED UP BUT DO IT MY WAY!? RE: SHOWBOATING IN THE PRESS I SUBMIT THIS QUOTE:

It doesn’t help our community, it doesn’t help the political discourse, and it certainly doesn’t help to attract new businesses to our town.-BRENT CARNEY

BUT AHHHHH YES, ELECTION SEASON IS APPROACHING AND MR CARNEY HAS HIS COVETED POLITICAL FUTURE ON THE LINE.

GETTING BACK TO YOUR VERY SAD AND VALID QUESTION THOUGH: ARE THOSE COUNCILORS INCOMPETENT OR ARE THEY DISHONEST?

Anonymous said...

anon 1:30 let's see if i have this correct. according to your astute assessment of derry world:

coyle leads burtis, carney leads the derry news and fairbanks leads the nutfield news. therefore, if coyle leads fairbanks, and fairbanks leads carney and carney leads his political future then it must logically follow that coyle, burtis, carney, fairbanks, the derry news, the nutfield news and carney's political future are all leaders?......but wait a minute... i am bit confused, you said coyle has moved on out of desperation to lead the union leader? so does that make coyle the leader of the union leader? i can't follow your lead on this one....by the way did you see the sox last night...who on first?

Anonymous said...

notnavi and anon 1:30, what does the name earl rinker and the word sidebar have in common?...seems they were referred to today in some correspondence an acquaintence forwarded along that was sent this very day...coincidence?...i think not....it almost knocked me off my CHAIR.

Anonymous said...

I'm still waiting to hear why Fairbanks voted against the Patrolman's contract.

Is this payback for when she accused the police of treating her son unfairly?

BC said...

D3,
I'm going out on a limb here. I think Janet voted "no" because she felt the public did not have a chance to speak on the issue. It was not a public hearing and only was on the agenda for a council vote.

Anonymous said...

bc: I think you're safe on that limb.

Anonymous said...

I think that would be a poor reason for her to vote "no" on the contract. The process is what it is. She should learn the process, not sound so surprised that there is no public hearing, and vote accordingly. She should also explain her vote, so the people that live in her district can hear why she voted that way.