This is the title of the new mailing from the Teaneck PBA. I was looking at the list of the past contributions on the letter they sent, and it didn't mention that the Teaneck PBA contributed thousands of dollars $$ in a failed attempt to take over the Council. I am not suggesting that they used the same money that they collect from their annual drive, but it would be nice to know where that money came from and why were they so interested in gaining control of The governing body that makes legislation and controls salaries and wages for the police. At a time when we question the loyalty of our elected officials that work for the County or State-ie: Parker, Kates & now Rudolph. One only has to ask, what are the payback requirements if you are beholden to the employees and Teaneck unions. Parker should have to sit out on the salaries and police portion of this years budget.
I wish the PBA well on its drive, but after their disgusting, unprecedented interference with last years Council election, for this fund drive, my check will NOT be in the mail.
14 comments:
TeaneckTalk, you're a bigger man(or woman) than I am! Although, I wish the PBA safety, I will NOT be contributing to their annual fundraising drive. I was apalled by their involvement in the Town Council elections last year. Only I get to decide which causes my hard earned money supports. This year, my PBA contribution will be added to my annual TVAC donation. I strongly urge readers to do the same.
Great suggestion -- may I add that blog readers and their friends and neighbors also consider redirecting their contributions to the Teaneck Community Scholarship Fund, which benefits all graduating Teaneck high school seniors in both private and publi schools...
I also will be sending my dollars elsewhere. Lets hope they learn from there mistake.It was wrong, they were wrong and like others they were wrong before.This year when they see the lack of funds coming there way they will see loud and clear how the public feels .no$$$$$$$$this year for the PBA sorry guys
l
The PBA contribution to the Teaneck New Beginnings campaign was noteworthy because it was by far the largest individual campaign contribution in Teaneck’s election history. Though it was unusual for Teaneck, unions have had a long history of supporting political candidates. Not surprisingly the union contributions often counterbalance the contribution made by businesses. It is not surprising that some Republican campaign finance reform proposals at the national level have suggested limits on union contributions, but not on corporations.
In Teaneck, we have seen this on a smaller scale with TNB’s being supported openly by union members. While the Gonzalez, Rudolph, and Gussen campaign were being supported secretly by the Bergen County Democratic Party's pay-for-play contributors.
While those who have written in this thread decry the $3,000 from the PBA, it pales before the money secretly provided to finance the Gonzalez, Rudolph, and Gussen campaign. After the May election the Gonzalez campaign submitted its pre-election report showing $8,200 it received from the Latin American Democratic Association of Bergen County. In June it followed with it’s post-election report showing another $6,600 from other Democratic party sources. In October, it reported that (as of June 1st) it had received another $8,239 from the Bergen County Young Democrats. With all that money the Gonzalez campaign still owes more than $13,000 to a printing company associated with the Bergen Democratic Party.
Balance that against a straightforward open contribution of $3000 from the PBA. You might also want to balance it against the $7,000 of their own that Schwartz and Crowley spent in the hope of serving Teaneck.
Consider also that moneys donated to the PBA charity funds are not commingled with the union dues from which political contributions may be made. That being said, you may go ahead with your plans to punish the children that the PBA programs help. Feel free to donate it instead to the Teaneck Community Scholarship Fund, the Teaneck Volunteer Ambulance Corps or anyplace else that meets your high moral standards.
Consider also that moneys donated to the PBA charity funds are not commingled with the union dues from which political contributions may be made.
Baloney.
Don't give your money to TVAC- they are more corrupt than the PBA
tvac- corrupt??- i have been a member for numerous years yet never a civic or line officer- the one thing i can say about them- they are the last thing from corrupt- nothing is free or given away- no perks- no uniforms- no benefits- no clothing allowance (area fd's do)we are happy we get free toilet paper- OH! one thing- we pay for drinks food etc through the vending machine- but on the yearly election meeting i think cans may be free- so say 60 are given out that night at .40 each- $24 dollars- CALL AN INVESTIGATION (into this non profit volunteer organization)
get a life
TVAC is not corrupt. I always contribute in appreciation for their quick, curtious and professional help they have given to friends and family thru the years.
It might be easier to believe that the PBA didn't misuse it's charity fund if we knew where the money came from. How big were the donations made by the TNB organizational team to the PBA? A previous post commented "You may go ahead with your plans to punish the children that the PBA programs help." The PBA already did that by using $$$ towards a (FAILED)political campaign, rather then for deserving children.
Ms. Parker must remove herself from all budget discussions regarding the Police. That includes salaries, benefits, headquarters renovations, etc.
To be fair, Mrs. Parker should not participate in any budget talks. Its not enough to remove her from budget discussions about the Police only. It is possible to argue that she could be in favor of larger budget cuts to the DPW or Fire Dept. to minimize cuts to the Police Dept. I'm not saying that Mrs. Parker would show favoritism to the Police Dept. but how can we know that she won't.
The notion that councilmember Parker should not participate in the budget talks because a Teaneck Polise union donated to her campaign is a bit on the silly side. (For the record TNB's also received $500 from the Professional Fire Officers of Teaneck.)
Mr. Katz received $300 from Ken's Auto Repair. Should ths bar him from all discussion and votes related to the Master plan and zoning as the Master Plan seeks to bar gas stations. He also received $500 from Alfred Sanzari Enterprises. Should he recuse himself from all matters related to the Glen Pointe and New Bridge Inn areas or by extension to all matters of development.
Would the logic apply to Mr. Feit as well? Should his connections to TVAC preclude him from voting on TVAC budget matters and by extension to other matters that relate to the budget and might leave more money TVAC?
Lets not overlook Adam Gussen. Could he possibly be allowed to vote on budget items. As a dog owner, he should clearly be barred from voting on the creation of a dog run. If he discusses and votes on other budget items, might he not be trying to leave money for his pet project!
On the practical side consider that an abstention is essentially a no vote. If a councilmember were to be excluded it would still requite 4 other votes to pass a budget. If this kind of restriction were imposed, it would be virtually impossible for the council to act on any item.
"Consider also that moneys donated to the PBA charity funds are not commingled with the union dues from which political contributions may be made."..
riiiight! half truths are one thing.. blatent lies.. are another.
When the PBA calls they (generally) use a presumtuous tone of voice,
As if giving them money is your duty, not your choice.
the phone calls are not teaneck pba, they send mailings out. the phone calls are fake.
Post a Comment