Lodi’s
Completed 2013 Best Practices Questionnaire:
Arrogance:
#5: Instead of just answering with a “No”, they
inserted the comment “The borough complies with state statues.” There is no defense or justification for not
having a real pay-to-play ordinance on the books in the year 2013. There is NO state statue banning the practice
of pay-to-play so a local ordinance is necessary. The Lodi politicians should read the State Comptroller’s
report on this subject right after they read the one on government legal fees.
Misguided:
#1: They listed "Lodi Board of Education school
security" as a new shared service. This
clearly is not a shared service. A
shared service would be if the borough and the school were both using retired
armed guards. They would share the service
and the costs. But school security is
strictly school security and related only to the Board of Education. The retired armed
guards provide no security to the borough hall or any borough facilities. They are not Lodi police officers like the
resource officers at the middle school and high school in which they can
provide a service to both our schools and the borough throughout the year.
No Accountability:
#15: Why hasn’t this administration corrected their
noted deficiencies from past audits and why didn’t they list those deficiencies
in their comments?
Lies:
Lies:
#3: Tony Luna isn’t public safety and is still using a town vehicle for personal use. At the October 8th Executive Meeting, this administration stated that they currently do not have any policy prohibiting personal use of borough vehicles.
#4: Alan Spiniello acknowledged during the October 15th
regular council meeting that Lodi does not follow the best practices outlined
in the Appendix of the State Comptroller’s June 25, 2013. He said the borough may consider some
suggestions of the checklist in the future.
#8: No codification was adopted at any October
meetings.
#27: Marc stated at the October 8th
executive meeting that a part-time elected official is still receiving health
benefits from the borough (presumably him).
This administration acknowledged that they DON’T have policy of their OWN
prohibiting this practice.
#38: This is clearly a "No" and not a "Prospective".
Other YES answers are clearly deceptive as
well. At the October 8th executive
meeting, this administration answered YES to things they said they may do in
the future and others in which they casually said, “I believe” that could be a
YES.#38: This is clearly a "No" and not a "Prospective".
Here is a copy of their 2013 completed
questionnaire:
