Over One Million Dollars Paid in NO BID Contracts to Seven Campaign Contributors (Just in the Last Two Years).

* Gary Paparozzi’s $20,000 as “Technical Inspector” is not included above.  That pay would be found on payroll.  The above payout is from the monthly bills for the NO BID contract “Paparozzi Associates” received.

Two quick observations:

During the last five months of 2014, Alan Spiniello was paid $13,333.33 instead of $12,500.  Why? 

If Di Maria is paid $3,750 a month for auditing, how could his payout in 2013 reach $114,039.79?

Hundreds of thousands of dollars can be saved each year just with these NO BID contracts for campaign contributors.

It’s time for Lodi to pass a strict Pay-to-Play Ordinance.  It’s time to use a public bidding process when seeking “professional services.”

You can see the names and contributions below:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/144050028/Follow-the-Money-July-1st-United-Pay-to-Play

Borough Attorney Assigned to Investigate Licata's Municipal Alliance

Here are some questions I asked tonight and the responses I received:

1)     Last month, you appointed a new member to the Planning Board.  Three days later, his name appeared in a Record article.  Can you explain the selection process you used?

Mr. Masopust said they received Mr. Apicella’s resume and people aren’t knocking down the door to be on the Planning Board.

I questioned how they received his resume being Lodi never posted the vacancy or sought resumes anywhere. I also pointed out that Mr. Apicella recently just moved to Lodi.  If Lodi sought resumes, maybe they could have found a better candidate with some expertise to offer the Board.

Mr. Masopust said a member of the Planning Board recommended Mr. Apicella.  Mr. Masopust would not provide the name of that member.

Mr. Masopust said Mr. Apicella appeared in the Record article as a Tax Collector and not a Zoning member.

I pointed out that he appeared in the article as a Zoning Board member of Palisades Park.  All the members of the Palisades Park Zoning Board were subpoenaed to go before a federal grand jury and also hand over records.

2)     Last month, Mrs. Licata voted “Yes” on her son’s new contract in which her son signed his name as the “shop steward”.  Why is she voting yes?

Mr. Spiniello said the collective bargaining agreement included other people and not just her son so what she did is alright.

I responded:  with all due respect, it’s an ethics violation to vote YES on your own son’s contract when your son is listed as the shop steward.

3)     Did Mr. Luna’s petty cash fund ever receive State approval?

Frank DiMaria said it didn’t need State approval as long as the Resolution is on file in the borough hall.

http://www.state.nj.us/dca/divisions/dlgs/resources/fiscal_docs/sample_resolutions/petty_cash_approval_procs.pdf

I pointed out that all the other towns that created petty cash funds in recent years are listed on the State website for receiving approval.

4)  Can you please explain the municipal alliance resolution on tonight’s agenda?  Are Lodi tax dollars used for the match because this administration has stated for years that no Lodi tax dollars are used?

DiMaria said tax dollars are used for the match but all the money doesn’t have to be used each year.

How can you go another year spending drug alliance money when you won’t produce any financial reports, you don’t keep minutes, and you don’t even know who is on the committee?

DiMaria said Judy Forman from the County spoke more favorably of Joe Licata than some other coordinators.

I stated that I have spoken to people in other towns and Judy Forman is not an authority on this matter.  Regulations and money come from the State.

I asked Mr. DiMaria to comment on the State requiring public notices, minutes, etc.

Mr. DiMaria could not.

I asked the council to comment on this matter.

Mr. Masopust said after becoming “Mayor”, he assigned Mr. Spiniello to investigate the Drug Alliance and have a report for the next work session.

I have been questioning this for years.  Shouldn’t he have a report by now?

Mr. Masopust said he will have a report at the next work session.

I thanked him for looking into the matter because it is more than I got in the past.

"Superintendent Pay Cap": Letter in Today's Record

Capping pay of superintendents

Regarding "School districts want to lift salary limits" (Page A-1, Feb. 9):

The superintendent's pay cap did not go far enough because it's not a real cap. Nowhere in the article was there mention of "merit bonuses." Superintendents can receive up to 15 percent more than the maximum pay through a merit-pay bonus.

In 2011, Lodi's superintendent was being paid $198,690. The cap set his maximum salary at $167,000. Every year since the cap went into effect, he has gotten the bonus. Lodi never saw a real savings. And many would argue that $167,000 is too much for the job being done.

The merit criteria being used by Lodi are absurd. From what I can tell, they are not tied to academic performance. They are not tied to college preparedness, SAT scores or other standardized testing. Some of the criteria that have been used for the annual merit bonus of about $25,000 include more "walkthroughs" of the schools and purchasing more smart boards.

The Record reported that New Jersey property taxes increased by a little more than 2 percent last year. That is understandable, because the reforms that Governor Christie touted in 2010 have too many exceptions and too many loopholes and are not enforced properly. The superintendent pay cap is just one example.

I encourage residents of Bergen County to look into the merit bonuses being approved by school boards and the county superintendent. They will be surprised.

Ryan Curioni

Lodi, Feb. 9

Link to Record: 

http://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/the-record-letters-wednesday-feb-11-1.1268793?page=all