web analytics

JerseySmarts.com

Right Lane Speedsters

Posted on by

Just thought I’d add a comment that passed through my head this morning as I was driving to work. Do you ever find yourself in the left lane (the fast lane) and you’re moving along at a regular pace until you come to a car that is going about ten miles below the limit?

Happens all of the time in New Jersey (especially on I-195). Well, I understand that some people don’t drive as fast as others, but what always confuses me is that sometimes you get the person in front of you to switch into the slower, right lane and then they speed up! I generally coast along with my cruise control so I know that I don’t slow down – what gives?

When you are essentially bumped out of the fast lane and forced to switch into the slow lane, why the hell would you speed up in the slow lane?! Geez, if you had been going that fast to begin with you wouldn’t have been bumped into the slower lane!

New Jersey. 🙂

Excessive Force = Excessive Payout

Posted on by

Anyone who lives in New Jersey knows that there are two kinds of police officers. The first (and more prevalent) type of officer is the man or woman who is out to do some good for his or her community. These are the folks who always wanted to be police officers and who always wanted to serve the greater good. The second (and more talked about) type of officer is the complete asshole. You know this guy – this is the one who pulled you over and got in your face just because he felt like it. This is the police officer who broke up your college party, but also punched three people in the face while doing so. This is the guy who stops you on the boardwalk and slams you down on the ground because there’s nothing you can do about. This is the prick with the snide comments while he’s writing you a ticket or standing outside of your car.

And this is the type of police officer that just cost Seaside Park $1,271,000. Wait – you think that’s bad? Here’s a clip from the linked article:

The borough’s insurance carrier, the Ocean County Joint Insurance Fund, has previously settled five excessive force claims for more than $1.5 million over the past 2 1/2 years. A total of 14 excessive force lawsuits were filed against the police department over the past three years.

Overly aggressive police officers have cost Seaside Park $2.8 million. I don’t know about you, but if I was the Mayor or the Chief of Police, I’d be going ape shit at my officers. In fact, I’d be on a firing spree. I don’t think you’ll find that in Seaside Park, though. If you read the article, it goes on to say:

The settlements have included no admission of wrongdoing by Seaside Park or its police department. The officers involved, and their attorneys, have strongly denied using excessive force in any of the cases. No officer has ever been disciplined for any action related to the cases.

So not only have these police officers cost Seaside Park almost $3 million in insurance expenses, but they’re not admitting that they’re wrong. Of course they are admitting wrongdoing via the huge payouts, but there is no official, “Hey, we’re sorry. Our bad.”

What a sad commentary on some of the people who get into law enforcement, huh? And the worst part is that not only are these the type of police officers getting headlines, but they are the only ones getting headlines, period. If the egomaniacs and those with Napoleon complexes would just get out of law enforcement, we wouldn’t have to deal with such aggravating stories.

But that’s New Jersey for you…

New Jersey Screws Up Again: COAH

Posted on by

Just when you think that New Jersey can’t become a bigger disaster than it already is…surprise! The state has come in and screwed up once again. Only this time, not only does their mistake hit critically close to home, it actually contradicts previous decisions by state agencies and (most importantly) promises to destroy the open area that so many of us fight so hard to preserve.

Some of you may be familiar with the acronym COAH. In New Jersey, this means Council on Affordable Housing. This state is in so many crunches at once that it’s hard to keep a handle on all of the problems that are going on, but we are in serious need of affordable housing. For those of you that aren’t up to speed on what “affordable housing” means in New Jersey – this isn’t government housing, it’s not “the projects,” it’s not the place where the drug addicts live, etc. In New Jersey, a new term has come to take the place of affordable housing: workforce housing.

Believe it or not America, New Jersey’s workers cannot afford to live in this state. Nurses, young doctors, police officers, government employees, cashiers, retail managers, salesmen, waiters – no one can afford to buy a new home in New Jersey unless they come from a two income household that is making at least or above our state’s median income (roughly $67,000 depending on whose numbers you believe). New Jersey is not affordable for ANYONE.

The latest smack in the face comes as a one-two punch from Governor Money Bags and COAH and is directed at most non-urban areas in the state. Just last week Governor Money Bags told many of the smaller municipalities that they were having their state aid drastically reduced. As if that wasn’t bad enough, COAH has announced what they call “Round Three” requirements for New Jersey’s municipalities. Round Three will tell the state’s towns, boroughs, and cities how many units of affordable housing they need to produce.

Aside from Money Bags diverting even MORE money away from the suburbs, it would seem that being told what your affordable housing obligations are isn’t the worst thing in the world, right?

Wrong.

In Round Three many suburbs are facing an obligation that is QUADRUPLE what they were previously held accountable for. Take the case in my hometown of Roxbury Township. Not only does their COAH obligation jump from some 245 units to 837 units, but Roxbury was told by ANOTHER state agency that they can no longer build in the green areas of the township! What does COAH want to have happen here? Would they like it if the existing housing – which has stood for decades, even centuries – was knocked down so higher density homes can be put in their place? Completely outrageous!

Taken from the Roxbury Register article:

Councilman Richard Zoschak said this latest COAH proposal just causes more confusion and presents more contradictions.

“How do we deal with the Highlands legislation and this? The Highlands legislation says no building here. COAH says we have to build here,” Zoschak said.

Sustainable growth in New Jersey? Not a chance. Continued destruction of the non-urban areas so more money can be pumped into Newark and Camden? Absolutely! More from the article…

Smith faulted the state for having what he called “no coherence, no coordination and no central planning mechanism.”

“We are all being told what to do by different parties, all with power, and they all conflict with one another,” he said.

For those of you who do not live in New Jersey, let me explain how this state’s government “works.” COAH says that Township A needs to create 50 units of affordable housing. The Highlands Council says that Township A only has enough space to put up 5 single family homes. The State Planning Commission approves Township A’s master plan that cites no buildings may be built over 3 stories high. The Governor’s Office tells Township A to meet its COAH obligation or it gets no more state money.

What is the Township to do? They only have room for 5 more single family homes, but – assuming that these open lots are all next to each other (which is near impossible) – are they to build an extremely high density 3-story apartment building (in an area likely not zoned for apartment buildings) with extremely small, 600 square foot (if that) rental units so they meet all of the above obligations? Oh, and this would be built in a generic neighborhood setting where there are no apartment buildings and only single family homes. Oh, and for each apartment you need to provide one and a half parking spaces (in a residential neighborhood, mind you). Oh, and these are affordable units, which means they have to be income restricted and not just any citizen can apply to rent a unit. Oh, and with such a high density unit police, fire, sanitation, and civil services need to be increased (spending more taxpayer money). Oh, and Township A may need to create a housing authority (spend more taxpayer money) to oversee this complex.

Listen. I’m one of the many people in this state who NEED workforce housing to exist. I cannot afford to buy a decent home in New Jersey and – right now – I can only afford to pay a very low monthly rent. But if the plan above is Governor Money Bags’ idea of how to plan for MY future housing needs, then he can take this plan and shove it.

When will it stop in New Jersey?

Biggest Losers: Maggie & Brittany

Posted on by

Ugh – I hate to put up a post that is a reaction to a television show, but after watching tonight’s The Biggest Loser I had to put something up. Maggie and Brittany are a bunch of crybabies and complainers. These stupid asses don’t realize that this show is a golden opportunity. You do NOT go on this show, break your ass for a week in the gym, and then lose no weight like Maggie did tonight. It just doesn’t happen – the laws of nature don’t function that way. At one time I lost well over 100 pounds (before I consciously put it all back on because I got very lazy). I know the disappointment of not losing weight after a week of breaking your butt. But I also know that the reason why that happens is largely because you get horrible sleep during the week and you pig out when people aren’t looking.

These two fools aren’t getting away with anything – the entire world is watching and we know what the deal is!

Unfortunately, NBC is milking this show for everything that it’s worth so we didn’t get the opportunity to see who was last night’s biggest loser, but do we really need to know? Both Maggie and Brittany are the biggest losers on all of television right now. I don’t know who put the idea in Brittany’s head that a woman’s metabolism cannot, fundamentally, work as well as a man’s metabolism, but a slim, tone Ali threw that mindset into the can by winning the whole thing.

Week in and week out I watch this show and I wonder how much more overly dramatic these two dummies could possibly get, but then I remember that there needs to be some type of drama in this show or else some of the viewers will refuse to watch. For my part, I can’t wait for both of these complaining losers to get off the show.

And in case you’re wondering (probably not) – I’m hoping that either Roger, Kelly, or Dan wins this season.

Office Nonsense: What a Waste of Energy

Posted on by

We all knew it had to happen at some point…well, here we go! My first office aggravation entry! Whoo hoo! Exciting! So, without any further adieu, I present my first awkward situation and the first time that I’ve put myself out there as someone NOT to be wrecklessly and witlessly tread upon in my office.

For the last year and a half, I’ve worked for a SMALL financial institution (less than 15 people). We take in money, send out money, invest money, etc. My role in this company is as a Loan Officer. Folks come to me and ask for loans, I underwrite their request, and hopefully we sign a deal so they can receive financing and my company can earn a few bucks.

Once a loan is signed, there is a specific process for the borrower to access money from the company. They submit a request, I put together a few forms, and the forms get sent around for various signatures so the money is approved to go to the borrower. This usually works like clockwork, but my latest set of forms to go around the office didn’t quite work right…

The first person who gets the forms held on to them for a WEEK before passing them to the second person. The second person signed them quickly and passed them down to the Secretary. The Secretary did her part and put them on the financial officer’s desk…where they sat for two days, untouched. In other words, a process that normally takes 2 – 3 days wound up taking 10 days. The borrower started to get angry and I looked like the fool since – to the borrower – I am the public face of the organization.

It gets better.

We tried to send the check overnight and that didn’t work (which is odd – I mean we paid for the overnight service and didn’t get it). So as the public face of the organization to this borrower, I started getting some harsh e-mails and nasty responses on the phone. Nothing I could do – the check was literally in the mail and the process to get it there was out of my hands starting on day one.

After a particularly nasty e-mail/phone call combination, I sent an internal e-mail to the folks involved in getting the check out of our office and in the borrower’s hands. I couched the e-mail as an exasperated plea for help. I wanted to know what I could do to make my particular part of this process better (I figured let me take the “I must be wrong here” route since I knew that in such small organizations, no one ever raises their hand and says, “My fault. Sorry.”). In addition, I reported that our company had lost a measure of our standing with the borrower and I, too, had lost some measure (which is the truth).

The response that I received from this e-mail was way out of left field. I sent out a plea for help to do my job better and the Secretary responded to everyone with a few paragraphs of how this problem was not her fault (which was in bold and italicized). My first reaction was, “Huh? No one is blaming anyone here!”

Included in her response was a criticism of my time at the organization (apparently if you’re not a “lifer” in this place, then you are not allowed to ask how this check-sending system can be better managed). But what was most insulting to me in the Secretary’s e-mail was the final line where she completely rejected my statement that both the company and I had lost a measure of standing with the borrower. How the hell would the Secretary know anything about my borrower other than their name and address? The Secretary wouldn’t know – she made a statement that belittled the year and a half I’ve put into building my relationship with this borrower.

What type of response is this to a plea for help?

I had to take action so I responded to everyone saying simply that the Secretary should not take offense because no one was point a finger at her. I went on to talk about many of my recent dealings with this client and how they were obviously not happy with the product that we were giving them when they can get better deals from our competitors.

And the Secretary’s next response? She didn’t want to talk about this over the e-mail, but in person. So now this dope is getting offended that I dared to respond to her? What the hell is that about? How insecure must a person be in their job to be offended when someone else asks for assistance? In an office with less than 15 people, this type of psychotic, neurotic behavior becomes a glaring issue. Oh, and I won’t go into how pretty much everyone in the office has been telling me to deal gently with the Secretary because she doesn’t do her job well or how they’ve told me that I need to follow-up with her over and over and over again to be sure a task is complete. I don’t have time for that type of inefficiency. We have a process to get money on the street – either it works or it doesn’t.

What is completely mind-boggling to me is that the Secretary was absolutely not wrong in her role in the process! She performed her role as she was supposed to – no problems at all. Yet she gets offended when I ask how I can make my part of the process better?

To add icing to the cake – in a small office, people gossip too much. The week after this happened, I had a few road visits that kept me out of the office for a few days. In this time, the Secretary was sure to gossip with some of the other staff about how I was a rude asshole. I ask for help, she gets offended and defends herself, I tell her no one is blaming her, and I’m an asshole for it. Sounds logical, right?

When I did get back to the office, I had to call her from office to answer a question. She didn’t answer her phone. So I went to her office and asked her and a co-worker some questions and I got the cold shoulder from her and a stare that could have pierced a diamond. What a dopey, stupid response…

There is a lesson learned on my behalf, though. From this point forward, I cannot deal with the insecure people in my office (of which the Secretary may be the only one). They need to be left off of my e-mails and they need to be excluded from my pleas for assistance. I hope that the organization learns something from this, too. I hope that they learn that in a small office setting where resources are scarce, we do not have the ability to keep people on board who are constantly trying to defend the necessity of their presence. In other words, where there’s smoke there’s fire and the Secretary’s vehement defense of her role in the process (when it was never questioned) and her offended response to an ask for help is a blatant and obvious submission of her uselessness in the organization.