I have been debating over whether or not I should voice my opinion about the controversy over the SRO Officer at the High School but I feel compelled to after witnessing the meeting that was on Thursday May 14, 2009. I had the opportunity to attend the Township Committee Meeting. The Committee was going over the budget and the SRO officer at the High School.
When a young lawyer from town who is very aware of how a budget works, and other the members of the public started to try to explain the importance of having the SRO Officer by; I was taken aback by some of the committee member's reaction. You could see that some of them were uncomfortable and did not understand what he was explaining. To me and many others it appeared that they were trying to dodge a bullet.
As most of you know there is a big concern over the removal of the SRO Officer at the High School. When it became obvious that they did not understand what the member of the public was tying to explain, in very plain English, a former Township Committee person, got up attempting to come to the rescue, and said that the Township Committee was doing a great job. You could tell this was just a ploy to try and break the previous conversation and the full embarrassment that they were feeling.
I am really amazed that certain Committee Members either don't know or don't understand the town budget. Especially when one of them in his election bid, said he knew everything about the budget.
With regard to the picture of the Mayor with a "new" possible tenant in the Daily Record the other week, it should of actually been a picture of the Mayor with every possible "new" ratable that he squashed. If they had been ok'd, the squashed rateables would of helped all of us in Hanover Township and we wouldn't be having tax increases.
To SAVE our town please vote for John Ferramosca on June 2nd so we can put our town back into the hands of competent Committee Members who are there to HELP Hanover Township and not HURT us!!!!!!!
The police department certainly will retain the School Resource Officer. It is not a budget item. Just as it is not a budget item to have the police department do any job in town. Mr. Olsen, did you mean that the police department should be expanded by a 33rd police officer so that it can continue to do a job it is already performing? Hey, Hanover can have 40 officers - it's a matter of cost. Why not have. Question for Mr. Olsen: while you were on the HTC, what cost did the Hanover Finance Department give you for the employment of an additional police office over the length of his career? I suggest that Hanover runs the SRO program within the budget of the township. When I go shopping, I see a lot of nice things to buy. But I meet my needs within a budget. I wonder how important the SRO issue will be the day after June 2nd. adayoff (05/23/09 4:23pm) REPLY
So you are saying that the TC being fully committed to the SRO staying in the school is the answer? Making him a stand alone line item and replacing him on the road with a younger less costly patrolman (possibly through a grant) is not needed. At no point will Chief Gallagher be forced to remove him from the school due to increased need for coverage anywhere in HT? We will (someday I hope) have more activity at Whippany Village and numerous other vacant sites that will (someday I hope) be made into viable ratables. There will be no need for added police presence?
Will Chief Gallagher remember that the TC is fully committed to keeping the SRO at WPHS? Will he be able to juggle sufficient road time coverage against costly days off, overtime and vacation costs for senior officers in his present budget while leaving the SRO at WPHS? Maybe with all these skills; we should vote for Chief Gallagher. I heard that Bob Steiger was very vocal in his opposition to the grant and then he stormed out of the room, since he is the mentor of at least 2 of the present TC, I do not see this as a good sign, Bob is a good man but taking a financial option off the table shows a lack of vision in this present economy. Lenny has not embraced the grant either, my nephews go to WPHS, his kids go/went to Madison HS where thier SRO is safe...!!! Gabriel (05/24/09 10:27am) REPLY
To the wimp who has his or her opinion about my Father Mr. Olsen as you like to call him. Why don't you stand behind what you write by signing your name or are you just one of those who likes to huff and puff but, won't sign their name. At least my Father believes in what he states and probably has done more for this town than you do. If you believe so much with what you have written than SIGN YOUR POST!!!!!!!!! If not as far as I am concerned your post means nothing. It's like reading blah blah blah! Grow up and sign your name if you feel so strong about what you write! Trisha L. Olsen (05/25/09 4:41pm) REPLY
Trisha,
If the previous post means nothing to you since the poster did not sign his name, why get so bent out of shape. Deep breath, in and out, in and out.
If all you read is blah, blah, why bother commenting? It is up to us if we want to sign or not, so get used to it!
I have been debating over whether or not I should voice my opinion about the controversy over the SRO Officer at the High School but I feel compelled to after witnessing the meeting that was on Thursday May 14, 2009. I had the opportunity to attend the Township Committee Meeting. The Committee was going over the budget and the SRO officer at the High School.