Go to content Go to navigation Go to search
Associated Online

Friday, September 3, 2010 | Archives

February 1, 2010

First February letter


To the editor;

I would like to talk about decision the Paul White, Leon Wright, Al Ostrowski and Denise Partridge (POWW) have made in the hiring of Mr. Carl McClanahan for the position of Interim Public Safety Director. This is the reason listed for the February 23rd recall vote.

For the record, I believe Mr. McClanahan did a good job for the City of Detroit Police Department rising to rank of Sergeant. His service to Detroit and the job he did is not in question. We are talking about the responsibility of the Board of Trustees to search and find the most qualified candidates to serve this township, not just an exceptional candidate but the most qualified. POWW keep telling the township they are doing things in the best interest of the township. Let us look if they do have the best interest of Township?

The hiring of Mr. McClanahan as the interim Public Safety Director raises many questions. POWW will tell you it was done correctly, but where was the posting asking for applications to the job? Where were the memos to the captains and lieutenants asking them if any of them were interested in the job? Was an independent search done to find a qualified candidate for the job? (Remember Mr. Champagne was hired after an extensive search by an independent company).

Trustee Partridge even stated at the July 7th 2009 meeting that we had persons in our own department that were more qualified than Mr. McClanahan. That means Trustee Partridge stated that she was voting for a person who was not the most qualified person for the job, but yet Partridge, White, Wright and Ostrowski did vote for the appointment.

Trustee Partridge stated that Mr. McClanahan was not the most qualified person for the position, that we had people in our own department who were more qualified. Why did POWW not ask people in our own department who were more qualified for the position to see if they were interested? Why didn’t Trustee Partridge and the rest of POWW hold off the vote? Why did they vote” Yes” for a person when they had more qualified people in the police department already? Why did they not ask or post the job of Interim Public Safety Director to find a more qualified person for the job?

So if you believe POWW “has the best interest of the township residents when they make their decisions”. Then why would POWW vote for a person who was not the best qualified candidate for the position as interim public safety director? If Public Safety is as important to POWW as they state? If the best interest of the township was important to POWW as they state? Then why did POWW not even do a short search to get the most qualified person?

So on Feb. 23 when you are ask to vote, you need to ask did White, Wright, Ostrowski, Partridge when they voted for the appointment of Mr. McClanahan for the job of Interim Public Safety Director, did they vote for the most qualified person for the job? Did we have more qualified candidates even in our own Police Department?

Remember a vote’ YES” mean to recall them, a vote “NO” means to retain them. I believe the Voters will decide what the best interest to Van Buren is.

Allen Babosh
Van Buren Resident.

http://www.journalgroup.com/Belleville/10638

Join the Discussion

Reader comments [10]

Feb 2, 2010 | 12:16 PM
On the fence:

Alan is right,this does point out the question. I was on the fence but now I am leaning to voting yes. I hope more voters read this

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 3, 2010 | 1:33 PM
BAHM:

On the Fence, before you commit to your yes vote, why don’t you go and talk to some of the police officers. I know some of them and they have stated that things are changing for the better. Credentials do not always make the best leader!

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 3, 2010 | 3:48 PM
James Brewmeister:

Good ol’ boys of VBT. Ahhhhhhh, nepotism! Keep those outsiders out!

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 3, 2010 | 4:22 PM
eric feldkamp:

And a couple of the police officers are POWW supporters anyway. … I don’t want you naming names, but absent you doing that, I’d have to say that you’re talking to one of them, or you are making it up.

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 4, 2010 | 10:46 AM
On the fence:

To Bahm I did go and talk to some police officers like you asked. They all told me the same thing. The changes that are coming are by the Police Capts. Not by the Public Safety Director. So yes the Capts. Leadership is showing what kind of leaders they are.

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 4, 2010 | 9:08 PM
BAHM:

Mr. Feldcamp,
What an ARROGANT statement to make…to even entertain the thought that I would degrade myself to making something up to make a point….you do not know me but to even remotely imply something like that completely discredits evey point I felt you have ever made. Also, I have not talked to just 1 person…I think I stated I know SOME of them. As for On the Fence, maybe today’s postings of the pd salaries will strike a nerve with you!

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 5, 2010 | 8:39 AM
eric feldkamp:

Maybe BAHM

Except fence’s comment seems to bear out my thought. Perhaps you didn’t get clarity on who was making the improvements, or what the improvements were a result of. There seems to be little sentiment for crediting White or McClanahan (except for his preference for just staying out of the way) for those improvements.

Yeah, I know “some” of them too.

Interesting point about salaries. Why has White completely failed to get them under control like he promised? He even fired a guy for not doing it. White has no one to hide behind on the issue of salaries. Those costs are his to explain. Everyone that was mad at King or Champagne ought to be demanding his head now too.

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 5, 2010 | 12:13 PM
Allen Babosh:

To all, What that posting showed is that salaries increased under the White(POWW) Administration. He even even made comments it was under control. HE WAS IN CHARGE. Mr. Champagne was gone so he can no longer blame him. So lets put this in perspective. When Mr. Champagne in charge salaries were less then when Paul White and POWW was in charge.So if they Fired Mr. Champagne for that then we need to fire POWW for the same reason.

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 5, 2010 | 12:25 PM
On the fence:

This is what i got out of the article. Salaries increased under Mr. White when he told us that one of his objectives when he was elected to bring them down. I voted for him then. I will now vote him out. I am no longer on the fence. I jump off to the yes side.

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
Feb 8, 2010 | 11:25 AM
AKA... Paul Harvey:

I guess the V.I.‘s in this town still dont get it or they just still want the pied piper to lead them over the cliff as they are headed, but any past or present union member knows that these wages are not arbitarily set, and that only contact negoiation can change them! So, now as Paul Harvey would say, “Now for the rest of the story”. The only way to get a handle on this hemorrhaging is to drastically re-negotiate these contracts, and low and behold the talks start this year, thats why there has been so much deception from the recallers as to hide the thoughts of this process! If the recall is successful then these overly high paid “blended rates” will get at least 3 more years of ridiculous pay!

Add a Comment | Link to This | Back to Top
New! Talk about more issues in Journal Talk.
Communities All Areas Services & Extras About Us
VR Metro - Website Design, Development, Promotion, Hosting and Consulting Company