glhs837
Power with Control
Well, the advisory board thought it was unfair to someone, I'll suppose that's who it hurts. Only the three special ones get the good deal, no good deals for you, simply because you didn't work with Dominion.
Corporatism comes to Calvert County
- Thread starter LightRoasted
- Start date
Well, the advisory board thought it was unfair to someone, I'll suppose that's who it hurts. Only the three special ones get the good deal, no good deals for you, simply because you didn't work with Dominion.
So you have no reason why this is bad other than some people on an advisory board didn't like it? Ok. That makes so much sense. Only the three get the deal because those are the only three the sheriff wants to retain. Nobody else would be getting the deal, not because of dominion, but because that's the sheriff's choice when it comes to hiring and firing.
glhs837
Power with Control
And the Sheriff is immune from making bad choices? I can agree with them that it's unfair. I don't see how that makes no sense. If I said it was bad because rutabaga, that would make no sense
And the Sheriff is immune from making bad choices? I can agree with them that it's unfair. I don't see how that makes no sense. If I said it was bad because rutabaga, that would make no sense
Well those bad choices would have been made decades ago because that is when these tried and true officers were hired. If you had someone in your organization who was tried and true, a known commodity and trained, would you want to go through the expense and uncertainty of hiring new people or be able to retain those who wish to be retained?
So you think it's a bad decision because it is unfair? What is unfair about it?
glhs837
Power with Control
Your old folks retire and you, if you have done the job right, have used them train new officers to take their positions BEFORE they retire. Happens all the time. What's that old thing about a lack or prior planning on your part, etcetera? And I think we already covered this. Only the special kids get to keep working while receiving a retirement check.
We would pay bonuses and incentives to keep experience. Have you never been in an industry where they wanted to retain experience?
Baywatchv8
New Member
The same as it does now, assault is still against the law.
One, other thing, this wasn't a lack of prior planning. The plan was to retain the people. Poof....done!
LightRoasted
If I may ...
If I may ...
The point being their allegiance is not to the people of Calvert County, it will be to Dominion. The one that is paying for their brand new GMC 3500 Dually 4x4, or Fat Boy Harley, putting food on their table, their mortgage, their kids college ...
Instead of being forced to retire, like all the other deputies that reach the mandatory retirement age or max out their retirement, these deputies get to still wear the badge, keep their police powers, and be paid by an outside influence. Doesn't matter how good they are supposed to be. It is not just about government-corporate collusion, (the major reason for the post) it is also about the fairness to the other deputies and to the people of Calvert County. It is a slap in their face. Everyone who was hired knew well in advance how the system was setup, and now it has changed to be inequitable and unfair to those who don't have their nose up Evan's ass. Instead, Evans has allowed the Sheriffs dept to be run like a business, as security company, and the commissioners have put their stamp of approval on it. The Sheriffs dept has no business being in the security business. This is the slippery slope to fascism.
Also, it's not rocket science to be able to secure a facility such as Dominion. A soldier returning from Iraq after a six month tour would have far more experience than these "special" deputies could ever have. This is payola, simply as that.
The point being their allegiance is not to the people of Calvert County, it will be to Dominion. The one that is paying for their brand new GMC 3500 Dually 4x4, or Fat Boy Harley, putting food on their table, their mortgage, their kids college ...
Instead of being forced to retire, like all the other deputies that reach the mandatory retirement age or max out their retirement, these deputies get to still wear the badge, keep their police powers, and be paid by an outside influence. Doesn't matter how good they are supposed to be. It is not just about government-corporate collusion, (the major reason for the post) it is also about the fairness to the other deputies and to the people of Calvert County. It is a slap in their face. Everyone who was hired knew well in advance how the system was setup, and now it has changed to be inequitable and unfair to those who don't have their nose up Evan's ass. Instead, Evans has allowed the Sheriffs dept to be run like a business, as security company, and the commissioners have put their stamp of approval on it. The Sheriffs dept has no business being in the security business. This is the slippery slope to fascism.
Also, it's not rocket science to be able to secure a facility such as Dominion. A soldier returning from Iraq after a six month tour would have far more experience than these "special" deputies could ever have. This is payola, simply as that.
Because both Dominion and the Sheriff want them to be sworn officers who are still tied into the department.
H
Hodr
Guest
My major concern would be that one of two things is taking place:
Either they are taking officers who were not planning to retire (but are eligible), and moving them into this program and therefore shorting the officer's retirement fund. Or, they are taking three officers who were planning to retire, and keeping them employed in this capacity instead of hiring new people.
One was deprives the retirement fund of contributing members that fully intended to continue contributing, the other deprives potential new employees the opportunity to become police officers.
This
But if you point out the potential conflict of interest you are called a cop hater.
At least based on the story it would appear they will have two masters, the Sheriff and Dominion.
They will still fall under the sheriff but they will take daily direction from a Dominion and will be paid by Dominion - for all practicable purposes.
Also, to clarify, it appears they would be eligible for retirement. Staying with the department would not increase their benefits so for the deputy it's a win, win.
For Dominion it's a win, win. They have a security force that carries the full weight of the law and they only have to pay a fixed price as they would any other contract employ.
Last edited:
Amused_despair
New Member
Gee, you think that the cop, who is being paid by Dominion, is going to risk his pay by going against Dominion? Why should he? The victim of assault isn't paying his salary, the cop owes nothing to him/her. Likewise, if a protestor is near Dominion, what is to stop the retired cop now working as a cop but paid for by Dominion from going out there and arresting the protestor for anything they can think of?
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Here's the proposed change:
Here's the memo, with the attached letter from The Board of Trustees of the Sheriff's Department Pension Plan
http://md-calvertcounty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/9149
Here's the video of the meeting (Pension Plan Amendment portion is at 30:00)
http://calvertcounty.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=563
Here's the memo, with the attached letter from The Board of Trustees of the Sheriff's Department Pension Plan
http://md-calvertcounty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/9149
Here's the video of the meeting (Pension Plan Amendment portion is at 30:00)
http://calvertcounty.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=563
Last edited:
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
From reading and listening to the various folks in the video, my take is this:
If you're a cop (or CO), you have to be in the plan. There's 2 exceptions. Special Deputy (Courthouse security) and Jail Administrator.
The County Administrator wasn't sure if other deputies were not part of the plan, but it was mentioned by the FOP rep and others that there are in fact contract officers (or special deputies) doing something other than courthouse security. They don't want their plan to be disqualified by skirting around the participation rules, so they need an amendment to basically say that an officer can be a special deputy and do something other than courthouse security (which is specifically mentioned).
Financially, now, an officer can work, and be on the plan (withdraw from it), but not contribute the 8% they normally would.
Voting on, and adding the amendment prevents the plan from being disqualified and screwing up all 130+ participants in the plan.
All that being said, I'm still not in favor. I'm not in favor because if a private company wants security, pay for it. Mike Hart made it seem like the Sheriff's office would have someone there anyway, so they may as well pass this. I ask why. Why, outside of Dominion lining the pockets of Evans and his dept. through campaign contributions, new equipment, and paid-for training, should a local police department provide security for the construction of a facility (regardless of that facility's use)? Why should special amendments be made to bypass IRS rules, or at the least, cloud the rules enough to allow someone to work as a police officer but not be paid by the County they enforce the laws in? Instead of having this amendment, tell Dominion to hire their own security. Either Overtime pay, or outside help. That would help everyone. No detriment to the plan. No amendment (which has no end date, and could open the door to other things). No plan members being butthurt because the Sheriff gets to hand pick his 3 guys. Extra pay for certain deputies (if they go the OT route). Extra jobs if they go the security route.
If you're a cop (or CO), you have to be in the plan. There's 2 exceptions. Special Deputy (Courthouse security) and Jail Administrator.
The County Administrator wasn't sure if other deputies were not part of the plan, but it was mentioned by the FOP rep and others that there are in fact contract officers (or special deputies) doing something other than courthouse security. They don't want their plan to be disqualified by skirting around the participation rules, so they need an amendment to basically say that an officer can be a special deputy and do something other than courthouse security (which is specifically mentioned).
Financially, now, an officer can work, and be on the plan (withdraw from it), but not contribute the 8% they normally would.
Voting on, and adding the amendment prevents the plan from being disqualified and screwing up all 130+ participants in the plan.
All that being said, I'm still not in favor. I'm not in favor because if a private company wants security, pay for it. Mike Hart made it seem like the Sheriff's office would have someone there anyway, so they may as well pass this. I ask why. Why, outside of Dominion lining the pockets of Evans and his dept. through campaign contributions, new equipment, and paid-for training, should a local police department provide security for the construction of a facility (regardless of that facility's use)? Why should special amendments be made to bypass IRS rules, or at the least, cloud the rules enough to allow someone to work as a police officer but not be paid by the County they enforce the laws in? Instead of having this amendment, tell Dominion to hire their own security. Either Overtime pay, or outside help. That would help everyone. No detriment to the plan. No amendment (which has no end date, and could open the door to other things). No plan members being butthurt because the Sheriff gets to hand pick his 3 guys. Extra pay for certain deputies (if they go the OT route). Extra jobs if they go the security route.
Last edited:
LightRoasted
If I may ...
If I may ...
In addition to Nutter recusing himself as being retired in the system, Hejl should have as well since he is retired form the Sheriffs dept. Also, since Hart and Weems both have pretty intimate (professional) relationships with many of the deputies due to the interaction related to their respective liquor businesses, they should have recused themselves as well ... leaving no quorum and thereby having to follow the trustees recommendations.
In addition to Nutter recusing himself as being retired in the system, Hejl should have as well since he is retired form the Sheriffs dept. Also, since Hart and Weems both have pretty intimate (professional) relationships with many of the deputies due to the interaction related to their respective liquor businesses, they should have recused themselves as well ... leaving no quorum and thereby having to follow the trustees recommendations.
NorthBeachPerso
Honorary SMIB
I don't think that Hejl retired from the Sheriff's Department. He did retire from MSP. His deal with the Sheriff may have had to be different.
As far as Weems and Hart go, I understand what you're getting at but in a County as small as Calvert everyone knows everyone else. You use your metric and nothing would get done.
Gene Carol shouldn't have voted on school salaries, his wife was in Administration. Linda Kelly's husband subbed in the schools. Mary Harrison, Bill Bowen, David Hale, John Gott and Doc Weems all had commercial property in the County. Hagner Mister was a farmer approving TDRs. Joyce Terhes owned much of what became Dunkirk Town Center. You could go on forever.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
NorthBeachPerso
Honorary SMIB
He may have "retired" but I don't know his pension status from Calvert County. I was unclear about what I meant. As I said, at one time retired LEOs had to be careful what they did in law enforcement after retiring because if they screwed up they could lose their original pension. That, as I said, may have changed.