Judging Criminal Characters

As reported on nj1015.com, Gov. Chris Christie will nominate Labor & Workforce Development Commissioner Harold Wirths as a member of the State Parole Board, prompting questions about his qualifications from State Senator Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, who said he’ll vote against Wirths’ nomination explaining:

“It’s just another example of more waste of taxpayer dollars. We have a Parole Board that is a dumping ground for political appointees…..[T]his looks like another pension-padding scheme by Gov. Christie on behalf of the commissioner of labor.”

Is it? The story goes on to name the board members for us to judge:

The State Parole Board consists of 15 members, paid around $120,000 a year, and three alternates. Ten Parole Board appointees were approved by the Senate in June, including four new members:

  • Peter Cavicchia
  • Kerri Cody
  • John Paitakes
  • Christina Ramirez

Six board members were reappointed

Four current board members have been renominated and are awaiting consideration by the Senate:

Another new member would have been Ocean County Freeholder

  • Jack Kelly

but his candidacy was withdrawn. Some Democrats, including Lesniak, sharply questioned his opposition to allowing a gay, terminally ill county police officer to transfer her pension benefits to her domestic partner.
.

3 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on July 21, 2016 at 1:37 pm

    Hey what’s the problem so long as they get full P&B……..

    Reply

  2. Posted by George on July 21, 2016 at 5:07 pm

    “sharply questioned his opposition to allowing a gay, terminally ill county police officer to transfer her pension benefits to her domestic partner.”

    I noticed during the debate over gay marriage there was no discussion of the effect on pension payments and taxes like the estate tax. I sort of get why a woman who devotes her life to raising a large familly should get her husbands pension after his death. But I personally think it is time to reduce pensions that are joint, perhaps with an adjustment if there is actaully a familly being raised and a reduction if the age of the spouse is less than the employee.

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 21, 2016 at 10:57 pm

      Interesting concept of adjusting benefits based on family needs, etc. – sounds Socialist. FYI, P&FRS and SPRS already do so at NO reduction to the retirees base allowance. Childrens allowance until 18 or beyond for college (not sure) and spouse forever s o long as they don’t tie the knot again.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: