Interesting. Proves his self absorption...probably want to mooch off of Wareham because he thinks he will have it easier in Wareham to be loved and respected.

Get a real full time Chief and cut loose the hangers on....

$155,000 a year?, duct-taped sewer pipes?, and of course the "horror show" of a cable show..anyone impressed?..

No hate here, just wondering how a $50,000! raise is justified for a TA in an almost bankrupt Town..

http://northandover.patch.com/articles/ … l-creep-in

North Andover Patch wrote:

“We’ve worked so hard to keep this town in the shape its in, and we have the illustrious city of Lawrence right over there, creeping into town, affecting our lifestyle in North Andover with the murders, shootings, stabbings on a nightly basis,” Stanley said.  "We need to call a spade a spade, and we can’t be dancing around."

Whoever called this man racist?!

The increase in shootings, stabbings, etc. in Wareham is due to what?

A bad element invading from Bourne, or Rochester?

I guess you had better get ready for a request for a big increae in the PD budget ( mostly salaries, I am sure), or you will be subjected to the same problems as N. Andover.

Maybe the Chief is carrying some bad mojo...

Chief Joyce Made   95 K His Last Year ,crime Was Not As Bad As It Is Now  Maybe We Need Those Missing 10 Policeman ,and Bourne Makes 140 K ,well They Have A Better Run Town Than We Do , And Bourne Is A More  Affulant Town Than Wareham , ,so They Can Afford 140 K , The Only Way Wareham Can Afford This Salery Is Dont Give Are Rank And File Police  Officers A Raise Or Hire One Less Policman , By The Way The Chief In Plmouth Makes 119  K ,so What Is Your Point P Jc ,

pjc wrote:

Bullsh-t.

Eagle-Tribune: Police chief will end Wareham job at end of month

Aye aye Cap'n!! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.. You come on here throwing haymakers, and making non-sensical threats..like "Beware of what you have because what you don't will bite you in the ASS."...What does that even mean?? Seems "your boy" has other plans..

Posters on this site have bent over backwards to show you respect in the past..respect that has not been reciprocated by you. You may want to consider how often the things posted by blogger's on this site have turned out to be true. Hey, you're free to post all the "know it all" crap you usually do here..but maybe Slager's website has more "like-minded thinkers" for you...for a nominal fee. We disagree with you (and them)..it doesn't mean it's bulls#@t..or we're "hatemonger's"..we just have a clue...maybe it's you (and them) who have an "agenda".

Adios Super Chief..

Last edited by DDPTRO (2011-03-11 21:16:42)

IMO, the argument about which town is 'richer' is a sterile argument. The emphasis should be on the market value of the position. That value can be determined by the same process that you use to sell your house. Expose the house (or the vacant position) to the market and see what surfaces in terms of offers (or applicants for the position).

The relative wealth of the communities seeking such professionals is generally less important than the market level of compensation for such position. Is the Town of Weston (or Lincoln, Hingham, Manchester-by-the-Sea, etc.) going to pay a 'premium' because they are affluent communites; are they going to pay $200,000 for a police chief? Should lower-income communities such as Chelsea, Brockton, Orange, Lawrence; pay LESS because the average househiold income is lower? Should these communities only pay $50,000, due to the lower income scale within?

It just doesn't work that way. You cannot repeal the law of supply & demand. Yet, it appears that that is what some in Wareham are trying to do with the Chief/Chief. Ignore the basic rule of Economics 101. "we" like the Chief/Chief, so that justifies a pay rate that is 'out-of-the-money', as they say on Wall Street.  No. No. No!

Conversely, you cannot justify an 'out-of-the-money' pay rate in the opposite direction, as some have suggested. In this game, market rates will prevail. Of course, that requires an open, tranparent process to arrive at market rates....

TO: DDPTRO I have NO AGENDA and You just do not get it. Whether you like me or not, I do not stand behind a mask like you. I can conduct myself in any manner put forth. Heymakers people like you get upset when some one does not take your side because the becomes an enemy. I can disagree with you, but I will not ridicule you. I care what happens to Wareham, Oh by the way I worked at the PD for 32 years and I owe the community alot. Super C hief I am not, but when it comes to the PD I do take it serious.

Last edited by pjc (2011-03-16 12:20:30)

My name's Dave DiPietro..ok, mask off. I know who you are, and respect your service to our town and country. But you're the one who comes on here calling people hatemonger's, saying they talk out their butts, etc.. If there's one thing that bugs me it's people who don't seem very bright talking down to people as if they're the ones who are fools. You seem a bit like a bully to me..which is a frightening thought if that's how you were when you served. From what I heard you had a problem with former Chief Joyce, and felt sleighted that you were passed over for promotion. So, it sounds like politics to me from your side.

If I get respect, I give it..if I don't, I won't. Bottom line.

Last edited by DDPTRO (2011-03-16 12:33:35)

pjc equals  capt paul cardiinlo ?

PJC, that is correct. I don’t know you, and you “sure as hell” don’t know me either. I should have said I know OF you. Since you served in the armed forces and for WPD you should understand the concept of loyalty..and camaraderie. I have seen you repeatedly come on here and make “unkind” comments to DanO..and others. Well, I consider DanO a friend. We don’t always agree on everything, but you can bet your life that if someone is “attacking” him, then I’ll stand by his side any day..and I know he’ll stand by me as well. I actually welcome your insight. I wish you’d offer it more..and with less harsh judgment of the other blogger’s on this site. We get enough of that from other places..places that have proven to be (IMO) hypocritical, divisive and unreliable. I know when people who blog here try and get to the bottom of issues, they show that they care very much what happens in Wareham. When people say that “nothing good” comes from this site..I think of the 200-300 meetings, many public documents, etc. I’ve posted and figure that should count for something…and that’s just me..many others have added valuable information as well. Information that was unavailable elsewhere. It’s a process. Each of us knows things that others don’t..and by sharing, we can all benefit. As far as an agenda. I know for me, I just want a town with good leaders, good schools, and fiscal responsibility. All things that I feel have been lacking in recent years…and I admit I don’t have the benefit of a long history (as you, and some others do). But, I have been “fairly immersed” for a couple of years now..and I do have contact with a number of people, and perhaps have access to some information others don’t. So when I have “issues” with people like the Donahue’s, Slager, Sauvageau, Eckstrom…Schneider, Begley, etc...then it’s my opinion I’m stating..and it’s based on the thing’s I’ve seen and heard. “Civil discourse” is a term thrown around alot in this town, and more often than not, blogger’s on this site are accused of not being civil…usually by people who are “uncivil” themselves..and ignore the fact that the people they’ve supported are largely responsible for what “ails” Wareham. Do you seriously think the problems in Wareham are caused by the blogger’s on this site?? On the contrary, I believe. I welcome the opportunity for civil discourse, transparent government, and citizen participation. But it’s a little tough when people have already made their minds up about the blogger’s on this site based on the endless stream of BS by Slager and those he represents. One last thing..I too am Italian..so, I guess I’m not political either.

pjc   " Since you served in the armed forces and for WPD you should understand the concept of loyalty..and camaraderie. I actually welcome your insight. I wish you’d offer it more..and with less harsh judgment of the other blogger’s on this site. I know when people who blog here try and get to the bottom of issues, they show that they care very much what happens in Wareham. Each of us knows things that others don’t..and by sharing, we can all benefit. As far as an agenda. I know for me, I just want a town with good leaders, good schools, and fiscal responsibility. All things that I feel have been lacking in recent years.  I do have contact with a number of people, and perhaps have access to some information others don’t. So when I have “issues” with people like the Donahue’s, Slager, Sauvageau, Eckstrom…Schneider, Begley, etc...then it’s my opinion I’m stating..and it’s based on the thing’s I’ve seen and heard. “Civil discourse” is a term thrown around alot in this town, and more often than not, blogger’s on this site are accused of not being civil…usually by people who are “uncivil” themselves..and ignore the fact that the people they’ve supported are largely responsible for what “ails” Wareham. Do you seriously think the problems in Wareham are caused by the blogger’s on this site?? On the contrary, I believe. I welcome the opportunity for civil discourse, transparent government, and citizen participation. But it’s a little tough when people have already made their minds up about the blogger’s on this site based on the endless stream of BS by Slager and those he represents."   DDPTRO

pjc - with a little editing - ditto what he said.  I'm also like my father, but he was quieter.  He was a listener and a studier of the workings in Wareham.  He never spoke on a subject unless he was asking questions about it or he knew what he was saying was FACT.  You may not have been a resident but you were a part of Wareham.  You should love this town that allowed you to make a decent living for your family and paid for part of your education.  Why are you attacking some of us?  For reasons of my own, I prefer not to put my real name on any site.  It has nothing to do with politics.  Freedom of choice.

I remember that you were a "bit" arrogant at times, while on the force.  LOL, but you were also at times, very sensitive.  With all due respect, people, pjc did have some problems with Joyce that are no one's business but theirs.  They dealt with it, made amends and went forward.  That is old business that has nothing to do with Joyce being chief and pjc not.  Move on, on this subject, please.  It has nothing to do with Wareham's problems now.     MENRVA - pjc was not that cop.  PJC was a dedicated family man.

If people are democrats or republicans they debate issues.  Most of the people I read blogs from on this site are trying to do the same, but looking for multiple successes for Wareham.  You have enlightened me and almost enraged me by some of your comments  You have some knowledge to pass around about police and the political side of policing.  You need some work on your delivery, though, only my opinion.   I know you saw how the selectmen (past board) bucked everything Joyce tried to do.  That same board seems to have given a part time chief an open ended credit card.  I don't like this guy, but if they can find the resources for him to use, why couldn't they do it with Joyce.  Just me wondering.

You are so cool, justme :)

NO WAY, Paul...we don't want you to go.

Yes we have traded barbs for years, and each time has been well worth it. We owe you a debt of gratitude for your service to Wareham, we enjoy your ideas, and we appreciate your input.

YOU were the one that explained the Civil Service process...we wouldn't have known about it if not for you.

We need you to stay with us... disagree with us...at least we know who you are... we'll both write and post out of our butts, and we will learn more together.

None of us are as smart as all of us. :)

danoconnell wrote:

You are so cool, justme :)

Ice in these veins.

When North Andover police Chief Richard Stanley attempted to defend his budget against a proposed $90,000 cut during a recent meeting with town officials, he cited crime spilling over from Lawrence, conjuring images of criminal hordes storming across the border with Lawrence, looting and pillaging in their path.

Lawrence police Chief John Romero released a statement this week showing he is not above a little push-back.

"I was surprised and disappointed to read Chief Stanley's comments in the newspaper, where he injected inaccurate information about the city of Lawrence in an attempt to scare the residents of North Andover during budget negotiations," Romero said. "We have lost several millions of dollars from our police budget, and I understand the proposed budget loss for his department is $90,000.

"To use our city to help him with his argument is not fair to the hard-working people of Lawrence, or to my department, for that matter. We are all facing cuts, and we all need to deal with them."

Eagle-Tribune: Don't Print That!