Largest Available Land-Pier on the Delaware River - Directly Across from Philadelphia | AL41514A
Property Number
AL41514A
Land -
Commercial Development Land
1. Tax records show that said land is still owned by Gloucester Point INC.
CITY OF GLOUCESTER CITY
Tax Collectors Stub - Return with Payment
If Delinquent Payment is Due in Tax Office by 6/11/13
| Block | Lot Qualification |
Bank Code | |
| 110 | 2.01 | ||
| Tax Account Number | Amount Due |
$ 0.00 | |
| 18174 |
GLOUCESTER POINTE
707 WATER ST
2. Said land is due to be sold at Sheriff sale on 7/3/13
| Sales Listing Details | ||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
3. Gloucester was paid by a company to dump dirt on said land ($1,000,000)
4. Said land had buildings torn down and removed. (who did ths?? Gloucester Mayor & Council??)
Referr to Dirty Dirt under the Categories section to read more about this topic
Since this site first reported on Wallacegate this site has received many messages and has tried to make sense of what happened. According to sources the contract between the Supervisors and Coordinators Union and the Township only contained one change, which was to eliminate sick buy back. Below is the original tabled contract, the second contract which was supposed to have that change and the final change. Notice the salary changes. This site can only assume that these documents are correct. It appears the salaries were changed a number of times by people inside the Wallace Administration. This site has also learned that it has been past practice in Washington Township when the council voted on a contract any changes were highlighted. It appears this contract was different and the question to BA Bob Smith and Mayor Wallace is why? How was this changed without the Council President knowing about it?
Why would Frank Campbell, a 30+ year public servant, who has served the people/taxpayers of Washington Township sign/approve raise(s) which was never approved previously by the Governing Body of Washington Township?
What was Lisa Collins's involvement if any?
What was Kathleen Wenzel's involvement if any?
In an article written this weekend by South Jersey Times the headline implied that Wallacegate was nothing more than a clerical error. Does anyone believe that. It also appears Council President Morley and the Council Vice President have woken up and appear to be getting to the bottom of what really happened. Below is a link to the article.
http://www.nj.com/washington-township-times/index.ssf/2013/05/fraud_or_clerical_error_change.html
Just one question why did BA Bob Smith and Mayor Wallace have no comment?
Below are images of the contract which this site obtained from a concerned resident. Notice the salaries are not on the same page. The left copy is the original. The copy with the handwriting on it is the contract signed by Mayor Wallace. Whose handwriting is it?
Also It appears Ken Patrone got a raise as well. Can someone explain this?
Picture is from a past article, but you can drive by the Monmouth and Railrod ave to see for your self
Below is part of the personnel policy for Washington Township. It appears to be clear, and a reasonable person and every day taxpayer would agree a family member should not be supervising another family member. Below the personnel policy are timesheets. Does anyone see anything wrong?
Should a father be approving a son or son-in-laws overtime timesheets? Is all of this overtime warranted? Could this be a reason Mayor Wallace is raising taxes so friends can get rich?
HOWEVER
What is more alarming is that on the timesheet for 11/12/12-11/18/12 Supervisor of Municipal Services Frank Campbell wrote:
“QUESTIONS WAS RAISED LAST WEEK ABOUT ME FILLING OUT THIS EMPLOYEES O.T. SHEETS. HOWEVER NICK PILLEGI TOLD ME TO CONTINUE WHAT I HAVE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS SIGNING HIS TIME CARDS”
So Frank Campbell has been approving his sons time cards for years? And when asks about his boss Nick Pileggi said to continue to do so.
Then why have a personnel policy?
Is this favoritism?
Did Nick Pileggi ask Bob Smith?
Did Bob Smith okay this?
What is Mayor Wallace Doing?
Can Someone On Council Look Into This?
Is Anyone On Council Paying Attention?
Recently this site has learned that Washington Township has made $52,850 from renting the Senior Center since January of 2012. It is not uncommon for municipalities to rent public buildings for use by organizations and a private party. However unlike other towns Washington Township does not have the rental fees for the Center in the Township’s fee ordinance. A fee ordinance set fees which allows a municipality to charge for a service etc.
If there is no fee schedule for the rental of the Senior Center how is the Township legally collecting money?
Will they pay back each person who paid a fee?
How could the Township charge one person one amount of money and another a different? If there is no fee ordinance, is that legal?
Is someone in the Township possibly pocketing money from the Senior Center for personal gain?
Below are fee ordiances from other towns. At the meeting BA Bob Smith said that other towns were doing it wrong. Really Bob? Every other town that has set fees is doing it wrong OR is it Washington Township is doing it wrong AND you rather the public not know about it?
In Order: Runnemede Borough, Gloucester City and Berlin Borough.
It seems like government employees who receive a taxpayer paid cell phone think they can do anything they want with the taxpayer provided cell phone they are given. Last year it was reported on Galloway Township News that former Galloway Township manager Stephen Bonanni was teaching for Rutgers University while still on the clock getting paid by Galloway Township. This information was brought to light by a local blogger who used cell phone bills to trace Bonanni’s location at Rutgers. In addition the cell phone bill also linked the then Township manager to an alleged prostitution scandal.
It appears that Washington Township employees like to misuse taxpayer provided cell phones as well.
Below is a cell phone bill Washington Township received showing municipal employee Ken Patrone had a $20.00 service charge on his township provided phone. What was the $20.00 charge for? A request for detailed bills was denied under OPRA since the township does not receive detailed bills even though it can easily access that information online or by asking its carrier Verizon wireless.
What was the $20.00 special service charge for?
If an employee misused a Township provided cell phone why did they pay $20.00 to the Township?
Why does the employee still have a phone?
Why is the Township reluctant not to disclose the reason of the special charge?
What is going on inside the Wallace Administration?
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |