At the first conference meeting of 2014, Mayor Venezia and the Bloomfield Council faced a large crowd supporting two police officers who had been suspended in December due to an internal affairs investigation of time taken off for military duty in 2007 and 2008.
The meeting had to be moved to the Council Chambers to accommodate the public. The officers, Hector Cartagena and Michael McCracken, both Iraq veterans and members of the U.S. Air Force Reserve, were accused of misusing their military leave time, and suspended without pay in early December. Hearings had been scheduled for the two men on January 13 and 14, respectively, but have since been cancelled, and no new dates have been set at this time.
At the beginning of Monday night’s meeting, Mayor Venezia read a short statement saying that his administration “supports our military at home and abroad,” and said that the officers were not targeted because they were veterans. He said he could not offer further comment pending official hearings of their cases, which will be heard by a third-party hearing officer.
The two officers have now been reinstated pending their hearings, and will receive back pay owed to them from last month.
Over the holidays, rumors, recently confirmed, had swirled that Police Chief Goul had resigned. According to Bloomfield Life, Goul, who is retiring, is currently using up his vacation days. Captain James Behr, who attended Monday night’s meeting, is now the officer in charge of the Police Department. Goul had become Police Chief after previously losing out to Mark Leonard for the job, a decision that was reversed in early 2011 after the 2010 elections gave Mayor McCarthy the votes to do so.
Officers McCracken and Cartagena are represented by the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), a branch of which was formed in Bloomfield in 2010 because of dissatisfaction with the Policemen’s Benevolent Association (PBA), the union that had been representing the department, resulting in a department split between two unions. Chief Goul recently issued a statement calling the officers’ public statements “politically motivated,” while representatives of the PBA and the Superior Officers Association (the union representing supervisory police personnel) said the officers were “unprofessional” and said the “personal attacks” must stop.
During the public comment period, the first speaker was Anthony Argento, President of the Bloomfield FOP, who stated that he was “100% positive” the charges against the two officers were unwarranted. He pointed out that military pay records did not include days spent traveling or at medical appointments, which the two men say their time off from the police force included.
Another commenter stated that, although he was glad to hear that the officers had been reinstated and would receive back pay for the time lost, he wanted to point out that the members of the police department need to work together, and that divisiveness in the department was not conducive to this goal.
A couple of commenters referred to a “hit list” of 16 people that was allegedly kept by Internal Affairs Sergeant John Sierchio for the purposes of retaliation. Sierchio was the subject of controversy himself about three years ago, when he and a fellow officer sued for their promotions as part of a settlement involving the naming of Christopher Goul as the new police chief. The New Jersey Civil Service Commission had originally invalidated their promotions, as their names were taken from an expired eligibility list. Eventually the Bloomfield Council passed amendments to make the promotions legal. Sierchio has also been working to weed out fraudulent disability pensions in the department.
Not all public comments pertained to the two police officers. Maria Probst, while urging the council to settle the controversy as soon as possible, also spoke about the new Parkway Lofts development bordering East Orange and Bloomfield, whose website promotes the high-end apartments by touting the amenities available in nearby Montclair. All of the pictures on the site, she said, were of Montclair, with little mention of the many attributes Bloomfield has to offer. She pointed out that the site’s map even shows Bloomfield’s Orange Squirrel Restaurant as being located in Montclair. Mayor Venezia said he would ask Community Development Director Glenn Domenick to reach out to the developer.
Geoff Gove asked about the status of the work being done on the Lion Gate property by the developer who currently owns it, which the new council hopes to acquire for open space. Mayor Venezia said that although the developer’s plan had been approved by the Planning Board in 2007, the developer had not  yet applied for permits at this time.
After the public comment period closed, the new council began its regular business meeting. They voted to go forward with acquiring the aforementioned property at 1 and 8 Lion Gate Drive, with six votes in favor and one abstention (Councilman Carlos Bernard).
According to the wording of the ordinance, “The acquisition of the Property may be achieved by any of the following methods: (i) consummation of a purchase and sale contract by negotiations with the property owner, (ii) by a gift, grant, or contribution by the property owner, or (iii) by condemnation of the Property pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40A:61-1(a) and the Eminent Domain Act.”
The council also voted to change the ordinances governing council meetings to enable them to meet only twice a month, with one conference and one regular meeting per month.
Stuart Koperweis, Executive Director of the Bloomfield Center Alliance, presented the BCA’s 2014 budget. Mayor Venezia asked him to elaborate on the status of the proposed 6 Points project, which was approved last year and has not yet begun. Koperweis explained the project for the benefit of the public. The purpose of the revamping of the intersection at Broad Street and Bloomfield Avenue (6 Points) is to be done in order to facilitate traffic circulation, allow left-hand turns, make pedestrian crossings easier, and provide beautification to the intersection. He said that they are close to beginning the project, pending the completion of written Standard Operating Procedures, which are a requirement for the funding they are to receive for the project from the Department of Transportation.
Representatives of MCP Bloomfield Urban Renewal, LLC, the designated developer for Block 243 (the Annie Sez property and adjacent buildings) presented modified concept plans to the council for approval. The development agreement with the township had been approved last year, but prior to presenting the final application to the Planning Board, the developer wanted to ensure the council signed off on the plans, which had changed slightly since last year. The architect explained that some of the first floor window areas in the rendering would not actually be retail space, but instead would be “shadow boxes” that would house local artwork or other exhibits. The council voted to approve the changes.
Councilman Bernard requested that the council look into installing “Welcome to Bloomfield” signs on Bloomfield Avenue at the point at which people enter the township as they travel along the avenue. Mayor Venezia agreed, and suggested they contact local businesses to see if they would be willing to sponsor welcome signs on all of the main roads entering the township.
Bernard also reported he had visited the Bloomfield Animal Shelter over the holidays to drop off donations, and said that the shelter seemed clean and well-run. He said that the shelter had received a lot of donations of food and other necessities. He urged other council members to visit.
Mayor Venezia announced appointments to the Board of Recreation (John Marek and Mike Cantalupo) and the Planning Board (Daniel McGonigle, Sam LaForte, and E. Domingo).
The next meeting will be a regular meeting, to be held on Monday, January 13, 2014, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Carlos Bernard visited the shelter and found it clean and well run. Nice. How about the animals? Are the dogs getting the attention, training and exercise they need to make them more adoptable? They did when the core veteran volunteers were there 7 days a week. What about the cats? Are they being regularly groomed, socialized, exercised to help them become more adoptable? They did when the core veteran volunteers were there 7 days a week. That is, until Karen Lore, F. Michael Fitzpatrick and the BoH decided they were expendable and fired them all. Oh, wait, not all. The chosen few Karen Lore sycophants lead by the prime troublemaker in the volunteer ranks and her girl gang were allowed back. At least to continue to beg for money and donations of food and supplies. That makes them look good. Too hell with the animals. The powers that be couldn’t give a rat’s furry butt about them. Right Ted?
It would be nice if you would just clearly state, right up front, just what the “misuse” of the leave is alleged to be — as I posted under a previous story.
After reading half way down this story, I see that the defense apparently is defending against the officers taking off some unstated number of additional days, claiming they were for military service when they really were not on military service for those days. If that allegation were proven, it makes a huge difference to people’s attitudes here over them being punished for military service — the allegation appears to be that they lied, they were not on military service for all those days.
That is an important key point that Barristanet has failed to clearly report. Oh, as per the defense, the officers still might have actually been on military service — or not, it remains to be finally determined — but Barristanet needs to clearly explain the allegation. Under the reporting of this that we have had so far, most readers think the officers are being penalized for serving in the military, but that is NOT the allegation.
Actually, if you read the story, the opening paragraph says there was an internal affairs investigation of time taken off, and the second paragraph refers to the officers “misusing” their military leave. If the impression has been given that the officers are being targeted simply because they are veterans, that certainly is not the intention. In fact, it is the officers themselves who have said this, according to ABC news.”Both men believe they are being targeted for serving their country. Their attorney says there are tapes where Bloomfield Police Department internal investigators complained about military absences by the officers.” https://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?id=9367849. “Misuse of military leave” is the extent of details currently publicly available, as the governing body and police department are not providing further details pending the formal hearings that will be conducted. Until more information is available, there just are no further details on the exact nature of the misuse. If anyone knows of other details, I will be glad to learn them.
me1004 – did you bother to look at the officers facebook page where they talk about Bloomfield IA not bothering to look at their paperwork or communicate with their attorney.
Personally I’m surprised that the IA officer in charge is allowed to investigate – there are 2 Police Unions in Bloomfield – he is a representative of the union that these officers do not belong to – it’s well known that there was at least one fistfight either on the steps of the law enforcement building or in the building (by officers)because of tensions between the unions.
And then think about it- these officers are charged with violations that happened in 2007 & 2008 (one of them was in the hospital for injuries received while on reservist duty – during at this time that Bloomfield is charging he wasn’t on military leave)
“By statute, internal affairs investigations also have time constraints. Once investigators have developed enough information to substantiate a claim of wrongdoing, officers must be charged administratively within 45 days. ”
So- how does this charge fit in -with 2007 & 2008. Sounds political and like retaliation (there are tapes of Bloomfield officers complaining that they cannot go on vacation because these two officers are on reservists leave with the Airforce). Consider the timing