Mayoral Car
There are previous posts on the topic of Take Home Vehicles and the policy for the same in the City of Methuen. Some feel that my “complaints” are small things and not worth writing, reading or taking any action over.
There’s a saying that goes,
“Those who don’t know how to be grateful on small things does not know how to appreciate big thingsâ€.
The Writer and Founder of the Theosophical Society, W. Q. Judge, said; Remember it is the little things the work is done through.
Surely we all recall this little ditty.
For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,
For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,
For the want of a horse the rider was lost,
For the want of a rider the battle was lost,
For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost—
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
After an appreciable period of time, I wrote to our new Mayor. After all, City Councilor Stephen N. Zanni agrees.(with the new vehicle policy) “I fully support this new policy,†Zanni said.
Requesting an explanation as to why the Mayors Car was not emblazoned with the Seal of the City of Methuen. The Motor Vehicle Policy, established by his predecessor was clear that all vehicles should be so marked. ( some exceptions do apply)
[Please let me digress for a moment.
I have written to the Mayor using his official email address. I have never received an acknowledgement that the mayor received any email from me. Word on the street is that the Mayor does not read any email addressed to him. He receives only "filtered" email from his staff. I guess the internet is not a door that is part of the Open Door policy.]
My email stated;
Dear Mr. Mayor,
I ask the question, why isn’t the car you use as Mayor marked with the City Seal as required by EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 013-2008, section 3. “All vehicles owned by the City of Methuen shall be lettered with the City of Methuen seal, as well as having municipal plates.”
Thank you for your reply.
After a period of time I received the following explanation;
“…the car that the mayor is currently driving is an old undercover car that we are recycling from the police department. This car was not in the police rotation at the time and was the best fiscal option for the city, as per section three of the EO as it is an undercover car it does not need to be lettered and can have standard plates.”
There is a section of the Executive Order [EO] which does state;
section 3. All vehicles owned by the City of Methuen shall be lettered with the City of Methuen seal, as well as having municipal plates. All undercover, unmarked and surveillance public safety vehicles are not required to be lettered and may have standard plates.
I did not believe the Mayor needed an undercover, unmarked or surveillance public safety vehicle. He should have been excluded from the exemption.
I wrote back and asked “when will this car be returned to the Police rotation?
It has not been in the rotation for a number of years.
If it is, in effect, the Mayors car, it should be lettered and have Municipal plates.
When it is returned to rotation it can be properly designated as an undercover car again.”
The response was my concerns would be looked into.
This conversation took place in March. So I was waiting for some further response.
Then I looked through the Vendors Reports posted on the City website.
What a surprise to find the following invoices from January.
Keith Burdin Auto Cleaning
Account # 01-3575-5700-34766
Account Description Equipment Parts
Invoice # 3517
Additional Description Detail Mayors Car #405. See invoices.
Payment, Check # and date: $175.00, 119550, 1/28/2012
There were others, listed below.
3575-5700-34766
Equipment Parts
8688
Aligment for mayors car #405.
$40.00, 119546, 1/28/2012
Home Depot Inc.
01-3575-5700-34766
Equipment Parts
26854163713
Parts Mayors Car shop.
$14.75,119475, 1/21/2012
Caruso, Carmello
01-3575-5700-34766
Equipment Parts
303
Parts 405 Mayor.
$40.00, 119674, 2/4/2012
Because they do not list which vehicle is being inspected or insured, by any identifiable description, in the vendor reports, it is not easy to determine when the Mayor’s car was inspected or insured and who paid for this service, the Mayor Office, the Police Department or the DPW.
It would appear that the DPW recognizes that the car in question is the Mayor’s car and not a loaned police car. I ask that the car driven by the Mayor be detailed per the Executive Order or returned to the Police Department for placement back into the rotation.
Ed. Note: Glad I didn’t have to determine if this car was donated to the City Police for a specific purpose. Would be a shame if the donation were being misused —by the Mayor. Wouldn’t that have been poetic justice…