General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show, Weds., June 6, 2012
Brad Bennett announced he would not seek reelection to the 32nd Representative District seat. He did it publicly on the House floor, he did it with dignity, and I wish him success in addressing the issues that led to his announcement.
The legislative agendas ran true to form yesterday, with both the good and the bad passing muster. The bad? HB 87(Brady), which heightens the level of crimes when public transit operators are the victims. We’ve done this with first responders and others, and the Solomoronic solons are now well into creating a caste system of victims. One of our commenters, Andy, who represents DART bus drivers, made the case as well as it can be made:
HB 87 not only increases the penalty for Bus operators in this state but also tries to protect the public as well. Can you imagine a bus going down king st and and some one who get angry with the driver for what ever reason, a fare dispute, the bus is late what ever and decides to take a shot at the driver while the bus is moving. An out of control 40 foot dart bus with about 30 to 50 people on board going down a city street at rush hour is not a good thing. Assaults on bus drivers have risen in Delaware as well throughout the country. All you have to do is go on youtube to see what is happening. A bus driver is basically defensless in the seat with no where to go there is no drivers side door on a dart bus. rather than complaining about this bill maybe we should look into giving a little more protection to the 7-11 cashier.
Just for disclosure I am the Union President for the DART Drivers and Mechanics
OK, Andy, I’ll bite. Then how about private bus drivers, or Greyhound bus drivers, or camp counselors who shepherd kids around, or teachers? That’s my point. Either the crime is heinous enough to warrant an increased penalty regardless of the victim, be they public transit driver or 7-11 cashier, or leave it as is. This bill will not be the last of its kind, trust me. Just as we’ve created a veritable cornucopia of ‘special license plates’, we’re on the road to creating an ever-increasing special class of victims. BTW, the bill passed the Senate unanimously. As Al Mascitti said yesterday, this bill is pandering, pure and simple. Which is why more of its kind are coming, and coming soon.
Common sense legislation which “simplifies the mandatory report requirements for schools, ensuring that the most serious offenses shall be reported to law enforcement while giving schools discretion to handle minor offenses without mandatory reporting”, passed the House, with only five Rethugs displaying a lack of common sense. They are Reps. Lavelle, Lee, Manolakos, D. Short, and Wilson. Re lack of common sense: ‘Dog Bites Man’.
The entire House deserves credit for unanimously passing HB 309(Scott), which begins to protect privacy of students’ social media networks. Hmmm, I wonder if legislation protecting employees from snoopy employers will receive a similar unanimous vote…
Today is a HUGE Committee Day, with interesting bills galore. Before I start my rundown, I urge you to pay special attention to the following two bills:
SB 205(Ennis) will get its hearing in the House Manufactured Housing Committee today. If you’re one of the very very few who is just coming to our blog, you can read more about this issue right here.
Now, here’s one that illustrates the Delaware Way. Nancy Willing called Al’s show yesterday and brought it to our attention and, boy, is she right. Not only is HB 261 special interest legislation introduced on behalf of Delmarva, it is special interest legislation introduced on behalf of Delmarva with the intent of terminating service for people with serious medical conditions. And, get this, only John Kowalko had the empathy and decency to vote against this bill in the House. How cold and bloodless is this blatant attempt to literally take power away from the powerless? Let me quote from the bill’s synopsis:
This bill amends the current utility medical certification program that protects customers with a medical certification from termination of utility services. The current medical certification law is so broad that it is being used as a method of bill avoidance by numerous customers who do not need to be on the program, which is impacting all customers of the utility. Thus, this bill clarifies the parameters for a utility medical certification…
Now, read the highlighted portion, and ask yourselves: “Who has determined that the current…law is ‘so broad that it is being used as a method of bill avoidance by numerous customers who do not need to be on the program’?” Did legislators form a task force, examine this issue and reach this conclusion independently. No. Delmarva has made this assertion w/o any demonstrable public evidence to support it, and they’ve convinced their bought-and-paid-for General Assembly to accept it uncritically. But, don’t worry, legislators. The phony ‘lobbying reform’ bill you passed ensures that Delmarva’s lobbyists don’t have to reveal that they lobbied you, and that they lobbied you on this bill.
And you just know that horror stories are coming when/if this bill takes effect. It will be just like that federal bankruptcy bill that Carper loved so much and that has destroyed millions of families throughout the country while propping up the big banks. Look, there might in some cases possibly be some, some, merit in Delmarva’s claim. But a lot of people who need the service are gonna get hurt by this, and Delmarva knows that a lot of innocent people are gonna get hurt by this. Legislators, now you do too. If you do Delmarva’s bidding, the blood will be on your hands. And, no doubt, Delmarva’s blood money will be in your hands.
There’s lots more where that came from. My rundown of the other bills of interest to me in committee today, starting with the Senate:
SB 212(DeLuca) “will use the internet as a means to modernize the notice requirements for procurement bids, agency meetings, and public hearings. This Act will provide more convenient and universal access to legal notices for all interested parties and will do so in a cost-effective manner.” In the Senate Executive Committee.
HB 325(Schwartzkopf) seeks to end the lawless reign of the Sheriff of Nuttingham and his Posse Comatosis. In Senate Executive Committee.
The Senate Finance Committee will consider the following bills. Kids, I’m offering up a rare teaching opportunity here. Yay! The reason why these bills are being considered now and not earlier is b/c they each have some sort of fiscal impact. Until the Joint Finance Committee concluded its budgetary deliberations, there was no official clarity as to whether funding would be available for these initiatives. Now there is, which is why these bills are now being considered. This happens every year, there’s nothing sinister about it, but I just thought you should know.
Rep. Lumpy Carson’s “Get Out Of My Way, I’m Late for Happy Hour” bill will be considered in today’s Senate Highways & Transportation Committee.
Finally, a rare shoutout to Tony DeLuca. His Senate Executive Committee has already announced a list of gubernatorial appointees the committee will consider on June 13. That’s transparency I can support.
And, on the House side:
HB 211(Scott) requires that admission to vocational-technical high schools be determined through a lottery system rather than any other criteria. House Education Committee.
HB 292(Bennett) requires that a background check be completed on a new public school hire before that person begins employment. House Education Committee.
HB 362(Bolden) would place non-voting members from the City of Wilmington on the public school boards serving Wilmington, appointments to be made by the Mayor. House Education Committee.
HB 311(Barbieri) “significantly updates the laws under which a person can be held involuntarily for up to 24 hours for a mental health evaluation. In place of the current system where a person is transported in handcuffs by police to a hospital emergency department, the bill allows a psychiatrist or credentialed mental health screener to evaluate a person anywhere and then transport that person to the most appropriate location for evaluation or treatment in the most appropriate and least restrictive manner.” More great stuff from Rep. Barbieri. House Health & Human Services Committee.
SB 143(Katz) is the first leg of a constitutional amendment that will likely lead to greater use of absentee ballot provisions. House Administration Committee.
And finally, just like in the Senate, the House Revenue & Taxation Committee has a series of bills that can be considered now that budget deliberations have concluded.
The Senate Agenda for today includes the so-called campaign finance reform package, which consists of HB 300(Gilligan), which I support, and HB 310(Longhurst), which I don’t. Check out this exceedingly well-reasoned and well-written (‘Dog Bites Man’) post to find out why.
If you’ll please excuse me for today, I must now feed our hounds before I have a real ‘Dogs Bite Man’ story on my hands.
Tags: Brad Bennett Delaware, campaign finance reform Delaware, Delmarva Power, El Somnambulo, Manufactured Housing Delaware, Steve Tanzer Delaware, Tony DeLuca Delaware
Nice work. Maybe Brady can introduce something to protect bus drivers and first responders from Delmarva Power’s greed?
Looking the text of the Delmarva bill, It’s actually worse than you portray it.
I will give them this–I have no problem striking out “Christian Science practitioners” as the equivalent of doctors, physicians, or nurse practitioners.
That being said, the current law has the following language under which service cannot be terminated:
any occupant of any dwelling unit shall be so ill that the termination of such sale or service shall adversely affect his health or recovery,
Which they want to replace with:
if the termination will prevent the use of life-support equipment or cause loss of life or immediate hospitalization of the occupant of the premises
This literally means that Delmarva can shut off your power unless you are going to die immediately without it.
Now I can admit some possibility of abuse under the first language. But since the certificate is only good for 120 days, the better way to deal with this would to be to provide for a medical review by a disinterested health care provider, based on a challenge from Delmarve, for any extension.
The other cuteness hidden in the bill is this language
if the occupant of the premises makes a good faith effort to make payments toward the utility service being provided.
As written, this means Delmarva can cut you off short of 120 days if it decides you are not making “a good faith effort and your only recourse is to file an appeal with the Delaware Public Service Commission. No, they can’t cut you off until such an appeal is heard, but what is carefully missing from the language is any provision requiring them to inform you that you have the right to appeal.
I know most people think this is common sense or due process, and possibly it could get struck down in court, but I work in union mediation cases all the time where the employer will say, “Yes, you had a right to appeal this decision, but you are responsible for knowing that right is in your contract. Nothing in the contract requires us to inform you.”
About half the time labor arbitrators will decide this argument in favor of management.
Amazing what you find inside the sausage casing.
Thanks, Steve and Nancy.
And keep in mind that, other than John Kowalko, the House of Reps just took Delmarva’s word (and money) that this was some harmless bill.
Now that you’ve overturned the rock,let’s just see if the Senate is as compliant to Delmarva’s wishes.
And here are Delmarva’s Dover lobbyists:
Delmarva Power a PHI Company
P.O. Box 9239
Newark , DE 19714
Steven Baccino
P.O. Box 9239
Newark , DE 19714
Joseph P. Farley, Sr.(former D State Chair)
First State Strategies, LLC
204 West Side Drive
Rehoboth Beach , DE 19971
Joseph F. Fitzgerald, Jr. (former D legislative staffer)
Fitzgerald Consulting, Inc.
P.O. Box 7304
Wilmington , DE 19803
Robert Whetzel (uber-lawyer who represents the Dark Side): http://www.rlf.com/Lawyers/RobertWWhetzel
Richards, Layton & Finger
P.O. Box 551
Wilmington , DE 19899
Might I point out that, in a legislature controlled by Democrats, so-called ‘Democratic’ lobbyists Farley and Fitzgerald represent the Dark Side as well.
Joe Farley: The turd that keeps on stinking.
Only Kowalko voted against the bill because Kowalko is virtually the only Representative in the current General Assembly who hasn’t had his campaign funded by the Pepco Conective PHI Pac.
I am new to this site . . . it makes me nauseated every day that I read shit like this . . . I am even started to cuss . . . OMG . . . is there really no accountability!!!
Seriously why is this not front page news . . . these are real people being affected, some may be abusing . . . but then again some may be dying . . . big difference there!!!!
I also debated against the bill on the floor for at least 15 minutes and was disappointed in my own inability to convey the outrageous and unconscionable effect this will have on the sick and elderly. If your child is asthmatic and needs air cond. but will not be hospitalized or institutionalized or DIE than power can be shutoff for arrearages even if the air cond. will prevent further deterioration in his/her condition. Same with Grandma/Grandpa with emphysema no “life-support” hospitalization institutionalization hope you have a neighbor with air, cause you’re out of luck. Inhumane might be a kind word.
John Kowalko
HB 211(Scott) requires that admission to vocational-technical high schools be determined through a lottery system rather than any other criteria. House Education Committee.
If the state is going to mandate a lottery for vo-tech, why not charter, choice and any other program that requires an application? How are applicants selected for the IB program?
HB 292(Bennett) requires that a background check be completed on a new public school hire before that person begins employment. House Education Committee.
I find it hard to believe that in 2012 there is any school district anywhere that does not do background checks on potential employees. I have volunteered at 2 Catholic schools and have had more than one background check. Teachers and others who deal directly with the kids are required to have the background check and fingerprinting. I also find it interesting that this bill has approximately 21 sponsors and co-sponsors in the house, yet Deb Heffernan, the former president of the Brandywine board of education, is not one of them.
“If the state is going to mandate a lottery for vo-tech, why not charter, choice and any other program that requires an application? How are applicants selected for the IB program?”
With all due respect, if we have so much demand for vo-tech seats, why are we restricting the supply? As I understand it, there are about twice as many applicants as slots for them. The current system fails the students, the public — everyone but the otherwise unemployable GA clowns who find jobs within it.
“I also find it interesting that this bill has approximately 21 sponsors and co-sponsors in the house, yet Deb Heffernan, the former president of the Brandywine board of education, is not one of them.”
If you find that interesting, you must lead an incredibly dull life. With that many sponsors, it will pass even if Deb Heffernan drops dead in her oatmeal tomorrow morning.
Was anyone able to go to the sheriff hearing?
I think 292 stems from the backlog in checks in past years. People were starting teaching and working for several weeks while their background checks were still pending. This was in part because DSP’s unit was understaffed, and in part because districts weren’t making their assignments / selections until so late in the summer. But I may be talking out my ass.
SW: Maybe someone from the DP loony bin will post on it, if they’ve finished panicking over the courts forcing their churches to perform gay marriages and the crisis over sex-selective abortions. ‘Cause, y’know, FREEEEEDOMMMM!
With respect to HB292, I am told that the background check is done, but it does not actually have to come back before the staff member is placed in a position to interact with students.
Didn’t get to it today in the House Education Committee though. Spent the whole time talking about adding a non-voting member to the 5 school boards serving Wilmington (HB362), then tabling the bill.
Your compassionate asshole Kowalko is fighting against the release of 311.
What Will says is true; but there is a two-step process to returns on the background check. If there are warrants or wants immediately active they will come up in 24 hours or so.
The reason why this often occurs for school districts is that with the September unit count and budgetary considerations, many school districts cannot hire their final few employees until either during or even after the beginning of school. In many (perhaps most) cases with teachers and paras they have already passed background checks with prior employers or with their schools (for example, student teachers at DSU have to have a background check to go in the classroom; they have to have another when hired as a full-time employee) so it is not like the schools are not exercising due diligence with those kinds of positions. They have access to prior background checks and information from the college or previous employer.
Nor am I aware of a single case in Delaware where this has ever been a problem.
I AM aware of multiple cases in which the due diligence of HR people turned up problems well before the background check even came into play. These people do NOT want to hire bad people to work with our kids.
Sussex Watcher 0 == the bill was released from Senate COmmittee –
not sure when it will be on the floor
maybe tomorrow??? please – Senators??
292 stemms from the backgrounds NOT being done at all
can you say “Dana Goodman?”
what a cluster that was – they would rather fight a prayer issue than pay to throughly research the background of those working with our kids
Dana Goodman preyed on girls in Maryland before IRSD hired him and it was common knowledge
Isnt there a retired DSP major on the IRSD school Board?? wasnt he still on the job with Goodman was hired?
Oh, thats right – hes the one in the media photo with his head bowed in prayer…….
HMMMMMMM
@Steve – im sorry but what rock have you been under??
“Nor am I aware of a single case in Delaware where this has ever been a problem.”
really?? why do you think Sussex Central is called S***EX Central?
how many predators including Mr. Goodman have they had in the past 5 years?? WOW
the world does not end north of the Canal – there is life south of the canal – albeit not all intelligent…….
Aoine
If I am not mistaken, the problems with Goodman occurred AFTER the background check had come back.
Oh, and in almost every case the predators south of the canal HAD passed the background checks.
Unless you’d care to show where they didn’t.
Goodman was a problem, as I recall, because his issues in Maryland were not reported to schools in Delaware. He was never charged criminally there, and thus nothing showed on the background check. If districts pass the trash and don’t report, there are guaranteed to be problems down the line. This bill came from DSEA, not Goodman.
“With all due respect, if we have so much demand for vo-tech seats, why are we restricting the supply? As I understand it, there are about twice as many applicants as slots for them”- I can see demand for votech going up, so I agree the supply should go up, and in my opinion so should the supply at CSW, but I also see (ask any parent of an 8th grader and you will see too)people applying to votech as a backup plan, if their kid doesn’t get in CSW, Conrad, or another choice school.. many are avoiding other schools, not really trying to get into votech.
A heightening of the level of crime for a bus driver is disgusting to me. He/she is no more vulnerable than the rest of us who work out in the public every day
Doing a background check on someone is a little more than fingerprints and NCIC,and DELJIS etc
if you actually call references and talk to folks you can find out wonderful things about integrity. I understand that someone can have a clean “criminal” record and still be a predator – its a matter of being caught
However, with Goodman – all the flags were raised – IRSD failed in their due diligence.
I think investing time and effort into protecting those in society that are vulnerable is worthwhile, kids, the elderly, the ill, etc
Goodmans issues did not have to be reported to schools in Delaware -IRSD never checked further than the prints. They never made the calls, therefore they never found out that under the smoke there was a lot of fire.
if the background checks dont come back until after teachers are placed how can you then say that the problem occured after they passed background checks – I worked for the schools for years – one year my backgound came back in January, I got my copy in the mail – funny thing, I was fingerprinted in August the previous year and had already worked for the District for 2 years!
Good thing I wasnt a predator – the children in my cars aged from 6-12
the NCIC (FBI check) takes a little longer, but DELJIS takes about 30 seconds – its all a matter of priority isn;t it, and a phone call – about 5 minutes.
How do you know IR never made the calls?
Background checks are criminal history checks. The stuff you’re talking about are reference checks, and are NOT done by DSP.
I know that the Delmarva bill seems to be unduly harsh and cruel, but as someone who does outreach work, visits people and helps them with Delmarva bills I can tell you that there are people who use that medical alert just to avoid paying bills.
The bill probably shouldn’t pass, but as another commenter said reviews by an impartial medical party need to be done to stop some of this fraud.
On what planet? A thorough background check includes far more than a cursory search for criminal records. Anyone who has ever been bonded would know that.
Armored car drivers and those who work with large quantities of cash often aren’t paid very much, but their background is THOROUGHLY checked before they’re hired.
I’m w/ you mikes4mom. It blows me away those who game the system, under “medical necessity”. Just being elderly doesn’t give you a full pass to ignore your electric bill–but relatives will go to the mat arguing that point. Also, allowing your kids to be in shorts year round playing inside w/ your thermostat at 75 degrees in the middle of February, claiming an “asthmatic child” should not trump some sort of compensation to Delmarva. I’ve seen the reality of what the electric company is calling into question. Sure, you’re on a ventilator or dialysis–by all means they need to be excluded. But unfortunately, electric bill ignorance has gone the way of over-used “handicap parking” placards (of which I hear the state is starting to crack down on too). It’s a shame–but it’s a reality–Americans taking advantage of good intentioned services.
Background checks are multi-dimensional–between fingerprints, references, job history timeline, military service, drug screen, TB test etc. Finger prints alone used to be a double tiered return–state and federal. Sometimes took up to 10 weeks post 9/11. Maybe things are loosening up a bit now–but some districts won’t absorb the costs, so applicants are hesitant to pre-emptively begin the proceess–like fingerprints or TB screen–if they end up going to a district, who considers results expired–or won’t accept another district’s verification. I was at one job, where they made me use a certain doctor, for the physical component they required. It can be a mess, all the pre-employment stuff.
Get a TWIC, which is necessary to work in any port, refinery or power plant in this country regardless of having spent fifteen years on site previously and THEN discuss background checks versus criminal history. $132.50 to Lockheed Martin and the feds vet you like McCain wishes he had vetted Palin. Seriously, do it! Then you can speak from knowledge.
@Joe Cass–Fuck the TSA too. Bush sucked, and the monstrosity that is the TSA is his crowning achievement in sucky-ness.
Aoine and Joanne and Joe Cass, you know not of whence you speak. HB 292, the bill we are discussing and which none of you have apparently read, addresses only criminal background and sex abuse registry information. That’s it. Districts are on their own as far as the rest of it. References, etc., are NOT considered part of “background checks” in this part of Delaware law. RTFB.
@SW–Please direct us to the section of the Delaware Code that deals with background checks.
Roland,
Go look up the bill yourself, you lazy idiot.
Sorry. I’ll be nice. Roland obviously can’t think and type at the same time. Here is the bill we are discussing:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/lis146.nsf/vwLegislation/HB+292/$file/legis.html?open
I can’t take responsibility if your workplaces or employers consider “background checks” to be something different, but the bill and the existing code excerpted therein clearly explains what “background checks” are for teachers. Please stop talking before you embarrass yourselves.
SW-I’ve read the bill. It doesn’t exclude “necessary information” OK? That’s the interpretive crap districts are held over the barrel with–sure it’s sex registry and criminal background mentioned–but the whole package is TB test, work history etc… Districts and more importantly VICTIMS will hang their hat on “necessary information” being overlooked when a teacher being vetted goes wrong. You can make book on that. They need to clean up the nebulus “necessary information”.
Eat a bag of dicks, SW. You claimed the DE code defines “background checks”. It’s your job to back it up, not mine.
Joanne,
With respect, you’re completely misreading the bill. Read that first section again and strip out all the crap:
“Any person seeking employment … shall be required to submit fingerprints and other necessary information … in order to obtain the following: Report of the individual’s entire criminal history record … [and] A report of the individual’s entire federal criminal history record.”
“Necessary information” thus refers to the information that a candidate needs to provide to obtain the criminal history – stuff like name, address, DOB, birthplace, etc. It does not refer to the “whole package.”
This bill is not meant to backstop bad teacher vetting, but just to close one potential loophole. This is an issue DSEA has been pushing for. From a TNJ article from earlier this year: “One challenge Delaware faces is a delay each fall in conducting background checks on the flurry of new hires in school systems, Jenner said. Teachers hired in the latter part of the summer in some cases start work without having their criminal histories checked, she said. If a check comes back with a disqualifying item, the teacher would, of course, be removed from the classroom, she said. ‘But I don’t think that’s really how we want to be doing it,’ Jenner said.” (http://www.topix.com/wire/city/milford-de?q=u:delawareonline.com)
—————
Roland,
I have respect for Joanne, but none for you. So Google it, dumbass. I provided the links in a separate comment, but it is awaiting moderation for some reason.
Delaware needs to take another step and enact its own version of the SESAME Act, now pending in the Pennsylvania senate, or the Jeremy Bell Act, a piece of federal legislation. Dana Goodman never would have been hired had these been in place in Delaware.
http://www.sesamenet.org/legislation.html
I couldn’t care less if you respect me. I don’t know you & likely will never meet you.
You claim Joanne Christian is misreading the bill. I believe Ms. Christian is or was an elected school board member and she may have just a bit more experience than you in matters such as these.
What you claim to be a “misreading” will be some ambulance chaser’s argument before a court. An argument that could potentially a)win, or b) scare the board of a DE district into settling for monetary settlement.
I haven’t read the bill and it really isn’t very important to me. My initial comment was about background checks in general. It had nothing to do with the specifics of this bill.
My point, which obviously eluded you, was that people who work in relatively low paying jobs and who have NO CONTACT with children through the normal course of their work day are forced to endure very thorough background checks prior to being hired. Perhaps the bill should include specific language that REQUIRES a thorough check of potential new hires if we really want to “protect the children”.
Have a nice day. I hope you don’t die in your sleep tonight.
If you haven’t read the bill, and haven’t read the law, why should we listen to you about it? That’s what I thought. Now go run and play.
You’re still prattling on about “the law”. The “law” you’ve yet to cite. Hmmm.
Cited it at 10:51. Post still in moderation. Once staff bumps it free you can check it out. Or just Google your own self.
@ SW- how do i know they didnt make the calls? Becoz i worked there- becoz i know that IRSD HR at that time could not find their way out of a wet paper bag with both hands- because i have personal knowledge about hires that were not even authorized to work in the US being hired by IRSD
YEP- thats right undocumented workers working for the school district because HR had NO – let me repeat- NO CLUE what an I-9 form was or how to have one properly filled out.
They consistantly violated federal employment law. By illegal hires and civil right violations
They could not even abide by the list of documents the feds say must be obtained.
I know coz i witnessed it – all of it.- between the mess in the finance department and the HR department i got out before someone had me on a witness stand testifying- and dont think i didnt try to tell them either- i did and it caused nothing but grief for me- how dare i try to educate the wilfully ignorant. And yes- i covered my ass and documented all of it.
So – before you get on your high horse maybe, just maybe some does actually k ow what they r talking about besides you
Aoine – No high horse – just curious as to the source of your inside knowledge. So you saw Goodman’s personnel file and noted the lack of reference calls? Were you in the room when the HR director said “Nah, I didn’t check up on him?” Or is your statement just a general supposition you made based on previous experience with your former employer?
Even you can see the difference there, I assume.
Here’s what I wrote up for members of the Civic League last night (but I will add, I got my first taste of Joe Farley – the guy acted like he owned the place):
The amendment replaced the bill and took into consideration the major flaws and pretty much fixed them.
One flaw was that there are individuals who are not at death/hospitalization’s door but who may well be if there is a termination of utility for heat or AC.
Asthmatics who need ventilation, and MS suffers who need AC and other vulnerable populations are now protected by an appeal process – also involving the case manager, assuming that the people in this program are impoverished and on state assistance.
Harris McDowell asked about funding sources like LIHEAP for AC. Delmarva said that because the program had no way to force people to pay, they ignored bills and had no sense of responsibility to make payments. And in the same vein, it is not Delmarva’s place to get LIHEAP funding for them. They have to do it themselves and there is no incentive to make people seek alternative funding.
Delaware’s program has an unusually generous extended time frame between certifications (120 days). But the largest difference between us and the surrounding states studied for these recommendations (MD NJ PA) is that we had no mandate for setting a payment plan and the bills can accrue such that they become insurmountable.
In some cases, the individual dies and the bill must still be paid by other family residing at the residence which would tend to lead to foreclosure. Delmarva has property liens and wage attachments but even with the mandated payment plan feature, don’t believe they will actually recoup the existing deficit.
I mentioned that something to consider is that case managers are already incredibly over-loaded. Delaware is beginning to put the disabled population into regular community living with support of vouchers – vouchers that are not expected to actually meet the financial burden of living independently. If this population is not used to having to figure out how to handle bills etc, an educational component will be necessary.
Also, a unique moment presented itself for some insider humor at Delmarva’s expense.
The DP&L rep. made a statement that ‘agencies’ who have to help these people pay these bills (once they are no longer certified and are out of the program and vulnerable to termination of utility) agree that the bills should not be allowed to accrue. If an agency has one person with a 3 thousand dollar liability and 6 people with 500 liability, they will pay for the 6 first. The agencies use money from a fund that we all pay into for low income assistance.
DP&L could only come up with one named agency which sent a letter in support of the bill: Kingswood Community Center. A few of us started to murmer and John Flaherty asked if the agency cited didn’t have an unusually close relationship with Delmarva. The guy stuttered a bit and said, well, yes, Delmarva’s corporate President is also the President of the Board at Kingswood…but he is on several boards so that shouldn’t matter…..
That person is, of course, Gary Stockbridge. And I hear that he just gave Pam Scott a job over there.
HA!
I sat through some of the sheriff bill hearing. Schwarzkopf stated that:
This for-clarity ‘housekeeping’ bill was being offered at the request of Sussex County Council.
The state had layers of new legislation regarding the role and duty of sheriff under which older language hadn’t been removed and needed to be. The older law is defunct, (if that is the right term).
This has nothing to do with the Constitution.
I sat through some of the first witness a self-identified state constitutional expert named George. He was blah blah blah on the usual stuff with one exception I hadn’t heard before…
George thinks this is an issue of violation of separation of government branches.
The Council’s legislative branch is usurping the executive branch and trying to extinguish it. Why? Because George believes that the sheriff is in fact the county executive. huh.
I was riding the 626 today up Orange, and the bus driver stopped to talk to a homeless person on the corner, and it made me late for work. I lost my job because of him. I got back on his bus, and when it passed that same spot, I just got so rabid, I couldn’t think straight. That driver ruined my life, I didn’t care what happened to me, I didn’t care about right or wrong, I could only hear the pounding in my ears, and something happened to my vision, and it was all red. I just saw his face and wanted to pound the fuck out of it… I ran up to him, pulled back my hand, and then remembered it would be a an assault in the second degree, a class D felony, rather than an assault in the third degree, a class A misdemeanor. I regained my composure. I am so glad Delaware Liberal published this piece so I could know that. Brady is my hero. He is the saviour of mankind. This piece of legislation saved my life, and saved the life of the bus driver. That small difference, between an assault in the 2nd degree versus an assault in the 3rd degree, was enough to bring me to my senses and prevent a crime from taking place. Now, I wonder if Brady can find a job for me?
Are you serious, kavips? Did this bus story really happen and did you really lose your job today? Because it sorta sounds like a parable.
No, it’s the Post of the Week, maybe the Year. Simply priceless, Kavips!
BTW, Post/Pre-Game will be a little late this AM. Off today, and slept in. However, I’m rolling up the sleeves of my sleeveless T, so…
SW and Roland–Sorry, I had to go to bed. It’s that busy time of year w/ school “stuff”. Anyway, SW–I can see you are passionate and pleased w/ 292. And it is great…to a limit. Whether or not the intent is there for criminality only, the interpretation is left for a field day in defending. I’m all for good legislation–but let’s make it great legislation and sew up those misunderstandings. You and I both know the spirit of the law when challenged never trumps the letter of the law in court. Sad–but has proven time and time again true. Let me give you a few snippets of what ‘unclean” legislation lets through….of course all of these folks passed criminal background checks:
1) Foreign language teacher w/ multiple failures of PRAXUS ll of her language she is supposed to be teaching
2) Certification in process of a teacher who thought that on-line program, w/ no campus site, or practicum, incredulous that year(s) later would be challenged as not meeting minimal requirements for teaching.
3) A pending drug charge in another state beating our “hurry up” timeline here, and able to secure employment in good ol’ Delaware.
4) School nurses being hired in spite of failing basic 10th grade level math via PRAXIS ll–albeit conditionally–but for a LONG time. This is being changed though.
All of these “discoveries” are made into a school year, w/ argument being made “now you don’t want to disrupt a class/program do you?” or the best..”where are we going to find a replacement now?”. It’s just reality SW. Not an opposition.
I’m just saying the criminal background check isn’t the end all to beat all. I applaud the schools (and yes they are out there–but not in this state)–who “package” a graduate for hiring. They don’t graduate unless they already have in order the state certification, attached endorsements (like spec. ed),and fingerprint clearance. It is less chaotic, and fragmented than what we do here w/ applicants.
Kavips has given us the solution to crimes against bus drivers, senior citizens, paramedics, public safety officials and occupants of their own homes — all we’ve got to do is get all the would-be thugs in the state to read DL before they go about their daily business.
Thank you.
Mediawatch, THIS is our Kumbaya moment, a tagline for all of us: ” Delaware Liberal: Must-Reading for Thugs!”
All we’ll have to fear from now on are thugs who can’t read. However, most of them are too busy running for office to attack bus drivers…
There is no reason why the school districts cannot run potential candidates for positions through the vetting process prior to even having the intention of hiring. They could vett applicants when they apply to weed out those who cannot qualify. When a position comes open they can then hire from the list vetted candidates. There really is no excuse for not vetting prior to hiring.
There is no reason why the school districts cannot run potential candidates for positions through the vetting process prior to even having the intention of hiring. They could vett applicants when they apply to weed out those who cannot qualify.
This is one of those ideas that sounds good in principle, but . . .
For, say, the average secondary Social Studies position advertised in Delaware there will be as many as 40-50 applicants. Do you want to do the vetting there, or when the list is cut to 15 by the principal, or when the list is cut to 3 or 4 for interviews by the search committee? In most cases search committees do call references, but in many cases (especially over the summer) you cannot always connect with all the references. Having done this many times, it usually requires 1-2 hours of work to track down and call each candidate’s set of references. Given that there are usually multiple openings in multiple schools, this can quickly get into many hours. And there are variations on “best practices” around the state and the nation, so it isn’t all cut and dried.
@Joanne–DSU is moving toward that kind of packaging for our graduates. They already have fingerprint clearance (required for student teaching); PRAXIS scores (required for admission into Teacher Education Program); and references. Certification/endorsements are more problematic because DE DOE is not real cooperative on that–we can’t provide the documents and make “bulk” applications for our graduates even though we are fully State and NCATE accredited. DOE requires each graduate to submit their credentials separately. They can’t do that until they’ve finished student teacher, all coursework, and have a transcript that indicates degree completion–at which point we no longer control them. Other states have a smoother system.
Joanne,
You still aren’t getting this. The bill is not seeking to strengthen background checks. It does not alter the checks one iota. The process is still the same. The only change is in timing. If you want more vetting, write a law to require expanded process. As for me, I don’t care one way or the other about the bill.
“For, say, the average secondary Social Studies position advertised in Delaware there will be as many as 40-50 applicants. Do you want to do the vetting there, or when the list is cut to 15 by the principal, or when the list is cut to 3 or 4 for interviews by the search committee?”
It is a lot of work, but really, those 40-50 applicants plan on working somewhere, sometime, so eventually they need to be vetted. I would form a partnership between MD, DE, NJ, VA, and PA; arrive at common standards and use a shared means of vetting.
In the federal government, they employ a common organization with (mostly) common standards to conduct background investigations to vett those who with a requirement for access to classified material. If I am working for the DOD and previously had a clearance with DOE (Dept of Energy) that vetting works in DoD. As I said, the 40-50 applicants are going to be employed in education sometime.
I love how the so called know it alls here love to belittle folks who work hard to provide a needed service to the public under a heck of alot of stress. Besides the ever present traffic issues in Northern New Castle County that they have to navigate and maintain a schedule Then there is the on going verbal abuse due to the bus running late because due to so called cost saving the time on a route is continously reduced. Of course this is the driver’s since the passenger has no one else to lash out at. Or the passenger that pisses an moans about paying a $1.15 for the ride or can’t have their fare ready blames the driver because again a schedule has to be maintained. We acknowledge the verbal threats and abuse goes with the job. WHen it escalates into spitting in the drivers face which is an all too common occurence. Throwing unknown liquids in the drivers face up to and including urine the we get to those who either use the driver as a punching bag with their fists feet or other things like heavy bags. These things go way to far and are becoming a more common occurence in today’s society. The driver is strapped to the seat with a seatbelt unable to defend themselves and many time the attack comes from behind.
As it stands now A driver on the 40 bus gets punched in the face the cops are called. he basically tells the driver nothing is really going to happen Maybe probation for offensive touching.
We have had drivers off on workers comp for injuries as a result of being attacked. While it has not gotten to the level of what you may see on the evening news in Philly on Septa it has been getting worse on recent years. This is no joke and some one is going to get killed if we do not do something. and I am offended by some of the attitudes expressed.
I hope none of you are ever on a bus where something like this happens and your life is put in danger
We work for the state and it is up to the state to do their best of ensure a safe work enviorment
@Dave
I’m not sure you have an understanding of the word “vetted.” What do you mean here? The law and the initial set of comments involved background checks for criminal behavior. Most reference checking–unless there is a suspicion of a problem in that regard–has to do with potential job performance.
The standard for background checks and who is employable is a matter of state law, not Federal statute as with security clearances. Certain items on your background check make it illegal to hire you (drugs, sexual acts, etc.). Others don’t, unless state law so specifies.
A recent case of which I am aware involved a young person new to teaching, whose background check included (I’m not kidding) two dozen arrests for drug-related charges and no convictions. He only went to trial twice, because the rest of the charges (spanning a four-year period as a teen-ager wre dropped.) Under state law this individual has passed the background check, because he has no convictions, and you cannot legally use his record as a reason not to hire him.
As for a regional consortium, good luck–in Delaware at least 50% of the applications come outside that limited field of states. I suppose it would be possible to put together a “common application” like some colleges do, but that is in a sense very duplicative of what occurs in certification reciprocity. Nor is it a given that all those people are going to work in education sometime. Many of them won’t.