Jump to content



Photo

Big 4 water features....


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#1 TLIES

TLIES

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 07:25 AM

I have a concern... Saturday I walked the bridge, as i did i noticed people playing in the water feature.  Children and Adults. Not just touching the water, but sliding on the stairs, kicking water at each other, laying and sitting in it.  What concerned me most, is I don't believe it was intended as a spray park, and people will be people.  But there were some young ones /w parents. 15 to 18 months old, diapers and barely walking.

 

The end of this water feature HAS NO GRADE OVER THE DRAIN PORTION....where it flows from the stairs to the other feature.  A child could easily get stuck in the concrete drain between the two. The opening is about 10 to 12 inches high.   

 

This needs to be addressed ASAP. Before someone is injured or dies.

 

Either get fencing up around both.( My choice)  Or treat the water like a pool, and get the proper safety equipment installed. 

( Of course the Officer I observed lounging in the ATV.... could also enforce the area. Keeping people out of the features. :wink: )


  • GrumpyGranny, SandS, Kruger87 and 1 other like this

#2 Stephen Voelker

Stephen Voelker

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 194 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 08:46 AM

And like the dogs on the bridge, the cops ignore and stay in the car playing solitaire on the computer.  Community Policing in Jeffersonville is balderdash. The cops are never out of their cars to talk to anyone.  They pick up their paycheck from the Department of Redevelopment for this extra job and ignore the community.


Edited by Stephen Voelker, 05 May 2015 - 08:48 AM.


#3 TLIES

TLIES

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 09:03 AM

I will agree, this one sat.... and sat.... and watched.          No one should have been allowed in the water.

  At the least, he could have parked next to it. So could he yell , and wouldn't have had to get up.



#4 hmnelson3

hmnelson3

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 132 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 09:06 AM

No one thought about that. Lets go and spend some more money!!!!



#5 TLIES

TLIES

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 09:47 AM

 

 

No one thought about that. Lets go and spend some more money!!!!

 

I took your post as sarcasm.....

 

If it prevents an injury or a fatal accident.  Money should not be an issue,  Its worth every penny.


  • GrumpyGranny, Kruger87, Oldgoat and 1 other like this

#6 Kruger87

Kruger87

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 10:43 AM

Got to love the fact that RD is paying off duty police to sit in city owned cars, with city paid for uniforms and insurance to make extra money on the city! We always talk about people who Double Dip against the system but we allow it to happen. I have always been against the use of city owned equipment being used in 2nd jobs. If that is allowed why don't we allow the parks department to use the lawnmowers to work their 2nd jobs. If we have enough money in RD to pay for part time security by full time police then why doesn't RD fund the officers? I also remember after the big mess in Louisville last year the city was going to get cameras there for security and also RD was going to hire a company to monitor the cameras, why would we do that if we have a full time Police staff? RD at it's Best!! Spending money like it was nothing!! To Mike Moore and the RD department thanks for putting us deeper in debt!!



#7 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 01:40 PM

If they're in uniform, they're on the city clock, or at least that's how it's supposed to be.

#8 TLIES

TLIES

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 01:54 PM

 

 

If they're in uniform, they're on the city clock, or at least that's how it's supposed to be. 

 

 

 

Not sure where you have that info from.   

I know Jeffersonville and Louisville Metro both moonlight in uniform.  That's been happening for years.


  • Kruger87 and toomanytoofew like this

#9 Not Super But Honest Mike

Not Super But Honest Mike

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,711 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 02:44 PM

wait a minute.......they are police officers 24/7/365......that is why they need a take home car......



#10 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:05 PM

Not sure where you have that info from.
I know Jeffersonville and Louisville Metro both moonlight in uniform. That's been happening for years.


That's what I was told by a JPD rep when helping to mediate the conflict with Exit 0 and police/private security at Thornton's and Hardee's. There was confusion about whether encounters were occurring with on-duty officers or paid security. We were told they could use car, but shouldn't be in uniform and representing themself as on-duty city police if working privately. We were also told that would be addressed if not working that way.

Some time has passed (couple years, maybe?), so perhaps there's a possibility been a change, but I'm certain that's was what we were told then.

Edited by kelley, 05 May 2015 - 03:05 PM.


#11 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 05:09 AM

but isn't this a city park, no matter whether it's owned by the parks dept or redevelopment... still a city park. it' s not like they're moonlighting.



#12 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 05:48 AM

They may be.

Big 4 isn't officially a city park but a redevelopment project. The redevelopment commission has contracted with a private company owned and staffed with police to provide security.

Edited by kelley, 06 May 2015 - 06:13 AM.


#13 woo

woo

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 05:53 AM

wait a minute.......they are police officers 24/7/365......that is why they need a take home car......

Ask one if his pay stub reflects that....

 

I am also on call 24/7, It's not easy to have a life and be ready to work when the phone rings.


  • GrumpyGranny and Kruger87 like this

#14 Kruger87

Kruger87

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 06:15 AM

but isn't this a city park, no matter whether it's owned by the parks dept or redevelopment... still a city park. it' s not like they're moonlighting.

OK then why would they get a check for their job as Police officers from the city and another from working security at the park? So yes they are in way doing just that. Kinda like the Fire Chief owning his own company and cleaning the streets around the bridge. Do we not have a street cleaner that can do that and not have to pay a subcontractor $130,000 a year to do that? Oh this is a job that I am not even sure went out to bind in accordance with Indiana Purchasing guidelines. Another Illegal service brought to you by the Mike Moore Administration.



#15 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 06:55 AM

OK then why would they get a check for their job as Police officers from the city and another from working security at the park? So yes they are in way doing just that. Kinda like the Fire Chief owning his own company and cleaning the streets around the bridge. Do we not have a street cleaner that can do that and not have to pay a subcontractor $130,000 a year to do that? Oh this is a job that I am not even sure went out to bind in accordance with Indiana Purchasing guidelines. Another Illegal service brought to you by the Mike Moore Administration.

 

so the check working security is from some other entity than the city?  i don't know.



#16 Peanut

Peanut

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 349 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 07:16 AM

Is the water these people are playing in treated?  



#17 TLIES

TLIES

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 07:18 AM

I e-mailed the mayors office the same post I put here.I did get a response.

 

The grate is being repaired, and they are doing what they can at this point to keep people out. Until it is re-installed. 

and No the water feature should not be used as a spray park. it is meant to be off limits to people.

 

I will admit , I have not seen anyone in it since Saturday.

 

Let's hope security makes it a priority.  Who ever it is....


  • GrumpyGranny likes this

#18 sfizer

sfizer

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 07:21 AM

How much money was the fire chief making off the city before Moore was put in office?  It seems like I've seen a lot more of his trucks since Moore took office.  



#19 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 07:45 AM

so the check working security is from some other entity than the city? i don't know.


Yes. The redevelopment cuts a check to a security firm. The firm pays the security employees.

Edited by kelley, 06 May 2015 - 07:46 AM.

  • Kruger87 likes this

#20 Kruger87

Kruger87

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 10:26 AM

Yes. The redevelopment cuts a check to a security firm. The firm pays the security employees.

The firm is contracted through RD and the firm hires the police officers and the police officers use city owned cars and uniforms for the job. Also it was my understanding, and I may be wrong, but the firm is co-owned by our new police chief. How is that not a conflict of interest if it is co-owned by the police chief?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users