From time to time, I've been disparagingly called the Pope of Blogging. True, like most geniuses, I can be a snotty know-it-all. But as most of you know, I'm no rocket scientist. When I start getting on my high hoorse, it never takes long before one of you pops my balloon. I screwed up last week in my post about constables, and have to set the record straight. Fortunately, I was not speaking ex cathedra.
I correctly told you they cost counties money. When indigent Defendants are unable to pay the costs associated with serving a warrant, the county does foot the bill.
But I went too far when I reported that in 2007, Northampton County taxpayers shelled out nearly a million dollars in constable fees that they will never get back. The actual figure is closer to $300,000. I forgot that the 1099s sent out by the county includes payments made by Defendants that are passed through the county. One of my readers, who apparently does know what he's talking about, properly took me to task.
"I believe an update to your post is needed once you check Northampton County’s 2007 budget. You have definitely not stated the facts as your column indicates. You have used inaccurate information to support your viewpoint. In the future, please learn and understand the process of how something is calculated before you claim, 'Here are the facts'."
This reader is right and I am wrong. I apologize to everyone for misleading them. Next time, I'll be more sneaky.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe Pope has a guy who after the fact officially writes what the Pope meant to say, not what he really said. This is what you are supposed to go by. When the Pope said that condoms aggravate the spread of AIDS in Africa, the guy added the word "might" after a big blow up over the statement. Maybe you should see if the guy could do the same for you. I sure wish I had that option from time to time. :)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteTwo comments made by Michael Molovisky have been deleted referring to my lack of journalistic standards and the gravity of my offense. I refuse to engage in an unproductive tit for tat with him.
ReplyDelete$300,000 sounds a lot more reasonable then paying full time salaries + benefits + pensions to get the job done.
ReplyDeleteI favor people who are based on what actual work they have performed.
There was a prior discussion (I can't remember where) on this constable issue and when it was all broken down... constables spend a lot of out of pocket money (cars, supplies, office, telephone, etc.) that would be required to get this job done w/o even factoring in the salaries, benefits & pensions of those of county enforcement officers that might even have to clock in OT.
Besides if a these constable is acting out of line it's a simple matter to no longer use that person's services.
I'm with the constables on this one.
I'm with whatever makes most sense financially. I will try to be at tomorrow's budget hearing.
ReplyDeleteMolovinsky posted one of his deleted comments at the Poliblog. It is a confusing mish mash of 'I said this and then Bernie said that.' Although it definitely is what you called it, I would have let it stand.
ReplyDeleteI would not.
ReplyDeleteI think we all have to be our own judges. I'm not asking MM to remove his post at our place. He is entitled to his opinion. He is entitled to engage you as he sees fit. I choose to take my own path.
ReplyDeleteBernie, you have admitted an error and made a change. That is your perogative. I'm not in position to past judgement on any one. All I can say is I hope you guys can find some semblance of civility.
Chris,
ReplyDeleteThis is not the first time I made a factual error blogging, now will it be the last. This is not the first time I have had to acknowledge I got something wrong, nor will it be the laat.
I believe I have to admit my errors, and if they're bug enough, do so in a separate post. But one thing I don't have to put up is MM's claim that I'm not sorry enough, his bizarre claim that I lack journalistic standards, his insistence on regurgitating previous exchanges (worse than w/ any past girlfiend), his petulant claim that I've buried my link to his blog, or the way he insulted one of my readers on your blog.
As he began posting personal attack after personal attack, I saw no reason to highlight a link to his blog.
He is the only blogger who has actually ever complained about where the link to his blog is located on my own. Give me a break! That's pretty amazing from someone who links to no one but himself. But to make things easier for him, I've removed it completely as he and General Trexler gently weep. I'll consider restoring it when he stops acting like a baby and focuses on issues instead of other bloggers. Nobody cares about that.