Hank is called a “stooge”

Hank replies to “Again I was told to shut up or be fired”.  Article and comments can be found at
stoogeA couple of years ago I was accused by one of my web site readers of enjoying free meals provided to me by the PO FD.   It did not happen, and you can ask the Port Orange chamber of commerce, Jill Geddy, that when I took pictures at their affairs, I turned down free food because I do not enjoy eating when I have work to do.   Truer to the mark about freebies would be to explain that in the Pinecrest Diner in Bayshore, police who ate in the diner paid only half price.  Perhaps that was a violation of departmental policy, and as bad as accepting a free cup of coffee. I enjoyed the food at the Pinecrest diner, but I know no one would believe that is why I ate there.  That is ok with me.  Flourish your skepticism; it is healthy for us all.  Once in the diner, a young man went on a return trip from narcotics, and started screaming, yelling at the bugs on the wall, and pushing everything off the front counter, plates, cakes and people’s dinners. I was in uniform and had to do my thing. I put the handcuffs on him and SCPD came and took custody of the poor soul.
I now read that I am a “stooge” for Woodman.  Not so I assure you.  I know very little about the guy, have never spoken to, and post his opinions as I would for even those making accusations about my integrity with trying to be objective.
There was an interesting and well written comment by someone on the Port-Orange.us blog. It addressed the issue that Ted Noftall does harm to Port Orange employees by not attesting to the good work that many of them do.  Perhaps they do.  I have no doubt that there are many doing good work. I come from the police profession, and read many years ago about bad policemen and am still reading about bad policemen in my retirement years.  But I think, and I hope, we all know that not all of the workers in city government or police work are bad and poor workers.  I thought that goes without saying. It is difficult to discuss bad things about city government and at the same time give notice of all the good workers in a group.  When taking on negative issues, it is counterproductive to start giving out commendations.  That is not the time to do that.
And, how would Ted or I know who the good workers are?  We know they are there, and we know that it was hard on them all those years to see nonproductive workers being rewarded not for good work, but for being loyal team players, and all that it infers.
Once during the heat of Ted Noftall’s airing of problems in the water or utility department (I forget), Ken Parker stuck up for a worker who might have been responsible for some errors, and replied to Ted that such and such was  a very good worker.  I wrote to Mr. Parker and told him to cut it out, because of all people who were in a position to recognize good and bad workers, he was not the one.
The issue of the morale of city workers seems to be coming to the fore front.  It would be amazing to me, if the morale of the city workers only became bad when negative findings were being revealed, and Ted Noftall and the two blogs in this city publicized them.  I have written before, and write again, that I am confident that there were many good workers in city government who were displeased with whom the team favorites were to the administration.  If I had worked in such an environment it would have pissed me off.  And I bet there are quite a few in city government who were pissed off, and are still remaining quiet, because the old boy network still seems to be in control at city hall.
Let me recount a dialogue I had on the phone with Mayor Allen Green.  I recounted this dialogue to Mr. Parker when we met during his retirement months.
I asked Green if he had known about Parker’s special deal on retirement for Shelley, before it came into effect.  Green said he did, and he spoke to Parker and the city lawyer about it.  According to Green, Green told Parker that he did not approve of Parker’s special deal with Shelley for a couple of reasons. I asked Green if he told other city council members about the deal which was in the works.  Green told me that he did not, because morale in city government was already low, and he did not want to see a grand mass of people quitting and leaving city government.  I did not follow up on this perspective of Green, but wasn’t it true that at the time of the exposure about Parker and Shelley, no other negative aspects of city government had been revealed? (except the Public Works Director stealing issue)  After the Parker and Shelley deal, we learned about water billing problems, franchise fees not collected, vacation time stealing, computer problems, audit problems, and what else
So I sense that very early during these issues about unaccountability a defense was established to diminish or censure negative criticism using a concern of the morale of good workers.  And such a sham defense still seems to flourish.  So, like Ken Starr was a pervert, Ted Noftall is hurting the morale of city workers, and Hank is a stooge.   What an outfit over there in city hall!  Council members and the city manager cannot keep up the morale of good workers because Ted Noftall speaks his mind.  The commentator I am replying to, spoke of Ted wanting to do away with the bad workers.  It seems to me that some want to kill the messenger of negative perceptions.
Let me also address some of the ad hominem attacks I am reading in commentaries. Please be careful. Like Facebook, the people making them can get into legal problems. A court of law can find out who has been writing anonymously.  Also remember, there naturally are some deep seated emotional feelings by some readers of these postings.  Emotions can get out of hand and out of control, and we have seen such happened on face book.
As Ted wrote, if you are writing anonymously, keep to the facts and issues.  I am not a lawyer, but there may be some legal room to write pointed opinions about public figures, but I would suggest especially being careful of what you write about nonpublic personalities.
I could be wrong.  Remember, suspicion and skepticism are not facts, but should be put to rest by the true facts and in a lot of instances the real statistics.
Hank springer
posted 7:12:52 PM  May 03, 2014
via:   http://www.popdradiolog.com/

Submitted on 2014/05/04 at 7:49 am
by:  R. Woodman

Mr. Springer
Let me start by saying that I don’t think that you or Ted or any of the others mentioned are stooges and certainly not my stooges. I have never met or spoken to any of you with the exception of Bob Ford. I want to apologize to you all for being drawn into personal attacks on me. It is a given that we have good employees at the city and some not so good. It is the not so good ones that make the rest look bad not Ted.
At first some of the swipes that Ted was taking at employees hurt a little bit but I think that the good ones with nothing to hide are starting to get behind him. They want to see the bad things weeded out that reflect on all of them. I left the city after 36 years. I found this site and was inspired by some of the posts by guys like you, Ted and others. Now I can talk about my experiences and things that I know, that I could never do as an employee.
I try to base my posts on the facts as I know them. I have been involved in just about every capital project in utilities for the past 36 years. I refrain from naming names, name calling and slanderous remarks.
Have a good day sir.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.