|Hoboken's Dumb-inatrix strikes again.|
Still unconvinced that the 4th Ward Councilman is the mental equivalent of a cabbage?
The following is NOT a PhotoShop, it's the REAL thing. Yikes.
Posted on Facebook yesterday, here is what Timmy has to say about Marianne Camporeale, or "Mary Ann Camparelli" and his plans to "fight" tonight at the City Council.
Oh, Lord. Where to begin?
Let's ignore his unfortunate spelling. Here is what Timmy is peddling to the low-information crowd:
- The Zimmer Administration hates old, handicapped, Polio survivors.
- The ADA overrides the statute which deemed Camporeale "resigned" on November 3, 2011.
- Timmy lets slip that Camporeale is going to file a lawsuit (GA believes this is true, but it will get laughed out of court.)
- The burden is on "Bhalla" to produce "evidence" that Camporeale has been removed- for exactly the same reason Ruben Ramos was removed in 2003 and Father Micheal Gigliemelli in 2001. As though anyone- including the DCA- has jurisdiction over the STATUTE.
- Timmy is the champion of the (false) premise that Camporeale is being "attacked".
First, note the fact that Timmy- who is supposed to be advocating in the interest of Hoboken and not AGAINST it- encourages and facilitates a potential lawsuit by positing a (false) argument that "Camparelli" is a VICTIM of discrimination!
Mr. Numb-Nuts doesn't understand that her employer is HUD- not Hoboken. Consequently, she has already been removed by statute not "Bhalla" or "Zimmer"- read it:
Isn't that clear? She was "deemed resigned" when the clock ran out. The DCA "letter" does not remove her, the FEDERAL statute DOES.
In this case, DID.
Therefore, if Camporeale deigns to sue, the Defendant is The United States of America's Department of Housing and Urban Development. Not Hoboken.
No matter to Timmy, who pitches the notion of "another lawsuit", asserting the aspiring Plaintiff's claim she's been "attacked" for political reasons and is being "removed" in a "hostile" manner. Do you people get it?
Timmy is working AGAINST the interest of Hoboken by peddling the viability of Camporeale's discrimination claim.
Bringing me to Timmys next idiotic, false claim: that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 'protects' Camporeale from removal for failure to finish her study course in 18 months (per statute).
Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 " prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment."
It's a long piece of legislation- take a look. In Camporeale's case, the "employer" would be HUD and/or the DCA who administers the federal grant money (Not-Stempler, is that right?).
In order for Camporeale to make such a claim of "discrimination" under the ADA she would need to PROVE:
- her disability prevented her from meeting the 18 months accorded by statute
- she had notified her 'employer' that her disability required an 'accommodation' in the 18 month term followed by a negotiation of a 'reasonable' accommodation.
An employer generally does not have to provide a reasonable accommodation unless an individual with a disability has asked for one. If an employer believes that a medical condition is causing a performance or conduct problem, it may ask the employee how to solve the problem and if the employee needs a reasonable accommodation. Once a reasonable accommodation is requested, the employer and the individual should discuss the individual's needs and identify the appropriate reasonable accommodation. Where more than one accommodation would work, the employer may choose the one that is less costly or that is easier to provide.Got that, numb-nuts?
Camporeale completed 3/5 of her training. In the balance of 18 months, did she EVER notify her 'employer' at any time that she required more time due to her disability? Even ONCE? Did her employer ignore her pleas? Did her employer refuse her requests?
Her 'employer' can tell us. In FEDERAL court.
Camporeale may wish to think twice before filing a frivolous claim against the federal government. GA imagines they like to make example of those who exploit a serious piece of legislation designed to enforce he rights of handicapped and disabled Americans.
Now Timmy, before you make a complete jackass of yourself, understand the jurisdiction of the HHA and the limits of local government to selectively obey statutes. Did you read the statute?
Well, what else to expect from the stand-alone "NO" vote on the Mello-Giattino effort to update Hoboken's "Nuisances" Ordinance because he disagreed with restrictions on the public's right to spit.
|If we put the statute in a Seuss book, then he'll read it?|