Passaic County

[djg0770 481]

Does anyone know anything about the delays currently being experienced in Passaic County with mental health checks?

 

Or for that matter, which department at the County is responsible and whom they answer to?

[Barms 98]

It's the Passaic county Adjusters office.

 

I haven't inquired in over a year. But the one time I called the number right off the website a fantastic woman actually picked up the phone and I was nice and said "is it possible for you to tell me when my application came in?". And in 30 seconds she said "yup it's right here and we sent it back the next day. We try to turn these around same day"

 

In other words it was not a county delay it was local PD delay. So of course never believe what the local tells you

 

Again this was over a year ago. But I was amazed a human answered the phone there and was so accommodating. But maybe it's different now.

 

Just google Passaic county adjuster

[djg0770 481]

Will do Barms.  Local PD told my mayor they only received mental health checks from March back 2 wks ago.

[djg0770 481]

Ok - called the adjuster and it is as they say, they're significantly backed up.

 

Data:

 

In 2001 they completed 607 mental health apps for firearms

In 2012 they completed over 3000 mental health apps for firearms

In Jan of 2013, they received 3000 mental health requests, and staffing was cut from 5 people to 2, and allegedly another person is being hired in September.

 

They're currently processing requests from April 2013.

[boo 6]

I had been hoping that the surge in applications had died down by now and that my FID would be processed in 30 days, i.e., next week. Thanks for bringing me back to reality

[Johnny 0]

Ok - called the adjuster and it is as they say, they're significantly backed up.

 

Data:

 

In 2001 they completed 607 mental health apps for firearms

In 2012 they completed over 3000 mental health apps for firearms

In Jan of 2013, they received 3000 mental health requests, and staffing was cut from 5 people to 2, and allegedly another person is being hired in September.

 

They're currently processing requests from April 2013.

 

So as the number of requests went up, they cut staff. That makes sense.

[djg0770 481]

So as the number of requests went up, they cut staff. That makes sense.

 

Government efficiency.  This among many other reasons contributes to why I need to get out of NJ.

[mikka1 2]

Just a couple of back of the envelope calcs...

 

>>In 2012 they completed over 3000 mental health apps for firearms

>>In Jan of 2013, they received 3000 mental health requests, and staffing was cut from 5 people to 2

 

There were ~250 business days in 2012. Thus they had 3000 / 250 = 12 applications per day on average for the whole office.

They had 5 people employed. Assuming (but most likely that's not 100% correct) that those applications are all that they do, they had 2.4 applications per person per business day. With an average working hours of ~7.5 a day that would mean around 3 hours of work time per one application to be processed.

 

I don't have any ready to use workload efficiency benchmarks from the public sector now, but my gut feeling tells me that 3 hours per 1 mental health application is a little bit too much unless they manually call every single hospital in the area or go through multiple handwritten registries.

 

Frankly, I'm not surprised that they got their "staff optimization" with those kind of numbers...

[djg0770 481]

You're assuming that only firearms owners need mental health checks, or that these people ONLY do mental health checks. 

 

 

County Adjuster

Functions
The County Adjuster's Office is a statutory office authorized to act in cases of commitments or admission of persons to state, county or private hospitals for the mentally ill. It processes applications to the above named institutions, holds hearings to determine both the legal residence of the patient and the ability of relatives of the patient to contribute toward care and maintenance while hospitalized and presents cases relating to this work before the courts.

 

http://www.passaiccountynj.org/index.aspx?NID=216

[carguy3j 0]

So as the number of requests went up, they cut staff. That makes sense.

 

Ok - called the adjuster and it is as they say, they're significantly backed up.

 

Data:

 

In 2001 they completed 607 mental health apps for firearms

In 2012 they completed over 3000 mental health apps for firearms

In Jan of 2013, they received 3000 mental health requests, and staffing was cut from 5 people to 2, and allegedly another person is being hired in September.

 

They're currently processing requests from April 2013.

Hmmm, has anybody considered re-visiting/ filing another lawsuit around the 30 day requirement?

 

I understand that the ruling was that the court wouldn't"force" the local PD to issue the FPID WITHOUT receiving the mental health checks back from the county/whoever, as well as getting back background checks from the NJSP,etc... That does actually make sense, and I can't say I disagree with that. It is logical, that if the law requires that these checks be made, then they need to happen before the card is issued; otherwise the whole background check process becomes meaningless anyway.

 

HOWEVER, rather then asking a judge/court to force the local PD to issue an FPID w/o those checks back in from other agencies, why not seek to have those other outside agencies MANDATED by court order, to fulfill THEIR legal obligations to process/return those checks promptly? Ie, court orders county adjusters offices to process/return results of all checks within, say 14 days of receipt. PERIOD. Whatever they have to do to accomplish is their problem. Hire extra staff, have the supervisor work Sat/Sun/Holidays, run 3 shifts 24/7,whatever etc.... No excuses. They either do it, or the dept. head is in contempt of court, and sits in a cell until the agency is in compliance. I bet stuff would get done in a hurry.

 

Also, while I don't expect the court(s) to order the local PD ( or the relevant SP barracks) to issue the FPID w/o the checks, they can be required to do certain other things, to show a good faith/best effort to meet the 30 day deadline, on their part; while still staying within the intent of the law (that no one should get an FPID until they have been verified to be qualified(via the B/G checks) to do so 

1.) Mandate that all dates be documented, and such documentation be available to the applicant at any time. Ie, the locals MUST document (via postmarks, signed/dated registered mail receipts,etc.. or sworn notarized declarations by officers/chief for things that are not mailed- with SEVERE consequences for lying/falsification) :

 a.) the day/time application received from citizen

 b.) day/time/by which officer was application recvd/accepted, and first reviewed/work begun

 c.) date each reference letter was mailed (proof of postmark/mailing required) to each reference, or the day/time/by method/by which officer an attempt was made to make contact via other then mail- as well as documenting the result of that contact (spoke to ref-contact complete, no answer/left message, spoke with other person-will make another attempt at xx day/time,etc...)

d.) date/time requests for information from other agencies (mental health, other prior towns of residence,etc..) was made, method of request (mail/fax/phone call), proof of date of mailing, fax confirmation, or documentation of who spoke to/what time/what number(ok to partially redact private#'s)

e.) documentation, such as signed/sworn logs detailing date/time/by whom of receipt of all the above, as well as same type/method of documentation of follow up when any of the above are not received promptly 

f.) documentation of date/time of any contact with the applicant (including attempted notification of any delays and/or of completed FPIDs or P2P ready for pickup), regardless of whether initiated by applicant, or by PD, documentation of details of contact (what was discussed, with whom, what dates/promises/agreements-if any were made, what followup-if any is required by either party and when will it be done by,etc...)  This typical call center/help desk type stuff. It stops things from falling through the cracks.

 

2.) REQUIRE that local PD's engage in what has been called "parallel" processing, in order to minimize any delays. In other words, no sitting on apps while waiting for outside agencies. They should promptly proceed to do "their end" of everything while waiting for the other stuff, so when it arrives, the app can proceed immediately. Again, if the local PD want a pass on the 30 day window, then they need to show good faith, and come to the table with "clean hands", showing that the delays really aren't their fault.

 

3.) Mandate that any "intentional" delay or blatant "feet dragging" ; by any official involved in the FPID/P2P process, due to their personal political/moral views, are to be considered to be misconduct of the highest degree, and will be punished accordingly. Further, any expression/statement/actions of any official, while on-duty, or at work (for non-police) which are anti-2A,anti-gun or otherwise hostile or intimidating to applicants or other citizens should also be considered highly inappropriate and NOT tolerated. While perhaps not quite as serious as the active interference mentioned above, this activity/actions should also be subject to official disciplinary action. Yes, they are entitled to their personal opinions, but not while on-duty/at-work on the public payroll. They have sworn/agreed to uphold the law. The law is that people are allowed to have/buy guns, subject to certain restrictions. FPID apps are part of that lawful process. They need to follow/enforce/administer the law without injecting their personal bias.

 

4.) In light of several instances documented in various threads, as well as what we can all agree happens on a regular basis with any kind of "confrontational" phone contacts (not just gun, or even government related- it happens when calling companies,etc...), all government employees MUST identify themselves in a meaningful manner ( I understand that full names might be a security/personal safety concern. Then they need to use something else, such as Employee Id#- as long as it is something which can definitely be traced/attributed back to them and only them- for accountability purposes), upon request, by/to any caller, when inquiring about the application process, the status of their application,etc.... They must also identify the department they work for/how they are involved in the permit process,etc... They must also provide name and contact info for their supervisor any time it is requested.

 

5.) Here's one that seems to be a big problem and source of frequent delays.... Local PD should be REQUIRED to accept applications during normal business hours, 5 days a week - national holidays excluded, as a minimum. Sure, they can take them 24/7/265 if they are willing, but the 5day/business hours should be a minimum. There can be some leeway on what those hours are, but anything along the lines of 8am-5pm, 7am-4pm, 6am-3pm, 12pm-8pm,etc........ Basically, a minimum of 7-8hrs a day, with a reasonable attempt to accommodate varying schedules. Of course, small town departments should get some leeway for legit emergencies,etc.... I would expect that a state police barracks, or say Newark, should always have the building opened and staffed; whereas as small town in the Pine Barrens may have more reasonable justification for everyone being "out" on calls occasionally

 

6.) Again, along the lines of the whole "good faith effort", and showing that the delays are not their fault, the PD should be REQUIRED to have both an officer/Det./Sgt/whatever they use to actively process apps at all times (holidays and true all-hands emergencies excepted), as well as a CLEO or his designated substitute to sign them. No more excuses of Det A. is on vacation this week, and  Chief B. is out for the next month, so you'll just have to wait. Someone MUST be assigned (and properly trained) to perform the detectives FPID activities in his absence, and the Chief should be REQUIRED to delegate/assign someone else to sign the completed apps in his absence. Also, along the same lines as maintaining normal hours for the acceptance of the apps, those apps MUST be processed/investigated on a daily basis, like any other "case". No more having one guy work on FPID apps for 2hrs, on the 4th Tuesday following a full moon.  I don't want to hear any whining about not having manpower/budget,etc.... Tough cookies. The state has made it your job to process these apps. Just like the County offices (for mental health), background checks,etc...., it isn't OUR (citizens) problem. You simply have to do it, no matter what. if you don't like it bitch to the state, about it being an unfunded mandate or something. Maybe they can raid some of the corrupt slush funds to provide the funding. Maybe, instead of wasting time organizing/conducting botched drug raids, or busting sick people smoking a little pot, they can divert some of the "task force" funds to facilitating citizens' 2A rights. One less armored personnel carrier could pay for a lot of "desk time" for an officer processing FPIDs. Or, perhaps a few less prostitution "stings"..... Just don't try to pay for it with more traffic tickets...... That's a whole 'nother kind of wrong (viewing citizens as walking/rolling ATM's)

[halbautomatisch 60]

Ok - called the adjuster and it is as they say, they're significantly backed up.

 

Data:

 

In 2001 they completed 607 mental health apps for firearms

In 2012 they completed over 3000 mental health apps for firearms

In Jan of 2013, they received 3000 mental health requests, and staffing was cut from 5 people to 2, and allegedly another person is being hired in September.

 

They're currently processing requests from April 2013.

In 2001 they weren't making people go through the entire background check every time someone applied for more permits if they had gotten permit or an FID card recently. That started around 2007 or 2008.

[illy 1]

Just got off the phone with my PD (Edison).

 

The woman who handles permits (who's really great, btw) pulled my file and said everything's been back for weeks....,...  except Passaic Co.

Mother-effers.

[djg0770 481]

Just got off the phone with my PD (Edison).

 

The woman who handles permits (who's really great, btw) pulled my file and said everything's been back for weeks....,...  except Passaic Co.

Mother-effers.

 

Explain please - Edison is not in Passaic Cty and as far as I know they only check the mental health records of the county you reside in.

[illy 1]

Explain please - Edison is not in Passaic Cty and as far as I know they only check the mental health records of the county you reside in.

 

That's a good question actually ansd it raises an issue about the process and logic (or lack thereof) behind it.

 

As it turns (at least in Edison) they run the mental health check for every county in which you've ever resided. That makes sense, since you could have been committed in X county then moved to Y county and the records are held at the county, not state, level.  So far, so good.

But here's where the logic fails: That multi-county check should only be run for the counties you've lived in since the last time you applied. Once they've run your initial background/mental health check and it comes back clean, there's no need to run it again counties you haven't lived in for 10 years.

 

I thought about making a big deal about of it, but:

 

A- I've developed a good relationship with that office. The woman who handles records is very helpful, knows me by name and goes out of her way to look up my stuff/keep me updated, even though I know she's swamped. The other ladies are equally helpful, one even went handled 90% of the process for me (even though it's not her job) while we were waiting for the records clerk to get out of a meeting.

 

 B- (more importantly) Our mayor and some of the town council are big antis, so policies aren't going to get any easier, even if it makes perfect sense. No need to give the ladies at the recorsd office a hard time about something that's out of their hands.

[halbautomatisch 60]

That's a good question actually ansd it raises an issue about the process and logic (or lack thereof) behind it.

 

As it turns (at least in Edison) they run the mental health check for every county in which you've ever resided. That makes sense, since you could have been committed in X county then moved to Y county and the records are held at the county, not state, level.  So far, so good.

But here's where the logic fails: That multi-county check should only be run for the counties you've lived in since the last time you applied. Once they've run your initial background/mental health check and it comes back clean, there's no need to run it again counties you haven't lived in for 10 years.

 

I thought about making a big deal about of it, but:

 

A- I've developed a good relationship with that office. The woman who handles records is very helpful, knows me by name and goes out of her way to look up my stuff/keep me updated, even though I know she's swamped. The other ladies are equally helpful, one even went handled 90% of the process for me (even though it's not her job) while we were waiting for the records clerk to get out of a meeting.

 

 B- (more importantly) Our mayor and some of the town council are big antis, so policies aren't going to get any easier, even if it makes perfect sense. No need to give the ladies at the recorsd office a hard time about something that's out of their hands.

You're trying to apply logic where there is none to be found. If we only could get the various branches of government to apply logic to the existing archaic process we have now we'd be better off (never mind revamping everything to reflect that we're not in 1966 anymore). Do we really need to reinvestigate a person every time they apply for another batch of permits like they never applied before? - NO, but that's what the NJSP has mandated since around 2008.