Tonight's Council meeting should prove very interesting. On the agenda are the resolutions submitted by Mayor Segarra for the possible appointments of his hand picked Chief Operating Officer, Saundra Kee-Borges and Juan Figueroa as Corporation Counsel.
As of 4:00PM it appears as the votes are not there to approve Kee-Borges's appointment. It is most likely to try to avoid any more embarrassment, Segarra may pull the resolutions for both appointees rather than be humiliated by a public vote against his choice.
Unfortunately, Figueroa may end up as collateral damage in this vote, I think the votes may actually be there for him, but his confirmation would mean no home for Kee-Borges at City Hall if her vote as COO fails. There is only money budgeted for one Corporation Counsel, and Kee-Borges would revert back to her previous position if her ascension were to fail.
This may prove to be just one more step in the neutering of Segarra as he sees his power slip without the Council's support. The recent override of his veto was symbolic and now a potential no vote on Kee-Borges will be a negative blow to Segarra as strong mayor.
As a former Council President who came from an era of disrespect from the Mayor's Office under Eddie Perez, I can only say Segarra has done this to himself. He has fostered an era of disrespect for the Council, probably greater than any that happened under Perez. Unfortunately, rather than building relationships with the Council, Segarra has relied on terrible advice from his so called"Cabinet" that has led him down the wrong path for their own self serving interests rather than putting Hartford first.
Kee-Borges has presided over the City during some of the worst decisions made that have been far from boosting the best interests of Hartford and its people. The recent P-Card mess and the ignorance of City Ordinances have pushed Segarra into the public spotlight in a far from flattering role.
These appointments should have been a slam dunk for his Chief odf Staff if he knew how to build coalitions and consensus. In the end, everything works out for the best though, start a real search and find a professional that can lead our City forward
council can sever the resolution and take separate votes on each appointment.
ReplyDeleteGood top see you back Thom,
ReplyDeleteI believe they are already seperate resolutions , the problem exists that if they approve a new Corp Counsel, where does the old one go, we can only have one
Bingo. If the votes aren't there for SKB, Pedro will have to pull both nominations or have them tabled so that he has a landing spot for SKB back in corp. counsel. Problem is she isn't legally allowed in that position either due to being a retiree! But if the council previously confirmed her for that spot she has more protection there.
ReplyDeleteThe most obvious example of Sandra's horrific mistakes was her decision to hire Valda Washington for HR. And then her coverup and defense of that decision in the face of undeniable incompetence. That Pedro allowed Valda to destroy what credibility, relationships and good will his administration had left was crazy. Everyone who even wanted to support and back Pedro found it harder and harder to do so while seeing that his cabinet was covering for both Valda and SKB.
Sad to see his administration has imploded so badly. All from within and all avoidable had he not relied on the wrong people.
Thom this is wrong
ReplyDelete1. the IAC has ruled that Sandra is working illegaly and thus any vote for her to ascend to permanent COO would have no force of law.
The administration has through their own ineptitude put themselves between a rock and a hard place on the issue of residency. In order to keep SKB in her job the corp council has ruled that city charter has precedence over ordinances. If that is correct then the mayor has no legal standing to require residency, which has far fewer requirements in charter.
ReplyDeleteWe will have to see the legal opinion of the outside council next month. If ordinance stands, SKB and others double dipping go and those facing the residency requirement must make a decision. If the decision is that charter is, in fact, the superior document, then there is no legal requirement to require most of the residency.
It all looks bad for the mayor. Perhaps it's time for him to clean house and bring in some professional and ethical leadership who can restore trust in city hall.
Pinnochio is not telling a lie but has obviously mis-read Thom's comment. IF a resolution has a resolve appointed two different people, procedurally they can sever the resolution and vote on both separately (one yes, one no • two yes • or two no)
ReplyDeleteBut that point is moot because Kevin said there were two separate resolutions.
How much money has the P card debacle cost the city? Is it as much as hiring Your significant other as a Deputy Chief at plus or minus 100K a year for a position that doesn't exist? I think DC Wallers spot was already filled so now they pay 2 DC's for the same position.Talk about a waste of money.
ReplyDeleteDo you people know anything. SKB did not hire Valda Washington Valda was Pedros pick. He meet her at a conference and asked her to come to Hartford. She played alone with the team until Pedro guy Jose Colon Revas got upset with her for not giving out big rasises to one of his people. ( I hear it got real ugly) Understand folks if you play alone with the team you have to do the dirty work. You can't change your mine when the going gets tough. You cannot fight against Pedro favorote people ie Jared, SKB, Jose. Also remember Pedro also put some newbie on the board of education some woman who work for ESPN. This chick do'nt even know her way around the city yet Pedro thinks so-call "smart people" can serve on the board. Do'nt underestamite the power of the people. Pedro if you was smart get some better advisors. Get rid of your boy wonder Jared he is just looking to make his next move after you go to jail. lololo
ReplyDeleteWhat's all the uproar for these people. They are doing what they were hired to do bring in relatives and friends. Hire as many close relative or friends as possible and move on or retire. Change working conditions to fit the persons lack of ability. Even submit fraudulent time cards and then hastily retire
ReplyDeleteKevin: On 4/22/2013 at 5:10 pm I was in an out-of-state courthouse, and reading and/or responding to your blog (which I often still read by the way!) was the last thing on my mind. We have had multiple conversations about putting in place procedures whereby the authenticity and authorship of blog comments must be confirmed before they are posted, and this is certainly a prime example of why you should instigate those protections. I’m now responding merely to tell you that post wasn’t mine – what’s that all about? Otherwise, the filtering of blog comments, which must occur in a sordid attempt to discern the truth, is just too time consuming. Unfortunately the term “literary rag” raises its ugly head when you could be far above that, focusing serious discourse for substantive change concerning issues which cry out for positive resolution and progress.
ReplyDeleteFor reasons other than merely guaranteeing authenticity, perhaps you might take another look at professionalizing your publication in this manner. As you know, legitimate "anonymous" information can still be forwarded to you, the publication of illegitimate information will certainly wane (who wants illegitimate info anyway?), and legitimate dialogue could then become a staple of your blog. Who knows the accolades your efforts would then deserve, and how much this would propel efforts to truly make substantive change in this City.
I still maintain there is a market for competent, caring citizens who seek an authentic vehicle to express, develop, debate and advance serious possible solutions to the City’s issues. Why not give it a try and see what happens?
Best, the real Thom
Stop ur crying thom .... Its bothering me ..
ReplyDeleteThom go cry on Jean's shoulder,you were her lawyer and over her house often enough at night...(wink,wink)
ReplyDelete