I am getting closer to making the official proclamation that the Segarra Administration and those that are part of it have lost their minds.
The memo's below were released today through an FOI request. It seems that the full court press is on to remove Bruce Rubenstein from the Internal Audit Commission. Attorney Rubenstein was appointed to the Audit commission in March by Hartford's City Treasurer Adam Cloud.
Read more about that appointment here
Although van Norden claims in his opinion below that Rubenstein has a conflict of interest by representing clients that are suing the City, I think the answer is much more simple. The audit Commission, was essentially a lap dog before Rubenstein's appointment. Now in the last six months the Audit Commission has been producing some very substantial reports detailing numerous City Hall problems.
Many of those reports have been critical of Mayor Segarra, his Department heads, L.John Van Norden himself and his boss, Saundra Kee-Borges. The reports may have indirectly caused major shakeups in the Segarra Administration as several Department heads have left City Hall after audit reports were released detailing a pattern of incompetence.
It seems interesting though that Van Norden is detailing Rubenstein's potential Conflict of Interests since Van Norden seems unable to recognize his own conflict. How is he issuing opinions that relate directly to him and his bosses and trying to shut down the people that are critical of him?
Van Norden's own legal skills are questionable as he left his previous employer, the City of Schenectady New York under a cloud of suspicion, read more here. He actually was employed by the City of Hartford his first year here, even though he was not licensed to practice law in Connecticut
I don't think Van Norden's opinion has anything to do with concerns over a conflict of interest, it is that the Audit Commission is getting too close to the inner workings of the Segarra Administration.
Several sources have confirmed that numerous red flags have been raised over the handling of CIP funds, (Capital Improvement Project) and this most likely will be the next shoe to drop when it comes to Audit reports. Not to mention those that are already in the pipeline and proving to be less than favorable to Segarra, including the City Car take home use audit.
Numerous irregularities have already been identified in the CIP process and may eventually result in outside investigations being started. The questionable transactions involve both State and Federal funds according to sources
In the meantime, outside of Segarra's Office there seems to be very little or no support for removing Rubenstein as sources tell me that both the Hartford City Council and Treasurer Cloud are solidly behind Mr. Rubenstein. It is also unclear if there actually a process defined to remove a Commissioner.
One source familiar with the memo, said that they believe that the claim of financial gain has no merit. Any financial gain obtained by Rubenstein would be the result of him successfully representing his clients in their lawsuits against Hartford . The financial gain would be set as an award for damages determined by a Judge, and not as a result of any action Rubenstein could take as an Audit Commission member.
The simplest resolution of this matter would be for Segarra to do the right thing and not give the Audit Commission an opportunity to scrutinize him. Unfortunately I think that train has already left the station.
Here is some other reading material regarding Mr. Van Norden, here, or here ,or any earlier blog posting here
Rubenstein OfficialOpinionoftheOfficeoftheCorporationCounsel09242013
The memo's below were released today through an FOI request. It seems that the full court press is on to remove Bruce Rubenstein from the Internal Audit Commission. Attorney Rubenstein was appointed to the Audit commission in March by Hartford's City Treasurer Adam Cloud.
Read more about that appointment here
Although van Norden claims in his opinion below that Rubenstein has a conflict of interest by representing clients that are suing the City, I think the answer is much more simple. The audit Commission, was essentially a lap dog before Rubenstein's appointment. Now in the last six months the Audit Commission has been producing some very substantial reports detailing numerous City Hall problems.
Many of those reports have been critical of Mayor Segarra, his Department heads, L.John Van Norden himself and his boss, Saundra Kee-Borges. The reports may have indirectly caused major shakeups in the Segarra Administration as several Department heads have left City Hall after audit reports were released detailing a pattern of incompetence.
It seems interesting though that Van Norden is detailing Rubenstein's potential Conflict of Interests since Van Norden seems unable to recognize his own conflict. How is he issuing opinions that relate directly to him and his bosses and trying to shut down the people that are critical of him?
Van Norden's own legal skills are questionable as he left his previous employer, the City of Schenectady New York under a cloud of suspicion, read more here. He actually was employed by the City of Hartford his first year here, even though he was not licensed to practice law in Connecticut
I don't think Van Norden's opinion has anything to do with concerns over a conflict of interest, it is that the Audit Commission is getting too close to the inner workings of the Segarra Administration.
Several sources have confirmed that numerous red flags have been raised over the handling of CIP funds, (Capital Improvement Project) and this most likely will be the next shoe to drop when it comes to Audit reports. Not to mention those that are already in the pipeline and proving to be less than favorable to Segarra, including the City Car take home use audit.
Audit Commission Member Bruce Rubenstein
Numerous irregularities have already been identified in the CIP process and may eventually result in outside investigations being started. The questionable transactions involve both State and Federal funds according to sources
In the meantime, outside of Segarra's Office there seems to be very little or no support for removing Rubenstein as sources tell me that both the Hartford City Council and Treasurer Cloud are solidly behind Mr. Rubenstein. It is also unclear if there actually a process defined to remove a Commissioner.
One source familiar with the memo, said that they believe that the claim of financial gain has no merit. Any financial gain obtained by Rubenstein would be the result of him successfully representing his clients in their lawsuits against Hartford . The financial gain would be set as an award for damages determined by a Judge, and not as a result of any action Rubenstein could take as an Audit Commission member.
The simplest resolution of this matter would be for Segarra to do the right thing and not give the Audit Commission an opportunity to scrutinize him. Unfortunately I think that train has already left the station.
Here is some other reading material regarding Mr. Van Norden, here, or here ,or any earlier blog posting here
Rubenstein OfficialOpinionoftheOfficeoftheCorporationCounsel09242013