Search This Blog

Sunday, June 14, 2009

WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE HPD WEBSITE?


Anyone looking to view the City of Hartford's latest crime statistics can't do it on the HPD website. It seems that the last date crime stats have been updated was April 18, 2009 (http://www.hartford.gov/police/Crime_Stats_Folder/2009%20Compstats/2009_04_18.pdf). I wonder if this is the result of staff cutting measures by the administration of the dishonorable Mayor Eddie A. Perez or another effort at the "transparency" Perez keeps mentioning. Also, it seems rather odd that as violence continues to make the headlines every day, two lines that have been in the "Compstat Reports" for years have now been removed in the on-line versions posted on HPD's website. The two lines that showed the number of shooting incidents and shooting victims can no longer be viewed by the public in the on-line reports, as outdated as they are.

I can see why King Eddie wouldn't want those numbers available to the public, what with six people shot in a half hour period last weekend and another homicide last night, the citywide numbers can't be flattering to his administration.

Like everything else that is wrong in Hartford, I'm sure Perez can find a way to blame it on the State of Connecticut. Shootings? all the State's fault for not supervising released criminals. Failing schools? all the State's fault for not giving us more money than they already do for our dysfunctional school system. Out of Control spending and budget deficits? all the State's fault for not sending more money Eddie's way to mismanage than they already do (almost $100,000,000 more than our other large cities)

Thursday, June 11, 2009

ANOTHER FOI LOSS FOR THE "TRANSPARENT" PEREZ ADMINISTRATION

Some may remember one of my first postings regarding Hartford's former Tax Collector Donald LeFevere and his termination after he accused the dishonorable Mayor Eddie A. Perez of illegal activity. I'm not going to recap the whole incident here, but suffice it to say tha LeFevere was promptly suspended and shown the door at City Hall after he accused Perez of illegal activity and spelled the "illegal activity" out in an e-mail to his boss as well as several others in the Perez Administration. After Lefevere was left on a paid administrative suspension for almost a year at full salary, he eventually terminated. Apparently after his termination, the City realized that legally they may be on shaky ground and made a lump sum payment to LeFevere of almost a quarter of a million dollars, as well as lifetime health insurance for him and his wife.

In LeFevere's suspension letter and subsequent documents, Hartford's Chief Operating Officer Lee Erdmann referenced "complaint's" and an investigation leading to Lefevere's termination. Through an FOI request, I attempted to get the investigative report as well as any statements or supporting documents of any allegations of wrongdoing by LeFevere. No documentation was ever supplied to me, resulting in the FOI complaint and hearing outlined below. I thought it was odd that the Perez Administration would terminate someone and then offer him a settlement agreement in excess of $350,000 plus, and they had no documentation, statements or investigative report. It seems like the height of mismanagement,as well as extremely irresponsible, to open the City and its residents to such liability without being on solid legal ground. Apparently this is business as usual with those that disagree with King Eddie, as we have seen with Lefevere, Deputy Fire Chief Dan Nolan and most recently Public Works Director Clarence Corbin. Fortunately, LeFevere only cost the taxpayers of Hartford around $300,000 (so far) Nolan and Corbin have the potential to be in excess of six figures when they present their cases before a jury.

Back to the FOI hearing. Apparently the FOI hearing officer didn't feel as though it was plausible that you would take action against an employee without documenting the investigation and complaints, and found that the City, under the direction of Erdmann,"failed to prove that they had conducted a diligent search for all responsive requested records in this matter, and therefore failed to prove that they have provided all requested records to the complainant". The next paragraph in the decision, #15, states "It is concluded that the repondents (Erdmann and the City of Hartford) violated the FOI Act in this matter.

This is just another example of numerous violations by the Perez Administration to hide public documents from the public when they will most likely prove embarassing to the administration. Also, this adds to the dollar amount of outside counsel that have been hired to represent the City on these matters,in this case Fenton Guest, a good friend of Corporation Counsel John Rose. These matters appear to be pretty clear cut, public documents are able to be viewed by the public, end of story.

FOI Decision Erdmann

Thursday, May 21, 2009

IS A PRESS CONFERENCE STILL A PRESS CONFERENCE IF NO PRESS ATTENDS?


Sarah Barr, the dishonorable Mayor Eddie A. Perez's Director of Miscommunication was at it again today. After the lively press conference she orchestrated yesterday at the site of the proposed new Public Safety Complex, she was at it again today. The press conference yesterday was a huge joke as they announced another $750,000 in federal money being allocated for the facility that now puts the amount allocated at less than 50% of the total cost. At this rate we should expect another 40 or 50 press conferences before the project can be completed. This is already the third press conference in the last four years "announcing" the project. I sure hope Chief Roberts isn't holding his breath waiting for the completion of the project. Maybe that's why no Police Department representatives were in attendance yesterday, although the Fire Department was heavily represented, with Chief Teale standing proud over Perez's shoulder. I guess when you do as the Mayor tells you and you hire his buddies and fire his enemies, you remain in Eddie's good graces. The only good thing about the press conference was that it gave Channel 3 an opportunity to catch Perez in another one of his many lies. When asked about using stimulus money to hire police and firefighters that were laid off due to budget cuts, Perez replied that police and fire cuts were not being discussed and using stimulus money to "supplant" would be illegal. Cut to the video clip of King Eddie's Chief Operating Puppet, I mean Chief Operating Officer Lee Erdmann. In the clip of Erdmann testifying before the City Council budget hearings, Erdmann is on video stating that one of the options being discussed is laying off police and firefighters and hiring them back with stimulus money.You can view the video of Erdmann's testimony under the previous post "What is the Real truth about Hartford's financial condition"

But I digress. After her performance on Wednesday, Barr, the former Channel 3 reporter before she was terminated, held another press conference Thursday in front of the Hartford Hilton. The plan was to show people what a wonderful place Hartford is to "staycation" through using the media to sell the message. The only problem was that no media showed up. I wonder if Sarah gets the message that the media is tired of her useless messages. Even more interesting was the location Sarah Barr ( former Channel 3 reporter before she was terminated) chose for the conference. As at yesterdays press conference when King Eddie had Chief Teale standing proud over his shoulder, today he chose to have the "butt ugly building", which is just north of the Hilton, standing proudly behind him. For those that aren't familiar with the "butt ugly building", it has become the single most recognized symbol of corruption in Hartford, aside from Eddie Perez's mugshot and the granite countertops in his home. The butt ugly building was reported to be a focal point of the Grand
Jury investigation and the Gile's parking lot deals. ("we need to take care of Abe").
I'm not sure what Sarah was thinking, but the "butt ugly building" in the background is about as appropriate as holding the press conference on the lawn of the Hartford Correctional Center where Perez may be spending his "staycation" sometime in the not too distant future.

Even if one reporter had attended, I could think of a few spots that would make more sense to promote Hartford. Maybe the Bushnell Park Carousel, Elizabeth Park, the Wadsworth, the Mark Twain House, the Riverfront Plazas, anywhere but in the shadow of the "butt ugly building".

But I guess in Sarah Barr's defense, she must know what she is doing, she is paid almost a $100,000 a year to promote the Gospel of Perez. ( And $100,000 is a lot more than she was being paid before she was terminated as a reporter at Channel 3)

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

CHIEF LOPEZ, CHIEF FALLON, CHIEF PAWLINA, CAN YOU PLEASE RETURN YOUR CITY CARS

During the recent Hartford City Council budget hearings a request was made for an inventory of all City of Hartford vehicles and those that were used for "take home" use. Listed in the vehicle inventory for the Hartford Police Department were vehicles showing that they were assigned to retired Deputy Chief Jose Lopez, retired Assistant (and former acting Chief) Mark Pawlina, retired Assistant Chief Michael Fallon as well as several other retired members of the department. They have all been retired for at least a couple years, yet the city's records still show them having city cars, which they don't. I thought it was bad when testimony at the budget hearings showed that no one had a clear idea who had City of Hartford cellphones, but obviously they don't even have a clue who has city vehicles. Jeff Cohen at the Hartford Courant posted the list of vehicles on his blog, courant.com/cityline. One of the Police Department vehicles assigned for take home use shows Assistant Chief Lester McCoy commuting daily to Stamford on the city's dime. That seems like it could be a substantial cost savings there if that car was left at Jennings Road at night. I would question the value of McCoy coming back to the city on a call back. If the hour and a half drive from Stamford was needed, I would hope that others would have the situation under control by the time he got back here. It would also be very interesting to see the number of times that individuals like McCoy have actually responded back to the City during an emergency situation. I would venture to say the number is relatively low. Since these vehicles are not meant for personal use, but rather travelling back and forth to the city, I would think that, with the exception of persons involved in activities requiring unmarked cars, thezse vehicled should be clearly marked as City of Hartford vehicles, and in the case of police vehicles operated by uniformed officers, they should have police markings. This would take care of two issues. First would be visibility and provide a greater perception of police presence in the city. Second, I think clear markings would serve as a deterrent against these vehicles being used in a manner not compliant with city policy. I don't need to go into detail, but several of these vehicles have been involved in alcohol related incidents, and I'm sure no one wants their marked vehicle observed parked at a bar.

WHAT IS THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT HARTFORD'S FINANCIAL CONDITION?

After following the budget process and the recent Budget Hearings, I feel less and less comfortable about the direction our dishonorable Mayor Eddie A. Perez is taking us.

To hear city department heads and Hartford's Chief Operating Officer Lee Erdmann speak, it is almost scary to hear the large percentage of the budget that is being based on the potential receipt of stimulus money. Stimulus money that is far from guaranteed, and the majority of which will be based on a competitive grant application process.A prime example is the fact that although King Eddie promised hiring large numbers of Police Officers to get to the 500 officers Chief Robert's wants, it now appears that this was an empty election year promise. As of this date, no money is in the upcoming General Fund budget for the hiring of Police Officers. According to Perez and Erdmann, officers will be hired using stimulus money. If and when the money is approved, which could be never. Some of the "games" that Perez plans to play with the stimulus money could also jeopardize the money and put all stimulus funds at risk. A prime example is the video clip below where Erdmann testifies at a Council budget hearing that one of the item's being discussed is laying off Police and Firefighters and then hiring them back with stimulus money. Although Erdmann stated this on the record, today Perez responded to a reporters question during an interview and stated the total opposite. When asked about Erdmann's plans to potentially hire back laid off employees with stimulus money, Perez responded "that is not possible. This notion that we could supplant. I think everybody understands that we can't supplant. I provided an opportunity for us to apply for a grant. We can't put the grant at jeopardy by supplanting. It's not an option at all, you know, and again I haven't talked about cutting police and cutting fire. Those have been our priorities. I think anybody who talks about that needs to know that they're also putting the federal money at risk. You can't supplant. I think everybody understands that". Maybe Perez might want to speak with his Chief Operating Officer and get their message correct. Where is the Director of Miscommunication Sarah Barr?

Also, the third quarter budget report that was released last week has apparently now been recalled. I received mine at last weeks Council meeting, but other's I have spoke with have been told the book is not available because it is being reprinted to correct "mistakes". One of the biggest mistakes most likely is the fact that in Perez's letter to Council members, he actually admits that "the total year end deficit for FY 2008-09 could reach $27,205,792". A copy of the letter is below. There definitely won't be enough in the "Rainy Day Fund" to cover that deficit.

PEREZ'S LETTER TO THE COUNCIL:

3rd Quarter Budget Letter Highlighted

ERDMANN'S BUDGET TESTIMONY REGARDING POLICE AND FIRE LAYOFF IDEAS

MR. ROSE: THIS IS WHAT A LEGAL OPINION FROM A REAL ATTORNEY LOOKS LIKE

Recently a legal opinion was released from City Corporation Counsel John Rose, essentially stating that the dishonorable Mayor Eddie A. Perez could raid the city's "Rainy Day Fund" at will without approval of the City Council. As we would expect no less from Mr. Rose, his opinion came squarely down in support of the Mayor and his potentially illegal operation.As we saw with the budget testimony by the mayor's Chief of Staff, King Eddie considers the actions of the Council advisory in nature.

Well, it took a while, but finally the Hartford City Council (at least 5 of them) have realized that John Rose may not be the most credible and open minded person when it comes to interpreting the law. As Hartford's Corporation Counsel, Rose seems unwilling or unable to comprehend the fact that although Perez hired him, he is still the City's attorney, answering to both the City Council, the Mayor as well as all elected officials of the City and departments.

After receiving Rose's laughable opinion, a majority of the Council decided to seek their own opinion from outside legal counsel. That request was complied with, and on May 15, 2009 Attorney Allan B. Taylor provided his legal opinion to the Council. The full text of that opinion is available below. Taylor states that statements outlined in Rose's opinion were "unjustified and unjustifiable" and further states that "it is illegal for any city official to spend or otherwise obligate funds that have not been approved by the City Council". But then again, when has our dishonorable Mayor cared about what is legal and illegal.

Taylor further goes on in his opinion to point out a key phrase Rose chose to leave out when he was quoting the Charter. Taylor outlines this on page 3 of his opinion and points out that "the emphasized words were unaccountably omitted from the Opinion's quotation of Subsection 7(b).". Willfully misquoting or misrepresenting a staute or ordinance seems as though it would question Mr. Rose's integrity and sense of justice, as well as potentially constitute malpractice on his part.

Is it any wonder Hartford is the mess it is under the leadership of Perez and the guidance of John Rose?

Taylor Rainy Day Opinion