Search This Blog

Friday, October 20, 2023

THE TESLA DOESN'T LIE

 


This is another one from the " You can't make this stuff up" file.

Normally an Officer Involved Shooting  (OIS) is an all hands on deck type of situation. Apparently, according to several sources, one Hartford Police Officer had different ideas.

On October 16, 2023 at approximately 1:54PM On October 16, 2023 at approximately 1:54 p.m., Hartford Police Officer Brian Sulliman, who was on routine patrol operating a marked Harford Police cruiser, atempted to stop a motor vehicle on Westland Street. The vehicle, a grey-colored four-door Honda Accord bearing Florida registration 49DJXP, stopped on Westland Street near the intersection with Barbour Street. As soon as the vehicle came to a stop, a person, later identified as Jamie Grant, exited the front passenger door and walked to the rear of the vehicle. Officer Sulliman exited his police vehicle and approached the Honda. The Honda Accord then drove from the scene.

Grant was holding what appeared to be a firearm in his left hand. He raised his arm in the direction of Officer Sulliman. In response, Officer Sulliman then discharged his firearm multiple times striking Grant. Grant fell in the middle of the intersection of Westland Street and Barbour Street. Grant was later pronounced dead.

At about the same time another Hartford Police Officer who was working a private duty job in the area apparently passed the area in his private vehicle at the time of the shooting. The Officer, who I am not naming at this time, is reportedly a 12 year veteran of HPD. He most likely would have still been in his HPD uniform at this point as he was apparently directing traffic at a road job. Sources are telling me that much of this was captured on various cameras in the area. The officer was captured on video in his Tesla passing through the area at the same time. Rather than stop to render assistance, and also as a witness to an Officer Involved Shooting, he mad a U-Turn and left the area. This is inexcusable.

Also when questioned about it, he apparently claimed that his department issued firearm was in the trunk of his Tesla, and that is why he didn't stop. He also claimed he put his weapon in the trunk of the Tesla because he didn't want it on his leather seats.

The other interesting point is that, according to Tesla, the vehicles come equipped with 9 cameras throughout and around the vehicle recording video with high definition , crystal clear video. If the gun and gun belt were actually in the trunk, that would most likely be captured on video. I also have confirmed that HPD Policy requires Officers to be armed while they are in the City and in uniform.

I have to ask , what kind of Police Officer would not stop to render assistance to a fellow officer just involved in a traumatic incident, and how could any other officer have any confidence in someone exhibiting a cowardly act like this.

This is unacceptable, and when all the facts are in, it requires quick and severe action by Chief Thody up to and including termination for cowardice.

The following information details the in car cameras on Tesla vehicles:

The front cameras are located at the top of the windshield. They consist of a camera with a typical lens, a wide-angle lens, and a telephoto lens. The telephoto camera can see up to 250 meters ahead according to Tesla, ideal for high-speed Autopilot use, while the main lens covers 150 meters. In addition, the wide-angle lens gives a panoramic-like view for navigation at complex intersections and tight curves.

Rear View Camera

The rearview camera is positioned above the license plate. It provides a view of up to 50 meters behind the vehicle, assisting with parking, reverse driving and reverse automatic emergency braking.

Fender Cameras

Teslas contain a camera on each fender that points toward the rear of the vehicle at about a 45° angle. This allows the vehicle to see vehicles to its side and help monitor the vehicle's blind spots.

These cameras can also be viewed by the driver when using Tesla's blind spot monitor feature, or by enabling the side cameras while in reverse, which displays the reverse camera feed, along with the fender or 'repeater' cameras.

B-Pillar Cameras

Tesla vehicles also include two other side cameras that are found on the B-pillar. Instead of aiming backward like the repeater cameras, these cameras are aimed toward the front of the vehicle. This allows them to capture areas in the front half of the vehicle. These cameras aid with intersections, parking and more. Unfortunately, the video from these cameras can only be viewed while the vehicle is parked and by going to Controls > Service and tapping on 'Preview Cameras'.

Cabin Camera

All current Tesla models include a cabin camera. The camera is located above the rearview mirror and monitors driver attentiveness, especially when Autopilot is in use. You can view the cabin camera onscreen by navigating to Controls > Service > Preview Cabin Camera. You can also view it through the Tesla app if Sentry Mode is enabled and Sentry Mode Live Access is available in your region.

Future Bumper Camera

Looking ahead, newer Tesla models are expected to feature a bumper camera, as seen in the Cybertruck prototypes. Additionally, with hardware 4.0, the cameras have a higher resolution and an anti-glare coating for enhanced visibility.

Functionality Unveiled: The Multifaceted Uses of Tesla's Cameras

Tesla's cameras play a vital role in the advanced features the vehicles are known for. Their primary use is for the Autopilot system and active safety features like Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB). Furthermore, Sentry Mode and Dashcam features use cameras to record potential threats when parked and on the road. In newer models, the cabin camera monitors driver attentiveness to ensure safety during Autopilot use.

View, Access and Calibrate

Tesla now lets you preview all cameras included in your vehicle
Tesla now lets you preview all cameras included in your vehicle
Simon

While driving, you can access the rear and fender cameras through the center display. To test or preview other cameras, you can navigate to Controls > Service > Preview Cameras, and then select the camera you'd like to preview at the top of the screen. In addition, through the Tesla app, remote viewing capabilities are available for five of the vehicle's cameras, including the front-facing camera, fender cameras, rear camera, and cabin camera.

If you're noticing issues with your vehicle's cameras, Tesla provides the ability to calibrate them. It's a simple process initiated from the vehicle's touchscreen, although certain features like Autopilot will be unavailable until the process completes.

Confidentiality in Focus: Tesla's Data Privacy Measures

Tesla takes data privacy seriously. For example, the cabin camera doesn't save or transmit data unless data sharing is enabled in your car's settings. For Sentry Mode and Dashcam footage, data is stored locally and can be accessed only by the owner.

Tesla's advanced camera systems play an integral role in enhancing vehicle safety, providing driver-assist features, and creating a robust security layer. However, understanding the function and usage of these cameras is essential for maximizing the benefits. With Tesla continuously innovating, exciting enhancements, like bumper cameras and upgraded hardware, lie on the horizon, promising to take vehicular safety and autonomy to the next level.



LET'S ROLL

 The recent anniversary of 9/11 brought back to mind the courageous words of great American patriots. "Let's roll " were some of the last words uttered by a passenger on Flight 93 as they made the decision to take on hijackers who were determined to crash their commandeered airliner  before it could be crashed into a Washington DC location, possibly the White House or the US Capitol on 9/11.

The last couple of years have taken their toll on me as far as my health, and the pandemic didn't help either. Two years ago I awoke one morning to realize i had lost my eyesight, it was diagnosed the same day by my outstanding Ophthalmologist as a "vitreous hemorrhage", which is essentially bleeding in the back of the eye and the blood seepage blocks the vision. My Doctor had hoped that it would have resolved itself , but after a period of a couple months it did not. At that point the decision was made to operate. If you are squeamish, please don't read the next few lines.

The surgery consisted of an ophthalmologic surgeon cutting into the eyeball and draining the vitreous fluid and the blood and repairing the damage. The only caveat was that once they cut into the eye and repaired the damage (exposing the inner eye to air), I would most likely develop a cataract. I did and that was repaired with more surgery a few months late.

In a credit to the skill of Doctor Margolis. my ophthalmologist and his staff at Retina Consultants as well as modern technology, my eyesight began coming back and the day after the cataract surgery with Doctor Pasternack, so be sure to schedule regular checkups for your eye health, my vision was almost perfect. I think most people take their eyesight for granted until you are faced with losing it,so be sure to schedule regular checkups for your eye health.

In July of this year, I somehow injured my hip and was unable to walk for several weeks and was forced to use a walker to get around. I am still using the walker and going through Physical Therapy, its a slow process but I hopefully continue to see improvement.

Many have asked me if the ongoing lawsuit and the subsequent appeal have any effect on the lack of postings, I would have to say, unequivocally no. If anything, it has now pushed me to get rolling once again. I have realized the support that is out there to uncover the truth and the risk that many people are willing to take to expose corrupt activity and wrongdoing, wherever that may be, whether in the Hartford Police Department , Hartford City Hall or elsewhere. I was always taught that good will overcome evil, and there is plenty of evil going on that needs to be exposed though this blog and the assistance of great sources that are willing to trust me to get information out, as well as good things going on also that deserve to be highlighted.

So get ready to start following the blog again, please. Sometimes if you poke the hornets' nest you are going to get stung, but what's a bee sting if it is to accomplish good and help people. After all I have been through, I can handle a few stings.

Thursday, June 30, 2022

CAN HARTFORD EVER COME BACK?

The Honorable Judge Eric Coleman

I received a phone call a couple weeks ago and the caller asked me if I thought Hartford could ever make a comeback.

My answer was pretty quick and decisive. ABOULUTELY.

In my opinion, there are three major things standing in Hartford's way of  making a comeback. Number one is leadership. For probably over a decade Hartford has had some of the worst leadership imaginable, starting most recently with Eddie Perez who was eventually driven from office by the States Attorney and a Grand Jury investigation.  Hartford is under the "strong Mayor" form of government. I don't have an issue with a strong Mayor, the problem is Hartford voters have made terrible choices and have been unable to find the right person...yet.

From Eddie Perez to Pedro Segarra to Luke Bronin, all failures in my eyes. 

Pedro Segarra was cast into the Mayor's Office by  default when Eddie Perez was forced to resign under corruption charges.Then came Luke Bronin, not because he knew or understood Hartford, but because he would make a great puppet to do the political bidding of Hartford's elite who loved controlling political power, such as the DiBellas and others.  

Prior to Bronin, I had great hope for retired Probate Judge Bob Killian who ran for the office of Mayor, but there was no way of competing with the Bronin million dollar plus war chest the carpetbagger Bronin had amassed, much of it from outside of Hartford and outside of Connecticut.

I guess even a lousy candidate that very few people knew, can get elected if they are able to buy enough votes. A candidate who probably couldn't have found most neighborhoods or streets in the City without the aid of GPS.

Two other things that need to change are Public Safety and Education. Aside from the Mayor being a failure, both of those are disastrous, No one will move to a City where they don't feel safe, and no parent who has a choice will put their kids into a school system where a decent education is a crap shoot..

I am encouraged as of late because I am starting to hear people talking about the next Mayoral election.. I have been hearing the name of Eric Coleman mentioned. Coleman should be familiar to anyone who has spent more than a few days in Hartford over the last  few decades. For most of his adult life, Coleman has been serving the people of Hartford as a State Representative, a State Senator and eventually  (and currently) as a Superior Court Judge. Coleman didn't just arrive here with his sights on the Mayor's Office in an attempt to work his way up the political ladder with aspirations of grandeur, or maybe I should say delusions of grandeur like our current Mayor.


I think Coleman has the potential to restore confidence and civility to the Mayor's Office. I also think as current sitting Judge, Coleman has kept his distance from the political influence, That political influence such as the Democratic Town Committee has been one of the major forces in the downfall of Hartford.

If Coleman were  to be successful., his first stop after becoming Mayor should be a stop at 253 High Street to hand Chief Thody his termination papers. It will be a tough job to rebuild HPD to the previous levels before Thody decimated the ranks, but it can be done and it has to be done if Hartford is ever going to be safe again.

Another move would be to utilize Hartford's  Charter to its full extent and make appointments to the Hartford Board of Education of people that are serious about seeing Hartford's children and their schools excel. The Mayor has the power to appoint the majority of members to the BOE and that should be done with the best people who understand Hartford's Schools and why they have been failing up to this point.

I think Economic Development will also be an issue and it needs to be taken seriously by the next Mayor. Hartford has had far too many false starts when it comes to development and it not only makes the city look bad, it prevents any forward movement. Hartford's Economic development efforts seem to be a hotbed of nepotism ad rewards for political allies rather than any solid efforts.

There will be much more on this in the future , but I hope people will start thinking about Hartford coming back and where they can help with that effort. It can be done and I think Eric Coleman understands what needs to be done. After all of his years serving the people of Hartford, I seriously think he knows what needs to be done

Friday, April 15, 2022

JASON FIDDLES WHILE HARTFORD BURNS

HARTFORD'S POLICE CHIEF IN HIDING, JASON THODY

The City of Hartford is headed for a potentially violent summer. In years past, residents could ask the Police Chief what the plan was to deal with the homicides , the shootings and the violence. 


This year is different, If I am counting correctly, Hartford recorded its 11th  homicide of the year today . A daytime shooting at a relatively busy intersection, in broad daylight, blocks from Saint Francis Hospital resulted in a homicide, # 11 for the year so far.

And as I said, in years past, typically members of the community would  be meeting with the Police Chief to address their concerns. Typically the Police Chief would lay out their plan for their summer initiative  and the plan to address the concerns and hopefully put their fears at rest.

There is no chance of that this year . Why you might ask? Because Hartford's Police Chief Jason Thody is no where to be found. Well , let me correct that. Thody can be found at the FBI national Academy for the next 10 weeks, away from the City. 

Despite the official description, the FBI Academy is widely regarded as a networking and resume building opportunity.

I think most people would wish that a Police  Chief with almost thirty years of experience would be able to teach the classes, not attend them. Wouldn't it seem to make more sense to begin grooming junior members of the Department for future leadership roles, rather than sending the Chief?

It also seems like poor management that anyone would allow the Police Chief to be away for at least 10 weeks while violence is spiking at the same time that the number 2 guy , the Assistant Chief, is relatively new to the position and probably can't find most streets in Hartford without using GPS. At the same time the number 3 guy, Deputy Chief Jay Lee is away at training for 6 weeks out of state.

Does no one at HPD look at staffing and scheduling and question how two of your top "leaders" ( and I use the term leader sarcastically when I refer to Thody) In addition the current staffing at HPD is well under what is needed to function, Although HPD should have roughly 425 officers, their current level, I am told is about 330 sworn Officers, and more leaving almost daily. Many of those officers have left in the past two years since Thody has been Chief

Maybe the FBI can offer a course "How NOT to run a Police Department". I would fully support Thody attending that class  for as long as  it takes..























 co

ncer

ns

Thursday, March 10, 2022

IT IS TIME FOR ROVELLA TO THE RESCUE , AGAIN


 In 2010 and early 2011, the City of Hartford was plagued with gun violence, very similar to today's wave of violence

At the time , then Governor Dannel Malloy called his then Chief States Attorney Kevin Kane to the Capitol. During their meeting, Governor Malloy's instructions to Kane were simple. Malloy's instructions were "Do something about the crime in Hartford".

Kane's next move seemed to make a lot of sense. He moved his Chief Inspector from his office to organize and oversee the efforts, as instructed by the Governor.

Rovella quickly formed the "Shooting Task Force " and the results were almost instantaneous. Arrests were  being made for shootings, and cases that were being left unsolved were suddenly resulting in arrests and violent criminals were being taken off the streets of the Capitol region.

I am probably over simplifying this, but Rovella's philosophy was simple. In  order for Law Enforcement to be successful, they had to come out of their "silos" and share information and work together for a common goal, to combat gun violence.

This required communication and collaboration to get  the results both the Governor and Rovella wanted.

Rovella's plan wasn't rocket science, but it definitely was creative and unusual for Law Enforcement. Rovella brought numerous agencies into his plan to all work together.  HPD, surrounding suburban Police Agencies, Connecticut State Police, State's Attorney Inspectors, a Prosecutor from the Court to specifically follow prosecutions, State probation and Parole officers and numerous Federal partners such as DEA, ATF and FBI.

One of the biggest components of   Rovella's plan was communication and accountability. If someone was lucky to get invited inside the Shooting Task Force offices it quickly became apparent why the operation was working. The data exchanged and "connecting the dots" to criminals and potential shooters was obvious. A back hallway connecting offices had dozens of pictures posted of persons suspected with volent gun crimes and how  they were all connected together. Hartford is a relatively small City and most volent crime is committed by a very small percentage of persons. Tracking those persons and predicting their moves produced huge results

Rovella's plan was so productive, that his efforts were replicated in other Connecticut cities such as New Haven and New Britain with similar results.

The current administration doesn't seem to understand the problem or how too fix it. Rather , they seem to buy into the latest trend pushed by college academics with little or no results. One example is the "evidence based policing" which Thody and Bronin have seemed to buy into because someone's friend pushed it as plausible and landed a consulting contract in the process. Evidence based policing has been a failure in Hartford and the current crime stats show that.

People are being shot in Hartford, almost daily and at least 8 people have been murdered in the first few weeks of the new year.  The ever dwindling numbers  of Hartford Police Officers is going to make for a very difficult summer if things continue on as is.

It is long overdue for the time for Mayor Bronin to show some leadership and institute plans to bring accountability and solutions to Hartford's violent crime problem. If Bronin is incapable of making the tough decisions. it might just be time for Governor Lamont to have the conversation with his Public Safety Commissioner , James Rovella  to "do something about the crime in Hartford". It worked in 2011 and the time is right to give it a shot again under  Rovella

Friday, December 3, 2021

COUNCILMAN GALE FAILS THE SMELL TEST

COUNCILMAN JOHN GALE

A former Connecticut State Auditor used to speak of using the "smell test" when deciding if use of public funds was acceptable. If it stinks, don't do it. 

Hartford City Councilman John Gale's nasal passages must have been extremely congested not to recognize that this smell test stunk to high heavens.

In a nutshell, Gale came up with a scheme to show his appreciation for City employees during Covid. He wanted to have lapel pins made to show "Hartford Pride". Originally, according to sources, Gale had proposed paying for them out of pocket. Apparently, that never happened, at least not until I began questioning the expenditure from the City budget. 

Gale moved his plan forward, according to COO Thea Montanez, sometime in June. Rather than use any competitive bidding process to provide the best value to City taxpayers. Gale ordered and purchased the pins from his daughter's business for a total of almost $4,000 dollars. Now here is where it really starts to smell and runs afoul of ethics laws and ordinances. 

Gale 's printed material that accompanied the distribution of the pins specifically noted that they were courtesy of Councilman John Gale and ""the Hartford Party". The Hartford Party is the political party Gale formed to get re-elected after the Hartford Democratic Town Committee refused to give him their endorsement for his re-election campaign.

Gale should have known better. Instead of making it a thank you from the entire council, Gale's wording and mentioning himself and his personal political party, it essentially became campaign propaganda material for Gale, paid for by the taxpayers of Hartford. An improper use of taxpayer funds.

Even more troubling is that City Clerk Noel Macgregor, Council President Maly Rosado and Council Aide David Grant were all aware of  and signed off on Gale's propaganda order and Gale's misuse of City funds ,and none of them raised any red flags over what was clearly improper.


                                              ORIGINAL INVOICE FOR PURCHASE


ENTRY SHOWING BLANKET APPROVAL FOR GALE'S PURCHASE WITH CITY DOLLARS. APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT ROSADO, CITY CLERK MACGREGOR AND COUNCIL AIDE DAVID GRANT. RUBBER STAMP CHECKS AND BALANCES, NOT GOOD PROCESS

It was apparently only after COO Thea Montanez was made aware of the purchase   that she told Gale to self report himself to the City's Ethics Commission for his ethics violation. That action by Montanez was detailed in her e-mail to me today after I began questioning Gale's purchase and apparent misuse of City funds. That e-mail is below.

Since I raised the issue, Councilman Gale has reportedly reimbursed the City almost $4,000 for his propaganda purchase

COO Montanez's explanation e-mail to me today

Hello -

Hello -

On Tuesday, Dec.1st, Council President informed me that Councilman Gale used city funds to purchase pins as a thank you to city employees and the pins were purchased from a business owned by a member of his immediate family (Hartford Prints!).  That same day, I contacted Councilman Gale to confirm whether this was accurate and he confirmed it was. I informed Councilman Gale that I was concerned that the purchase potentially violated the City’s Ethics Code.  

As a follow up to our discussion, Councilman Gale self reported the purchase to the Ethics Commission via Corporation Counsel’s Office. He informed the corporation counsel's office of his intent to reimburse the city for the expense and since then, he has submitted payment to the city. 

There were 1400 pins and pin backers that were ordered that totaled $3100. In addition, he ordered 1400 envelopes, which included digital printing services and that was an additional $400 for a total of $3500. The total amount invoiced was approximately $3700 because tax was charged. 

Each pin was placed in an envelope with a thank you note signed by “Councilman John Q. Gale, The Hartford Party.”  The pins were ordered in March and invoiced and paid in June. The funds initially used were general fund dollars appropriated to the City Council in the FY21 city budget for the purposes of civic engagement, to be spent at Council's sole discretion.

Thank you, Thea


Friday, September 17, 2021

IF YOU ARE A POSTER CONCERNED ABOUT LOSING YOUR ANONYMITY, PLEASE READ THIS!!!

 A note from My Lawyer, Mario:

 

Dear Reader:


The founders of our country anonymously criticized government since the early colonial days.  They knew it was an important way to share ideas.  They knew about the danger of retaliation. There’s history here.  There’s tradition here. 

 

Anonymity is also really important to a very smart Attorney, Paul Levy.  Attorney Levy is offering to help people who posted here to protect their anonymity.  He is offering to do so pro bono, which means there is no fee. You can reach Attorney Levy by e-mail at plevy@citizen.org or by phone at 202-588-7725. 

Levy has represented hundreds of anonymous speakers over the past 20 years, always pro bono.  You can learn a little more about Levy here:  https://www.citizen.org/about/person/paul-alan-levy/


If you have posted here and you are worried about staying anonymous, you have a right to have that anonymity protected.  It’s part of the freedom of speech.  We want you to have the tools to protect your anonymity.

 

We thank you for your continuing support.

 

 

Mario Cerame

Associate Attorney

Brignole, Bush & Lewis

73 Wadsworth Street

Hartford, CT 06106

Phone: (860) 527-9973

Fax: (860) 527-5929

Thursday, September 2, 2021

IS THIS AMERICA?


This court decision just seems wrong to me in so many ways. The Court order for me to turn my laptop and cellphone over to a disgruntled Hartford Police Lieutenant just does not seem like America.

Let me just start by saying that at no time did Hartford Police  Lieutenant  Vincent Benvenuto ever attempt to contact me  to ask that I remove something that he found offensive or questionable. I have done that several times in the past when someone would call me and say that they thought a comment was unfair or baseless.

It also seems a huge invasion that someone can tramp through my personal devices to settle a vendetta or for whatever reason he wants to find out the identities of commentors. For example , both devices have medical in formation, banking information and other personal data.

Event though Google told the plaintiff that the information they are looking for is not available and even their expert testified that it may not be available, the judge still issued his order. It almost feels like Benvenuto has gained access to my home and allowed tgo paw through my desk and file cabinet on his search  to soothe his hurt feelings

There was never any mention of anything threatening or criminal in nature in the comments, it was the personal feelings of the commentor's, nothing more.

It was also obvious that the HPD command staff did not look favorably on the blog , and on more that one occasion voiced their displeasure with having their dirty laundry aired on the blog. It also seems a little odd to me that a Police Lieutenant would kick up the money to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit over hurt feelings. Who is funding this suit? Was it a coincidence that Benvenuto was moved into on e of the "gravy" positions at HPD as the Commander of the Intelligence Division immediately after the suit was filed? Was the position a reward from the Command Staff  for trying to silence the blog?  We will probably never know .

That move did not last long. Benvenuto was moved back to the Patrol Division shortly after he filed yet another lawsuit against HPD Chief Thody and Mayor Bronin. The reason you might ask?  Benvenuto's fellings were hurt on ce again when Thody refused to give Benvenuto a take home car for his daily commute to his home in Brewster, NewYork.

An appeal is not cheap, but I think I owe it to m y sources and the commentor's who have placed their trust in me and this blog. Any help in funding that would be greatly appreciated. This ruling will set a dangerous precedent for media outlets, social media users and journalists and can be wide reaching.

Thank you in advance

Go Fund Me link here-GO FUND ME or you can search under my name , Kevin Brookman, at gofundme.com. All donations are anonymous.You can also use venmo.com  and follow the link here  to make a donation.


You can view the entire case and filings herehttp://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=HHDCV196119733S


Link to Judge Noble's decision-http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=21296387

Friday, July 30, 2021

MORE HARTFORD CITY HALL CORRUPTION

 The following report was obtained through a Freedom of Information request from Hartford's Auditors.

This report proves the old adage, you get what you pay for and seems to show that Government operations should not be handed out as political favors, rather than relying on experience in the appropriate fields.

I won't rehash the entire report, but essentially the audit uncovered an alleged pattern and practice of embezzlement of cash funds from the City of Hartford Vital Records Division

Theft of City funds is probably as old as the City of Hartford itself, but unfortunately the safeguards that should be in place to prevent these thefts, are not.

It seems all to often we see these thefts go unchecked, whether it is tens of thousands of dollars from Students Activity accounts at the Board of Education or now a supervisor in the Town Clerks office skimming cash receipts from vital records  by allegedly  voiding cash  transactions and pocketing the cash..

 It also appears, as detailed in the report, the employee knew that auditors were on her heels of tracking  her  criminal deeds  and the employee let herself into City Hall on a Saturday morning to destroy the records that showed her thefts.

The dollar of the thefts is undetermined, essentially because the records have been destroyed by the employee in question, but it is estimated these thefts may have gone on for upwards of two decades.

I hate to say it, but only in Hartford can an employee steal like this, undetected, as they build their pension at the taxpayers expense with little or no fear of detection or criminal prosecution. An employee that had basic management skills should have been on top of this, especially after numerous warnings from auditors. This is what happens when people with no management experience are put in jobs because of their political connections and who they know, not what they know.

The Hartford City Clerk is a political appointment made by the Hartford City Council with no testing process or standardized requirements to manage the Department.

It is also interesting to note that probably one of the most qualified persons who applied for the Town Clerk's position, Eric Lusa. and was passed over. was the person who eventually noticed the suspicious activity and requested City auditors tor "take a deep dive" and investigate the Vital Records operations.  Good job Eric for paying attention and speaking up.


THE AUDITOR'S REPORT IS BELOW:

I.  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

At the request of the Town and City Clerk we completed a follow up audit in July 2021 to specific issues related to transactions recorded by the Vital Records Unit (VRU) supervisor into the City financial system, Munis in 2019, 2020 and 2021. The purpose of the audit was to evaluate and test the accuracy and propriety of transactions processed by the VRU supervisor and other employees as necessary.  The following includes only exceptions noted. The results of our examination were reviewed with N. McGregor, Town and City Clerk and shared with Corporation Counsel.

 

 The VRU supervisor has been employed by the City for the past 34 years, 17 of those in the VRU of the Town Clerk’s office. We found that there was a complete lack of good internal controls and segregation of duties related to the supervisor’s recording of transactions and preparation of the daily batch balancing and cash deposit process. The supervisor could process daily transactions including MUNIS transaction reversals, collect cash, record sales, reconcile daily work batches and prepare the daily deposit alone with no witness, and then sent to the City treasurer’s office. There was no process to periodically review the supervisor’s work. There were no security cameras in the VRU. The lack of adequate internal controls and appropriate segregation of duties with access to cash, creates an environment extremely susceptible to the misappropriation of funds. During the beginning of our follow up audit in March 2021 we had concerns that the accounting records that we needed to examine may be tampered with or destroyed. We requested that the Town Clerk have the VRU supervisor put on administrative leave during the duration of the audit in order to preserve the accounting records. Just prior to the VRU supervisor being put on administrative leave on April 28, 2021, the VRU supervisor contacted Iron Mountain Enterprise Information Management Company to shred accounting records for the VRU.  The VRU supervisor did this without the knowledge of the Town and City Clerk. We found, with the assistance of the Town Clerk that 2019, part of our investigative period of transactions, and many prior years accounting records were picked up for shredding by Iron Mountain in bins filled by the VRU supervisor on the Saturday before being put on administrative leave. These actions were in direct violation of the State of Connecticut document retention mandates and request for document destruction permission processes mandated by the State. Because most of the 2019 accounting documents were destroyed, we could not fully audit 2019 transactions. During our audit we found that the supervisor’s daily recording of transactions was not in accordance with established VRU procedures followed by the other VRU employees. Although the VRU operating procedures were apparently known by the VRU employees, the procedures were not documented in writing. Of the 92 transactions processed by the supervisor that we had accounting records available for examination, over half were not processed in accordance with established operating procedures. Critical fields in the MUNIS system were either vacant, incomplete, false all of which made it extremely difficult to follow and determine the legitimacy of the transactions. The evidential matter available to us was not sufficient to determine the complete extent of possible improper transaction recordings.

 

Background

 

The Vital Records Unit (VRU) of the Town and City Clerk’s (TCC) Office (reports to City Council) is responsible for providing the public with copies of vital records such as birth certificates, marriage licenses, death certificates, burial and cremation permits, disinterment services and notary services.  VRU charges its customers Connecticut State mandated fees ranging from $2 to $50 depending on the type of document.  A portion ($16) of each marriage certificate is remitted to the state of Connecticut’s Department of Public Health.  A majority of the transactions are processed over the counter in the VRU office in City Hall with customers paying with cash and with credit cards.  Customers also request documents by mail, facsimile or through the Internet.  These transactions are paid by money order or credit card.  VRU also bills and collects revenue generated from fees assessed to other cities and towns for document services provided.  VRU uses the Cash Receipt module of the MUNIS Financial Management System (MUNIS) to process and account for cash, checks, money orders and credit card receipts.  

On July 23, 2020, we issued our audit report #2017 covering the Revenue Accounts and Operations of the Vital Records Unit of the Town and City Clerk’s Office. We reported in this report and also in a similar report issued in 2015 the following:

·         During the period from July 1, 2019, to February 14, 2020, we noted 355 reversal of cash receipt transactions totaling $16,910 that were processed in MUNIS by VRU.  There is no indication that these transactions are being monitored, reviewed, and approved by supervisory personnel.  In addition, all VRU employees that receive, and process payments are also able to process reversals.

·         There is no indication that VRU supervisory personnel review the daily cash receipt transactions and summaries to verify that all activity has been properly accounted for throughout the process and recorded in MUNIS as required.  This includes reconciling transactions recorded in MUNIS to applications and other supporting documentation.

 

The Town Clerk responded that “I was appointed as Town and City Clerk on March 9, 2020. This is an area I have not had a chance to look into because of COVID 19, but do recognize there needs documentation, and verification of reversal transactions by a supervisor. We will work on the comments detailed above and will act to follow-up on and address each of the related recommendations as noted and will work with the Internal Audit Department to develop such directives”. In March 2021, the assistant Town Clerk asked the Chief Auditor if the internal audit department could take a deep dive into MUNIS reversal transactions because he had suspicions of improper accounting entries and possibly misappropriation of City funds perpetrated by the Vital Records supervisor. We met with the Town Clerk and the Assistant Town Clerk and agreed to perform audit work related to management’s concerns.

 

Scope

 

The scope of our audit included various reviews and tests of transactions recorded by the VRU supervisor and others primarily during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020, and 2021. We performed tests and reviews of daily cash receipts, bank deposits and related accounting, recording and balancing processes and reviews and tests of credit and voided transactions.

 

II. AUDIT RESULTS

 

City VRU Records Destroyed During the Investigation

 

During the beginning of our audit, we had concerns that the 2019 and current accounting records that we needed to examine may be destroyed. We requested that the Town Clerk put the VRU supervisor on administrative leave in order to preserve the accounting records. Before the supervisor was put on administrative leave, she contacted Iron Mountain Enterprise information management company to shred City VRU accounting records without the knowledge of the Town Clerk. We found, with the assistance of the Town Clerk, that most of the 2019 VRU manual accounting record, part of our investigative period, and many prior years accounting records were picked up by Iron Mountain, their secured bins filled by the supervisor, for destruction without the express permission of the Town Clerk or the State of Connecticut. The act of having municipal records destroyed prior to the state’s mandated retention period and during an audit/investigation was in direct violation of the State of Connecticut document retention mandates. Practically all of 2019 manual accounting records/daily work batches were destroyed during our audit that started in March of 2021. The following is an excerpt from the State Document retention mandates https://atlas.ct.gov/Portal/pages/index.jsp, record series title – Cash Receipts, Disbursement ledgers, Journals, Books, etc. Minimum retention period is Fiscal Year End plus three years.

 

 

Inadequate Segregation of the Supervisor’s Duties

 

We found that the internal controls and segregation of duties related to the VRU supervisor’s recording of transactions and preparation of the dialing batch balancing and cash deposit process were inadequate. The VRU supervisor could process daily transactions including the reversal of sale transactions in MUNIS, collect cash, record sale transactions in MUNIS, reconcile daily work batches and prepare the daily deposit with no witness prior to sending it to the City treasurer’s office. There was no process to periodically review the VRU supervisor’s work, as mentioned below, and there were no security cameras in the VRU. The lack of adequate internal controls, management oversite and appropriate segregation of duties, including access to cash, creates an environment susceptible to the misappropriation of funds and inappropriate accounting entries.

 

Town Clerk Management Oversight

 

We could not find any evidence that there was any documented management oversight of the VRU supervisor’s work during the past two Town Clerk’s terms. Such management oversite would include periodic documented reviews of the VRU supervisors work in light of a lack of segregation of duties including access to cash transaction recording in MUNIS and solely performing the daily deposit and work batch reconciliations. No management action, to our knowledge, was taken to correct issues reported in our 2015 audit report covering the VRU operations, specifically the issue related to reversals of recorded transactions in MUNIS.

 

Procedures and Controls

 

Procedures for the collection, processing, recording, deposit and balancing of cash receipts; and fee billing and collection processes were not adequately documented in writing.  Documenting procedures and controls for key processes in narrative form in writing is a basis for good internal controls and provides management with a baseline for evaluating day-to-day activities and employee performance.  We recommend that TCC management document procedures, process flows and related key controls for the areas noted above in writing.  Ideally, these procedures and process flows should be documented using automated tools such as Microsoft Word or Excel so that they can be easily updated as necessary with any required changes.  Key controls and the individuals/positions responsible for them should be noted where appropriate in the documentation. Although the procedures are not documented in writing, each VRU staff member is required to follow their supervisor’s verbal training in those areas.  The VRU staff was apparently trained on the proper recording of transactions in MUNIS. at the start of each VRU staff employment and they are expected to follow those procedures as follows:

 

1.      Each customer’s application, for Marriage Licenses, Burial Permits, and Death and Birth Certificates must be separately recorded in MUNIS

2.      All cash receipts should be recorded immediately by the cashier in MUNIS

3.      All checks, cash, money order, and credit cards should be recorded in MUNIS with the correct amount, check/money order and credit cards numbers

4.      At the end of each day, all applications for Marriage Licenses, Burial Permits, Death and Birth Certificates, check images, visa receipts and MUINS payment proof reports must be attached to each VRU staff batch package

5.      All customer transactions must be properly identified in MUNIS

6.      In the “Paid by” field, in the MUNIS cash receipt module, the name of the customer must be recorded

7.      The payment method should be recorded and properly identified with a check or credit card number

 

As noted in the details that follow the VRU supervisor’s processing of transactions in many instances are not in accordance with the procedures that the staff was trained on when processing like or similar transactions. The results listed below resulted from our audit work which include an examination of 205 MUNIS transaction reversals recorded between July 2019 and April 2021 related to the VRU supervisor’s daily work batches:

 

1.      In several instances, 159 out of the 205 reversal transactions were not properly identified and were in violation of most of, if not all the seven establish internal processes, procedures and controls listed above specifically as it relates to transaction recordings of Death Certificates. We identified more than 69 of the 205 reversal transactions, where the reversed sale was paid by check, the field in MUNIS identifying the payer was not properly posted. Instead of the name of the customer, as required, the “paid by” field said either “deaths” or “Customer”.  By not posting the customer’s name accurately it would be extremely difficult to identify the actual customer and make it easier to mask a misappropriation of funds.

2.      In the “paid by’’ section labeled Deaths, we found several different funeral homes made payments for Death Certificates that were recorded on one receipt instead of separate receipts for each funeral home as required, payments by check were recorded in MUNIS with no check number or an invalid check number. As a result, we could not trace these transactions to the daily bank deposit. It appears that these types of transactions were recorded in MUNIS to replace actual cash receipts that may not have been included in the daily deposit.

3.      In the “paid by” section labeled Customers, we found several different funeral homes check payments that were recorded for sales other than death certificates such as birth certificates and plastic covers, thing funeral homes do not purchase from the VRU. We contacted the related funeral homes, and we were informed that they did not request any birth certificates or covers from the City of Hartford and that they only purchase copies of death certificates. We also found credit card payments that were improperly recorded as sales of death certificates. These transactions could have the appearance of being made to replace unrecorded cash payments not included in the daily bank deposit.

4.      A reversed check payment made for death certificates, with no other replacing entry in MUNIS, was deposited in the City of Hartford bank account.  On March 2, 2021, the VRU supervisor processed a check totaling $105 for five death certificates and one burial permit. The transaction was recorded in MUNIS, and the customer received five certified death certificates and one burial permit. On March 3, 2021, the VRU supervisor reversed $105 check payment that was previously recorded on March 2, 2021. Later that afternoon, on March 3, 2021, the VRU supervisor prepared the daily batches, March 2, 2021, for deposit, which also included the $105 reversed/unrecorded check payment, in the City bank account. It appears that the deposit of the check related to the reversal of the sale in MUNIS was used to replace cash that was not recorded in MUNIS or deposited in the bank.

5.      We found instances where check payments recorded in MUNIS were completely different form the amount deposited in the bank account. One check was recorded in MUNIS as $105; however, the bank deposit indicated that the check was for $40. It appears that the $65 difference was used to replace $65 of the $105 reversed/unrecorded check deposit mention in item four above.  Also, a check payment totaling $40 was recorded in MUNIS with no check number and we could not find it deposited into the bank. It appears that this check was never remitted by a customer, is not a valid transaction and was made to reconciled MUNIS sales to the daily bank deposit inappropriately.

6.      We found a cash payment made to the VRU that was incorrectly recorded in MUNIS but was in the daily bank deposit. The VRU supervisor received, as evidenced by a signed receipt from a funeral home, $170 cash payment. The cash payment was a reimbursement to the City for an insufficient funds returned check for a transaction purchasing six death certificates for $120 and a $50 bounced check fee. The VRU supervisor recorded in MUNIS $100 for death certificates and $50 for the NFS fee. The VRU supervisor did not follow the proper procedure related to an accounts receivable payment. The proper procedure for an accounts receivable payment is to create a single receipt batch for the total amount received and to notify the City Custody of Funds division, Treasurer’s Department, of the payment. Because the payment was not properly recorded in MUNIS the Custody of Funds division did not clear the accounts receivable amount until February 2021, more than four months after the payment was received. The $20 cash difference between the $120 received and the $100 that was recorded in MUNIS could not be located in the City bank account. The VRU supervisor could not explain the $20 difference.

7.      We found another instance where the VRU supervisor received a check for $200 from a funeral home for the purchase of 10 death certificates; however, we could not find the related entry in MUNIS, but we found the deposit in the bank. It appears that in order to reconcile MUNIS transactions to the bank deposit for that day, the VRU supervisor recorded in MUNIS several fictitious check numbers to total $200. It appears that that these fictitious check numbers and amounts were inappropriately recorded to account for unrecorded funds of $200.  

8.      We found two instances where the VRU supervisor used check payments received, from three separate funeral homes for the purchase of death certificates, to apply in MUNIS to birth certificates and birth certificate plastic cover accounts. A detail review of these transactions indicates the following:

·        One funeral home, applied, paid for, and obtained 20 death certificates and one burial permit for $405 through the VRU supervisor. However, the transaction recorded in MUNIS indicates that the funeral home received a birth certificate plastic cover for $2 and $383.00 for death certificates. The funeral home indicated that they only applied for 20 death certificates ($400) and one burial permit ($5) but didn’t apply for or receive any plastic cover. The difference of $20 not recorded in MUNIS and the cover recording could not be explained by the VRU supervisor. The difference could have the appearance of been used to account for unrecorded cash receipts.

·         Three funeral homes purchased nine copies of two different death certificates, four burial permits and paid a total of $200. However, a review of the related MUNIS transactions indicates that the $200 in checks that were received for death certificates and burial permits, were recorded to the birth certificate and plastic cover charge allocation account.  It appears that the inappropriate transactions made to the birth certificate and plastic cover account was done to account for unrecorded cash receipts.

 

9.      On July 21, 2020, a customer applied for two separate birth certificates at $20 each.  The applications for a birth certificate copies indicated that one application was for the applicant’s child and the other was for the applicant’s grandchild. The application for the grandchild also indicated that the applicant must present the child’s birth record. A review of the applications indicated that the VRU supervisor approved the customer application and when questioned the VRU supervisor did admit that the applications were approved. Based on the VRU supervisor approval, it appears that a $40 payment was received for the birth certificates, and they were given to the customer. We could not find the related transaction in MUNIS, nor could we find the cash deposit in the bank.

 

10.  Our review of 707 receipts recorded in MUNIS and labeled not reversed disclosed that 43 were manually reversed. We noted that 23 of the 43 transactions were for, either incomplete receipt and cash/credit payments and adjustments for reconciled items.  It should be noted that 15 out of the 23 transactions were for credit card payments.  We could not determine the reasons for this transaction due to a lack of MUNIS documentation.

 

11.  A review of two of the VRU supervisor’s daily transactions batches, dated October 28, 2020, and July 21, 2020, disclosed that the VRU supervisor recorded in MUNIS, on October 28,2020, a cash payment of $20 for a copy of a marriage certificate. The recording was part of the total cash payments of $240. However, on October 29, 2020, the VRU supervisor included in the daily cash payments of only $220. On November 23, 2020, the VRU supervisor was informed by the Treasurer department that the daily batch did not match the deposit received by the bank. On November 24, 2020, the VRU supervisor, without conducting a due diligent research, reversed $20 from a check amount received from a funeral home for a death certificate. On the day of the initial October 28, 2020, recording, the VRU supervisor received $120 for six death certificates and the amount was correctly recorded in MUNIS and was part of the daily deposit. We also noted that on October 28, 2020, the Vital Records supervisor recorded in MUNIS a cash payment of $20 for a copy of a marriage certificate. This recording has part of the customer’s name, the amount, payment method and was never reversed in MUNIS.  An actual copy of the application was found in the VRU supervisor’s daily batch package. After a review of the marriage certificate, we determine that the customer received a copy of the marriage certificate.  It is our opinion that an actual customer came to the Vital Records office and apply for a copy of a marriage certificate, received a copy, and paid the correct amount in cash. However, the Vital Records supervisor could not account for the missing $20. We could not determine what happen to the $20 cash payment between the day of the transaction and the day it was prepared for deposit. 

 

Interview with the VRU Supervisor

 

On June 16, 2021, a meeting was held with the VRU supervisor to explain the business purpose of several accounting transactions and other related issues noted in this report. In attendance were the Chief Auditor, VRU Supervisor, HEMEA Union Representative and two Internal Audit Staff. During the two-hour meeting, the Supervisor could not adequately explain the business reason for entering numerous transactions into MUNIS related to VRU cash, credit card and check transactions. Most of the Supervisor’s answers to Internal Audit’s questions were, I do not remember or do not know the answer, or it must be a mistake. The business reasons for adjusting/reversing transactions were not documented or could not be explained in most questioned instances. At times the Supervisor was agitated and confrontational.

 

Town Clerk Management Actions Taken to Date

 

This memo is to provide an update on steps taken by the Town Clerk to remedy identified concerns in the Vital Records Unit. This update is not a completed list of the corrections that need to be made but we hope are steps taken immediately to correct past accounting deficiencies.

 

  1. Installed IQS accounting software which will detail each transaction and will eliminate reversals and manual input to MUNIS. Each transaction is identified and put into separate accounts therefore removing Transcript of Records as the sole depository of transactions
  2. Installed receipt printers at POS, with connected cash drawers.
  3. Deposits are done with two persons in Town Clerk’s office under cameras.
  4. Safes repaired and are able be locked.
  5. Security cameras ordered and waiting vendor installation.
  6. Corrected process of collecting of NSF.
  7. We are in the process of updating all policy and procedures.
  8. Card key will be required to enter secured working area from lobby of Vital Records Unit.
  9. Removed Vital Records supervisor as authorized on Iron Mountain account to shred records, the Town Clerk will be the only authorized person.

 

Next Steps

  

  • The Town Clerk will keep the Internal Audit Department up to date with future actions taken to improve the controls in the VRU.    
  • The Town Clerk will determine the appropriate personnel action to take, if any, related the VRU supervisor and he will work with the City Human Relations office and the City Corporation Counsel’s office based on the action he deems appropriate.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

 

 

 

 

Distribution:                                                                                                                                                                         

 

City Council Members                                                                                                                                                                                   

Internal Audit Commission Members                                                                                                                                                            

L. Bronin, Mayor                                                                                           

A. Cloud, Treasurer

J. Hockenhull, Chief Financial Officer          

T. Montanez, Chief Operating Officer

L.A. Ralls, Finance Director

H. Rifkin, Corporation Counsel

V. Rossitto, Partner, Blum Shapiro