New Haven Register call to 'Fix Deathtrap on Morgan Lane'

Today's New Haven Register had two articles on last Sunday's storm with torrential downpours, and the horrifying and tragic death of Gladys Padula, who died when her van was submerged in flash flooding under Morgan Lane:

• Opinion: Fix Deathtrap on Morgan Lane
• Police Intensify underpass probe

My heart goes out to Michael Padula and the couple's two children.

Apparently there has been some finger pointing towards Public Works, Police Department, dispatching, Metro North Railroad, etc. Some have even accused the town of trying to save money by not forming an emergency crew -- but I really do find that hard to believe.

I think P0lice Chief Ron Quagliani states it well in the second article when he says :

"This was not a predictable event. This is not like a hurricane we could prepare for. This was a flash flood that I haven’t seen the likes of in years," he said, adding that flooding hasn’t occurred in that area since a retention pond was installed in that area in the 1980s.

Given the tight time line provided between the police first being notified of flooding at 10:37, and the call of Gladys' van going under at 11:05, I dont' think that anyone wasn't responsive to the problem. According to the article, the police were called, reponded to the initial problem and brought the initial car driver to nearby Bailey to meet up with a called ride, called dispatch who called Public Works, who assembled an emergency crew for the problem within 45 minutes of the initial call.

While it could be argued that the police officer should have stayed there to flag down drivers, they would have been on the wrong side of the problem, as best I can tell. I suppose had someone been on the scene, they might have jumped in after Gladys - but they might not have been able to help even then.

The southbound sign was obscured by brush (no good), and there was no northbound sign, which was the direction that Gladys was travelling. Given the visibility, that might not have mattered.

The bottom line is that we received nearly 7 inches of rain in a very short amount of time, flash flooding occurred, visibility was poor, and one would expect that Gladys didn't know that the water was there or that deep. While I agree that steps should be taken so this will never happen again, I don't think it could have been predicted, particularly given the work to prevent flooding from the area.

Breaking News from our Readers (Structure31)

This just in from one of our readers in response to the West Haven Taypayer Initiative ignored by Council post:

New news on the taxpayer initiative. The leaders of this group have said they will filing an election enforcement complaint tomorrow and possible criminal complaint. Appearently,AFTER Charles Marino got up at the podium on Monday and said he thought some petition circulators might have not been voters, he had Kaplowe and Grengas removed from the voter list on Tuesday. therefore, he was untruthful at the podium when he said they weren't voters (they were at the time of circulation)and then played with their constitutioal right to vote. The Taxpayer initiative leaders are calling it political retribution for circulating petitions and trying to take away the will of the people. stay tuned on that one.

The plot just keeps thickening.

HOWEVER... My memory recalls the scenario a little bit differently - I remember Charles Marino stating that some petition circulators were registered in two states at the same time at the time that the petitions were being handed in. The oath that the petition circulators had to give at that time, he said, indicated that they were still valid voters in their locale.

I may have it wrong, but it's my understanding that if you register in a new jurisdiction, the new jurisdiction notifies the old one the date as of which you registered in a new area, and as of that date, you are no longer considered part of the voter list for the old jurisdiction.

Can anyone point me to statutes that backup or refute this?

High Bacteria in Beach Water in Milford - does West Haven Test???

According to this New Haven Register article, high levels of bacteria closed 6 state beaches, including nearby Milford's Silver Sands Beach... does West Haven even test their beaches?

West Haven Taxpayer Initiative ignored by Council

Accord to this New Haven Register article:

A taxpayer-fueled petition, asking the City Council to lower the tax rate because signers feel financially overburdened by skyrocketing taxes, has failed to attract the council’s attention, let alone be placed to a vote.

Despite taxpayers’ repeated protests and pleas to save them from potential financial ruin, the City Council early Tuesday heeded the advice of Corporation Counsel Peter C. Barrett to avoid even entertaining the petition because he believes it to be a legal misuse of the city charter’s provision for initiative petitions.

Clearly, it wasn't worth staying through the full meeting.

According to the article, there were more than 4300 signatures, including the required 3025 that were verified by City Clerk Deborah Collins. It's unclear how many were affected by the allegation brought on by Charles Marino, who stated that 3 of the 54+ circulators were registered voters out of state.

According to the article:

Barrett’s opinion, citing case law, claims an initiative is meant to bring legislative action as opposed to stopping an action, like the 2006-07 budget, from being implemented. Barrett said taxpayers should have used the charter’s budget referendum provision. The deadline for that passed 30 days after the budget’s May approval.

What was also interesting, is that Barrett said that:

the petition, if enacted, would preclude the city from adhering to its statutory obligation to "sufficiently fund the budget."

From what was stated at the meeting by Robert Symmes, the budget WASN'T sufficiently funded, and that it didn't balance... it will be interesting to see how this one pans out in the end.

Reader Feedback: Some Background Information and Comments

Structure3 (formerly known as Structure) wrote in some interesting comments on The City Council Meeting post which help give more of the background information that I'm missing. These are unverified comments, but give some more insight from another point of view:

I want to give input to the council meeting. Although I don't get up and speak, I do listen to everything else that I hear from various sources and take it into consideration so that when people do speak I can understand where they are coming from. Some of it I have confirmed and some of it I have not. I may be a bit biased abuot the new administration and it's credibility but that does not mean I don't have an opinion and can't get out some thoughts for consideration.

The First is regarding Albie Towles. That is the name of the gentleman who spoke regarding property taxes. Albie, a democratic town committee member who endorsed the mayor, processes service papers for extra money. This is a very lucrative business and you get PAID for serving papers on the old taxes. The reason he is upset with the Tax Collector is because he, the mayor and the town chairman asked the tax collector to give this work to Albie of which Albie,their close friend, would have made a lot of money. The Tax Collector did not do this. And Albie is very angry with the Tax Collector over this. So unfotunately, it looks to me like there is a financial motive to his speaking.

Secondly, Mrs Larusso was mayor Borer's secretary and her and her sister Deb EVangeliste that works in the Registrar's Office sued mayor borer because the sister Deb Evanageliste who works in the Registrar's Office hours were cut. The city defended this law suit and won. Mrs Larusso and her sister donated and worked for Mayor Picard's election. The first item to put on the agenda for the city council when the mayor was elected was to give back Mrs Larusso's siter her hours back and give her full health benefits. A total of $20,000. So, while we are cutting everyone else and saying we have a fiscal crisis, these women were paid with increased hours and health benefits after the city spent that money defending the suit. There was a memo that was written and serves as an agreement between the council and the Registrar's office saying that this woman will get more hours and health benefits if she keeps the REgsitrar's office open all day and cleans up the voters list. These jobs are not justifiably full time. Also, since taking office both Mrs Larusso and her sister's sons have been hired by the city. This comes directly from Councilwoman Rossi who kept bringing this up over and over in the first few months only to be ignored and I haven't heard her mention it since.

Charles Marino, Mayor Picard's former campaign manager, works for the Voice, Deb Evangeliste (the sister who was given a pay back of full time hours as noted above) writes the columns for the Voice, and she does it on WORK TIME. So we pay her our tax money to write the VOICE.

On the hand out from Mayor Borer's sisterin law, maybe they shouldn't have handed it out, but maybe they have no other way to get any word out and challenge the administration. Seems to be one sided newspapers. If the taxes are being paid on the house that the mayor's wife's father owns than of course is a good thing. But he still owns its and they pay him. That is no different from renting. And if all those improvements were made that the mayor's wife mentioned, did they get assessed on them like the rest of us??

On the fire issue in the memo, I agree. Mayor Picard's campaign manager was Harold Burns Deputy cheif of the Fire Department in West Shore. Mayor Picard's Treasurer for his campaign is the Fire Commissioner, Tina Peckingham. So when the west shore had the fire tax vote, of course he couldn't come out and vote with the rest of west shore and reject the tax increase because that would be going aginst his campaign leaders. Now this group wants to consolidiate away from the city. Why? because the Deputy Cheif will be Cheif soon and they will control the hiring of all three fire districts but still be UNACCOUNTABLE for their budgeting and actions and taxes. The fox watching the hen house but now the hen house is bigger.

Tim Wrightington. Here is a person who was appoitned to the Ethics Commission by Mayor Picard in January and is suppose to stay nuetral. Need I say more?

Curtis Jordon, is not Finance Director, but appointed to the Finance Board by Mayor Picard.

I'm disappointed this petition issue died and I hope Paul Kalowe and BobSymmes can keep it together in a non-plitical way. Everyone's missing the point, it's not whether there should be a referendum or not,it's that 5,000 people said this budget is unacceptable and the council should be acknowledging the people in some way, rather than just rubber stamping a "no".

Unfortunately Charles Marino didn't mention who he thought lived out of the city and should not be circulating, but he should have had some numbers. If there were 3,000 signatures needed and 5,000 were handed in, even if 1,500 were wrong, it's still a valid petition. Charles Marino never said any numbers. Unless I missed them. He is the Registrar if he has issues he should have had numbers in hand. Just like the bond counsel with his news, but nothing to pass out ever, no way for us to ever verify anything these people say.

Reader Feedback from 'Bob Symmes'- unverified author, but credible sounding statements.

I received the following as a comment on the Clarifications of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative post from a user named 'Bob Symmes':

We tried to keep the politics out of the Initiative process, but of course the Mayor and his cronies couldn't help themselves:

1) they took my illustration of a budget that could save money for the City...and used it as an actual proposal (showing it around saying "this is what will happen if they have their way")

2) they decided not even to entertain the petition itself.

While I have no way currently to verify the authenticity of the poster, the statements make sense in context of explaining the frustration exhibited by Mr. Symmes at the meeting the other night. His statements did indicate that not enough information had been given to him in order to present a revised budget proposal; and this made the statement by Curtiss Jordan about the Finance Committee recommendations to not accept the budget given by the WHTI odd. The comments above explain that.

Politics definitely do seem to continue to run thick in West Haven, despite many calling for non-partisan teamwork...

State Money secured for both West Haven and Orange Metro North Train Stations

Accord to the New Haven Register article entitled "$11M set for Metro-North stations in W. Haven, Orange", Jodi Rell has signed a bill that would set aside a total of $11M for train stations in both Orange and West Haven, with the bulk of the money going to West Haven (although it isn't clear how much of that it is.).

Each station is expected to cost about $50 million, with the bulk of the money coming from the Federal government. Rosa DeLauro has indicated that she has so far been able to secure $3M for both stations, including $1.2 million secured in June for West Haven.

The $11 Million contributed by the state will apparently be matched by Federal Government funds:

State Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Cooper said Monday that the $11 million will be in the DOT’s budget for the stations, with matching funds coming from the federal government.

"As it stands right now moving forward, both (West Haven and Orange) will get train stations as a result of this bill," said Cooper.

So, that looks like $25M of $100M (required to build both stations) has been found...
that's good news. State officials indicates that "Preliminary plans [for the West Haven Station] call for a transportation "hub," with bus lines, parking, condominiums and office space".

Mayor Picard indicated that preliminary plans have construction starting in January 2009 (why so far away -- maybe to raise $$$'s?) with completion in 2010, and hopes that this will help revitalize West Haven.

Public meetings are apparently on the way so that residents can understand what is happening with the projects -- stay tuned, as I think this is really exciting news for West Haven.

City Council Meeting Part II - Public comments

So, here's another day, and I wanted to highlight a few of the more interesting public comments. Remember, these are one person's statement - and they haven't been checked or verified by the town council (which is a very frustrating thing).

First off, I had made the comment in my last post that the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative vote was probably a moot point -- here's why.

The public comments section started with a bit of a bombshell. Chuck Marino, who works for the West Haven Voice, and who is the Democratic registrar of voters for the town of West Haven, dropped the following doozy. He stated that 3 circulators of the petition for referedum for the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative were no longer electors of West Haven, as they had registered in another jurisdiction, and effectively were on two voter rolls (sp?) at the same time (which is illegal, for obvious reasons). He stated that dual registration is a serious matter, as they swore under oath that they had properly completed the petitions, and that . As this might affect as many as 1/3 of the signatures, the petition would not have had enough voters to
force entry onto the city council or to force a referendum. He cited the following sections of code: 9-21, 9-21(a), 9-21(c), 9-357, 9-360, and 9-361. Finally he stated that he would be turning over the results of his investigation (once completed) to the Secretary of State for legal review.

I didn't stay for the final vote on the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative requests last evening, but I suspect that it was basically voted down.

Here are some other interesting (but unverified) points raised during the public comment section of the meeting (note this is roughly chronological, but isn't a full play by play - there's just too much to weed through for that):

• Paul Scanlon (head of an effort to increase arts in West Haven) discussed the potential city purchase of the Masonic Lodge, which apparently the city has received some grant money from the state in order to convert into an Art Center, and urged the council to approve the purchase at a minimum, so that the monies wouldn't have to be returned. He talked about making the Art Center into a destination 'anchor' that would attract businesses (such as boutiques, cafes, etc.), to spread the tax basis to business, and would attract people downtown. He also discussed his idea of Summer Theatre for the kids of West Haven, so that they'd have something positive to do.
  
  
• Three of the four questions that Brent Coscia raised were intriguing:
  
  1. If expenditures that are more than $3500 are supposed to go out to bid, why was the audit with Checkers not put out to bid?
  2. Why would the city idemnify Checkers from lawsuits to the City of West Haven?
  3. Did the city council understand that they were granting Checkers indemnification?
     

• Timothy Writington (sp?) mentioned that from 1998-2001, the city was working from a "False" grandlist, as $2M of the property listed included the already destroyed apartments on Sawmill Road.
  
  
• Timothy also stated something to the effect that the Police Retirement Fund budget was $55 million, but $78 million was allocated, and as only $55 million went to the fund, what was the remainder used for?
  
  
• Finally, he asked for the town council to address the large quantity and expenditure of overtime for the city since July 1st to the present date, where some individuals had already received as much as $6300 in overtime.
  
  
• One commentator mentioned that city council meeting minutes should be placed on the internet on a more timely basis, and that he felt that not enough information was being distributed to taxpayers so that they could make good decisions.
  
  
• The resource website of Connecticut Public Notices was mentioned (which I'll add to the useful resources on the right hand side). This site pulls public notices from local area papers, and includes tons of useful information about upcoming meetings - well worth while to look at.
  
  
• The budget cutting idea of reducing bulk pickup to twice a year was brought up, as well as eliminating the beach cleaning (personally, I think that the beach may be our greatest resource - we need to keep it clean).
  
  
• It was mentioned that New Haven charges its residents $100/day if junk is dumped on the curb, and that we needed to more rigorously enforce the 24 hour rule about putting garbage by the curb, and limitations of bulk pickup.
  
  
• An idea of restricting parking outside of the paid lots for 1000 feet from the beaches was brought up, as it was mentioned that many out of towners use our beaches, and don't park in the lots. Instead, only residents with stickers would be able to park on side streets for 1000 feet from the beaches, and that the stickers should expire every 2 years instead of 5 or 6.
  
  
• Paul Kaplowe (known as one of the leaders of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative) brought up the Haverstraw (sp?), NY project as an example of what would be great for West River Crossing, that would move the tax basis from homeowners to businesses, and presented his writeup to the council. I am working phonetically on the town name, but I think he is referring to the Haverstraw, NY 'Encore Palisades' project.
  
  
• Paul Kaplowe also indicated that everyone should support thte town counsel, and we should all work together instead of fighting. This is significant, because of Robert Symmes' statements later on; one wonders if there is a split in the initiative, or if Mr. Symmes was reacting to the allegations of Chuck Marino.
  
  
• Paul Frosolone, of Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation and also the Republican town committee chairman, thanked the 8 of 13 city council members who attended the fire consolidation meeting, and mentioned that the next meeting would be on September 18th. He urged that we all become better educated on the pros and cons of the consolidation of the fire departments, and mentioned that ultimately, whether or not West Haven changes, at least those involved will have a better understanding of the situation. In addition to the consolidation of the 3 departments, he stated that they are also looking into whether or not control of the fire department should be under the City Council, or if they should continue to be separate. He mentioned that he respects every city fireman and their families, and asked them to respect him and his organization, too. He indicated that no one is out to hurt firemen, or look at individual pensions, etc., but instead that they are looking at the big picture.
  
  
• One point that Mr. Frosolone made was flawed, though. He indicated that although there are three fire chiefs, each individual household only payed for one fire chief. The flaw in this logic is that if there was only 1 firechief, and all of West Haven was paying for that chief, that the amount each of us would pay for a fire chief would be less!
  
  
• Curtis Jordan, the Finance Director, pointed out that the Allingtown fire district in 1998 increased their tax rate by 2.5 mills, clearly a sore point. He indicated that the 1996 study of fire district consolidation showed that we would save money, solve staffing issues, and solve the pension funding problem.
  
  
• Mr. Alan B. Toles (sp?) mentioned that there are $6M in delinquent taxes - or roughly 2 mills worth, and wanted to know why the tax collector wasn't doing his job. He indicated that the tax collector is an elected official, but only sent out 3 tax warrents in the past 2 years. (all facts unchecked).
  
  
• Marty Northum asked why the budget went up 5% but the taxes went up by an average of 20-40% .
  
  
• He also pointed out that businesses property taxes weren't re-evaluated -- only personal property owners, and that while businesses can raise rates to generate income, individuals can't! He called for the business taxes to be revaluated by October, to put them on the newest grand list.
  
  
• One speaker poignantly pointed out the frustration of the format of the City Counsel meeting, where questions can be raised, but there isn't a provision to answer the speakers -- so all questions tend to go unanswered.
  
  
• Mr. Robert Symmes stood up with some fairly strong statements directed at Mayor Picard. It's clear that he feels betrayed by him - that after he and Mr. Kaplowe sat down with him on July 29th, that he felt that certain information would be granted to him so that they could try to find common ground for a solution. By the time he sat down with the Finance Committee on 8/9, his FOI (freedom of Information) requests had not been granted, so they couldn't make a full recommendation.
  
  
• Mr. Symmes indicated that he would be filing a suit against the City of West Haven to force the mandates of the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative. He announced his frustration with the existing budget, saying that the current numbers do not properly add up, and that he found nearly $5M of income not stated, which he would provide to the Secretary of State.
  
  
• Another person read Curtis Jordan's letter to the city council regarding the West Haven Taxpayer Initiative, urging the counsel to turn down the initiative, stating that it called for the elimination of 28 jobs which were protected by agreements with the unions (local 681 and local 1103), which conceded raises to job protection. It was also mentioned in the letter that it is highly unlikely that any tax relief will happen this year.
  
  
• Sandy LaRusso, who appears to be a dis-enchanted former executive secretary for Mayor Borer (1991-1996), mentioned that Mr. Charles Marino and Picard were 'ousted' by Mayor Picard for not agreeing with bonding issues. She mentioned that she, her sister, and Mr. Marino also visited Haverstraw, and were also impressed.
  
  
• A woman from Allingtown wants to know why the Forest School project went from 8 classrooms to 6, and mentioned that she would welcome the state stepping in.
  
  
• A man who works nights mentioned that recently when going to the Walgreens on Campbell Avenue at 3am after his shift, he saw 13 teenagers out on the streets. When he talked to a policeman in the Walgreens parking lot, the police officer indicated that there was nothing he could do about it - that the parents didn't want them brough thome, and that there are no city ordinances regarding kids out at nighttime. He expressed great concern that the police have no control over 13 and 14 year olds in the city.
  
  
• A anecdote about paying taxes was also relayed, where 6 weeks after the taxes were paid, the motor vehicle department indicated that they were not, and a registration could not be renewed. The man relaying the story said that he went down to the tax department and asked to speak to the tax collector (who wasn't in), and that his payment was not in the computer. The women in the department had to look through two large boxes containing 100's of payments that had not yet been processed... he wondered how much interest was being lost.
  
  
• Councilwoman Nancy Rossi expressed concern that neither Levitsky & Berney nor Checkers are coming before the Council to answer questions about their findings. She also expressed concern that Levitsky & Berney were not releasing documents to Checkers. This was also echoed by Councilman Arutsky.
  
  
• Nancy Rossi also seemed to indicate that Corporate Counsel advised the City Council not to raise personal property rates for vehicles and businesses.
  
  
• Councilwoman Tracy Morrisey indicated that it was brought to her attention that a contract that went to Pittney Bowes for more than $3500 did not go out to bid. She wants both this fact and the the fact that the Checkers contract didn't go out to bid to be brought before the city council.

Again, just from these notes on the Public Commentary, I have no way of knowing what is fact, and what is fiction...

More on the Notice that was handed out will come later... got to get SOME work done today!

The City Council Meeting

I gave up on the City Council meeting at about 10:30 after sitting through 3.5 hours, and after the council broke to caucus, but before they voted on the West Haven Taxpayer initiative. As best I can tell, though, it was entirely a mute point by then.

The biggest impressions that hit me as I walked away from the meeting was one of disbelief that so much unchallenged mis-information could be presented in one meeting, and disappointment that so few residents attended. In our town of more than 50,000 people, there were only about 75 taxpayers in attendance.

For those who haven't been to a City Council meeting, besides urging you to attend at least one per year, let me explain how I understand the meeting to work (my experience with these meetings are not great - this is my first meeting). After the meeting is called to order, there is a Public Comment section. Anyone in the city of West Haven can sign up to speak; you must present your first and last names, and your address, and you can only speak once. There is no limit on how long you can speak, although one is urged to be brief. No one can interrupt your speech, and no one answers any questions you may pose. Others are welcome to come and respond later in the Public Comment time - but remember, they can only speak once.

Basically, anyone can say anything about anything on their mind... and say anything they did. 25 people spoke - from 7pm through 9:30pm. And sadly, because there was no official response section to each of the public comments, it's very hard to separate the truth from the fiction, even when some points were refuted by others later in the proceedings. Who's to say who was the correct responder?

Upon arriving, I received a hand-out, of which according to Mrs. Tara Picard (yes, the mayor's wife was one of the public commenters about half way through the session) had been suppied by former Mayor Borer's sister in law. There were definitely some half truths, half facts, and possibly some out and out mistruths on that hand out. Mrs. Picard urged the council to consider initiating a police investigation into political misdoings with the handouts, in that were political statements being distributed without proper identification of whose agenda it was (or something to that effect.)

Mrs. Picard also discussed the fact that her father's name was on their deed, stating that it really was none of anyone's business, but that her father's name was on the deed as their 'building advisors'. She also stated that she and Mayor Picard pay taxes on the property, and the leasing company pays the taxes on their cars. Truly, she has a point - the taxes are paid for the place where they live. However, I think people feel like she and Mayor Picard haven't financially invested themselves into this city, and find that uncomfortable, particularly as Mayor Picard's occupation is that of a financial advisor.

I'm not going to bore everyone by going through play by play - but there are a number of good points raised, and a few good highlights, which I'll go into tomorrow in more detail. There were also a bunch of political revelations to me, that explain a whole bunch of things, including why the West Haven Voice is pro-Mayor Picard, and anti-Mayor Borer - but I'll wait for tomorrow for that, too.

After the public session, the city council said the Pledge of Allegence to the Flag, paid some bills.

Then came a fascinating segment where the Bond lawyer that was retained back on Dec 29, 2005 came to speak on his findings for the School Construction Report. This investigation looked into the bonding pracices on 8 recent school construction projects.

He explained that West Haven's bonding ordinances were ordinary; that there were borrowing limits (total amount that could be bonded) and expenditure limits (total project costs), and that basically, the borrowing limit was found by subtracting the value of any state grants from the expenditure limits imposed by the vote of the city council. That's pretty straight forward.

However, it soon became clear that the school projects did NOT follow the ordinances properly.

In four of the projects, borrowing limits were exceeded by $4.4 million. In these projects, where the city council had authorized a certain amount of total expenditures for the project, 100% of the total expenditure had been bonded. Additionally, though, the city had received grant monies from the state, which were placed into the general fund and used for operating expenses.

It becomes more complex, though, as many of these projects also showed a negative balance. This occurs when money is advanced from the general fund which is earmarked for other uses. While this is an acceptable practice, the money has to be paid back into the fund. From those same 4 projects, the general fund is owed $9.8 million.

What the city has appeared to have done for some time, even prior to Mayor Borer's time in office, was to take those negative balances and bond out that amount. Groan.

So, as mentioned there were 8 projects.

1 was not bonded, and was not an issue.

For one project there is a negative balance to the general fund of abut $970,000. Had this amount been bonded, then there would have been about $575,000 in excess of the allowable bond by ordinance.

For another project, thankfully this one can be restored, and will not be overborrowed.

The final project did not have enough information to make a final determination.

The Bond lawyer, who I believe was named Mr. Thassy (my apologies for any mistakes - I'm worked by ear), then stated:

The pattern of non-school project bonding, however, is different from that of the school project bonding. For the school projects, while they were overbonded (i.e. we borrowed too much), we did not appear to overspend. Instead, the grants alloted to the school projects were diverted to the general fund, and then bonded as well.

For non-school projects, it would appear that we overbonded AND overspent. The lawyer then stated that he wanted the details and authorizations for all projects AT LEAST back to 1996... ugh.

... at any rate... more tomorrow.

West Haven Roads and flooding

According to this WTNH report, several cars (including one that was entirely submerged) were caught in rising flood waters under the train trestle on Morgan Lane last evening. From personal experience, I know that parts of Ocean Avenue were under 6-8 inches of water as well.

It seems that every time we have a good soaking rain, the storm drains are inadequate - what's being done about it??

Editorial Warns West Haven Residents about Checker's Audit

In the print version of the Sunday New Haven Register yesterday, former West Haven resident Richard J. Luby of Seymour wrote a letter to the editor regarding the Checker's Audit. Now living in Seymour, he talks about the audit that Checkers performed in their town and remarks:

It seems that whenever Checkers gets involved in politics it turns into a witch hunt. It gets paid astronomicaal amounts to bring down the former administration and does a fine job of it.

That's the suspicion I had too, Richard.

What's worse, he explains that the former first selection who was the person who was the center of the Checkers' audit in Seymour subsequently sued over the inflammatory remarks and won - which means that Seymour residents paid not only for the audit, but for a lawsuit as well. He states that even people in Seymour who originally requested the audit would no longer endorse Checkers.

Richard also poses some questions:

Did Major John Picard even put a bid out before having the Checkers firm do the audit? Don't the residents of West Haven question why he didn't bid it out? What was the motive?

Well, we know in West Haven that Mayor Picard did NOT bid out the audit. We also know that West Haven residents most definitely question not only his motive, but why that is the case.

Tonight's City Council meeting will be interesting - it will particularly be interesting to see if people turn out in full force, or if they're just resigned to pay increased taxes.

Insult to Injury for West Shore Residents

In a case of adding insult to injury reported by the New Haven Register, a Massachussetts insurance company, Andover Cos will be dropping customers along the shoreline who do not install and pay for new storm shutters. Customers up to 3/4 of a mile inland will be required to install the hurricane shutters, which can cost up to $100,000, or face losing coverage.

Thankfully, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is urging Susan Cogswell (State Department of Insurance Commissioner) to recind her approval of this underwriting change. Apparently, Allstate and Nationwide have ALSO asked for changes to limit their liability for storm damage, although what those changes are were not detailed.

St. Paul Travelers takes a different approach - they don't require the storm shutters, but offer discounts to those who have them.

Lien on property over MULCH PILE??!!??

Here's a new waste of taxpayer dollars. According to an NBC-30 news report, the city of West Haven has apparently placed a lien on a property because a neighbor complained about a mulch pile. The city apparently investigated and found several (unnamed) violations, and placed the lien, even though an unnamed city official even admitted that the law is subjective.

What a waste.

City Council To debate petition at Bailey Middle School - Monday August 28th 7:00 pm

I received the following from West Haven Lover today:

Urgent - I hope that you can post this. Today I finally got an update on where the petitions stand. It truly is imperative that we get as many residents as we can at this meeting. Here is the update:

The City Council got the petitions as of August 3rd. They're going to debate it at this next meeting....MONDAY, AUGUST 28th at 7:00 PM - BAILEY MIDDLE SCHOOL. It is expected they'll try to dismiss the petition as illegal (more on that later), so we need as many people to be there as possible. PLEASE ask all your friends & neighbors to attend.

As mentioned earlier, Corp Counsel has issued an opinion telling the Council not to act on the petition. Obviously, we'll challenge this in court; and are hoping for a quick decision.

It is now that we must come together to get some positive changes in West Haven!!!!!

It's time to stand up and be heard if you want your taxes lowered!

Two "Material Weaknesses" in 2004-2005 Accounting Practices

... which brings me to the second half of the story based on today's New Haven Register article entitled "W. Haven considers 3 options on deficit".

First, an aside... are we too poor to even merit spelling out West Haven? It's not exactly a space saver to go from West Haven to W. Haven... but I digress...

When the city auditors, Levitsky & Berney, re-audited the 2004-5 fiscal year, they included a supplemental report in which they said: "Two conditions were considered material weaknesses and were related to the misclassification of revenues and project overexpenditures of authorization amounts."

So why didn't they find it the first time? Former Mayor Borer would like to know, too.

The two weaknesses were:

1. 13 out of 145 capital projects reviewed for fiscal 2004-05 exceeded amounts authorized by the City Council because "internal controls are not in place."
2. The second weakness is identified as the city’s misclassification of revenues for school construction projects into the general fund instead of the capital account, creating a false general fund figure.

The reworked audit also showed almost half a million in overexpenditures in the school projects at West Haven High School and Thompson Elementary school... ugh.

Increased Debt may be 16M - Picard proposes tax hikes or more bonds

In the ever growing category of "You've Got to be Kidding me!", in today's New Haven Register article entitled "W. Haven considers 3 options on deficit", Mayor Picard says that he can only think of 3 potential solutions for the city to address the budget deficit:

1. Raise the tax rate again in 2007-2008.
2. Impose a mid-year tax-rate increase.
3. Issue deficit bonds
   

Sorry - these aren't acceptable... how about "Lower spending"? There is a lot of fat in the budget STILL.

Or maybe even more important, how about: "Include ALL of the incoming funds in the budget"? While Mayor Picard is quite happy to spread tales of doom and gloom about how we owe more money than we think we do, but he hasn't been explaining about how some monies have been 'found' that start to make up some of the multi-million dollar gap, which he says might be as high as $16 M.

For instance, what about the following articles I've previously blogged about:

• Unsolicited State Reimbursements for School Projects (worth $1.3-3.2 M)
  
• FEMA Funds from State (worth about $80,000)
• Revise extremely conservative estimates of revenues from state and grant monies to reasonable figures. (Who knows how much this is worth?)
  

Also, while you can't count your chickens before they hatch, why isn't he trying like crazy to get UI to move to town and bring in an additional $4M in tax dollars? Or what about talking to Governor Jodi Rell about assistance, citing the nearly $1 BILLION dollar state surplus?

More about this New Haven Register article shortly...

Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation - next meeting on 9/18/06

Today's New Haven Register article entitled "West Haven group discusses one district" discusses a newly formed, non-partisan group who had their first meeting on Tuesday night. "Citizens in Favor of Fire Consolidation" (CIFOFC) is looking to get the public discussing the ins and outs of consolidating West Haven's 3 fire departments into one department, and to ulimately put the question of Fire District Consolidation on the November 2007 ballot. 2,900 signatures are needed by July 2007 to force a referendum vote.

The West Haven city charter currently precludes the districts from merging under the city counsel control; it wasn't clearly stated how this can be changed, but it sounds like we would need to have a motion to ammend the city charter.

There are some very interesting statistics in the article:

The taxpayers’ commentary initially got off to an emotionally rocky start because most can’t fathom why a city of 53,000 people needs to pay for three fire budgets, including triplicate administrative salaries, for a total of more than $20 million annually compared to other towns. New Haven, for example, has 125,000 inhabitants and a fire department that costs $20.5 million annually.

Chairman of the group is Paul Frosolone (who also is the Republican Town Committee chairman), but the group is decidedly non partisan, also includes Democrats, A Better Future party (former Mayor Richard Borer ran as a member of this one), and includes city counselmen, too, including City Councilwoman Sharon Spaziani, D-3.

The crux of the problem is not having separate fire departments, but having three separate sets of administrators, and three separate budgets.

Refreshingly, this doesn't appear to be slam politics, but instead seems to be a fact-finding group; from the article:

Some taxpayers, like William Kane, noted that this group’s endeavor must also seek out the truth and not the too many "half-truths" that had already infiltrated the meeting because many taxpayers started singling out fire administrator salaries and other expenditures.

"You have to be honest if you’re going to bring this out to the public," Kane said.

Also at the meeting were members of Citizens For an Excellent Fire Service , who formed to oppose a proprosed city charter revision on Sept. 19, 2003 because some firefighters felt strong-armed. However, the group doesn't take an official stand on consolidation, and refreshingly, they just wanted to be included in the discussions.

Mayor Picard and the districts fire administrators and boards were apparently not directly invited to this meeting; however, Paul Frosolone promised to invite them to answer questions from the public in future meetings. Mayor Picard continues to support Citizens For an Excellent Fire Service, and urged everyone to carefully study the current 3 district situation as well as the effects of consolidation.

The group’s next meeting will be held at 7 p.m. Sept. 18. in City Hall, 355 Main St.

Hamden cites West Haven as an example not to follow

The Hamden Journal reports that their legistlative council approved a $77,000 bid waiver for a year's license for Munis, in the article entitled "Town Computer system undergoes an overhaul".

Munis is the same software which West Haven uses to run our town. The recent Audit with Checkers, however, found that we were not using the software to its fullest.

Hamden is determined to not have the same problems West Haven experienced with pushing the Tax collection portion of Munis live:

"[The Assessor's office] is the difficult part," he said. "We have to be ready for problems if they come up. We see the hard time West Haven is having with its tax system because they were trying to convert too quickly, and the timing wasn't right."

As an aside - wow - I had no idea how much the licensing costs for Munis were - for that kind of price, I truly hope we start using it properly.

Who Audits the Hiring of Auditors?

The New Haven Independent online has an interesting article on the long-time auditors for the city of West Haven, entitled "Who audits the audit-hiring?" that was published back in May of this year. Apparently, New Haven city council members were questioning the 8 year relationship with Levitsky & Berney.

Should the State Income Tax be abandoned?

WTNH reports that "Think tank says state's income tax should be abandoned". The Yankee Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank, indicates that the state income tax has hampered Connecticut's economy, and blames low job growth, increased homeowner tax burdens, and slow population growth on the income tax. You can read the report , entitled "Fifteen Years of Folly: The Failures of Connecticut's Income tax" online.

When the income tax was put into place by Lowell Weicker 15 years ago (remember, his campaign promise of "No State Income tax, because that would be like throwing gasoline on a fire"), I remember the fake "license plates" that came out that proclaimed Connecticut the 'Tax Us to Death" state. It certainly has contributed to businesses moving out... it's hard to attract good workers for reasonable rates here.

For those interested, there's an interesting article on the history of Tax Reform and the State Income Tax in the state of Connecticut - from 1993. While the story is angled to discuss the issues facing the progressives and Democrats, and that you can enact progressive tax reform and still win elections, it's still a fascinating read on the history of the state income tax.

Psychobabble and Potpourri: Primary Day: Mayor Picard in the Driver's Seat

Mary from West Haven has posted on her blog about her encounter with Mayor Picard here:

Psychobabble and Potpourri: Primary Day: Mayor Picard in the Driver's Seat

In it, she talks about the human side of politics, and how Mayor Picard kindly fetched her car on a hot primary day, as well as her take on the Rally on the green.

And it really does occur to me - these people who are our politicians ARE human beings. And for the most part, they ALL want to do the right thing. This is why I have such a difficulty with negative campaigning - there are human beings behind the bashing - who whether or not they are elected, have personal, private lives.

I'd like to see us get BEYOND the name calling and the blame game - let's find solutions.

West Haven Voice, Mayor Picard, and Slamming Former Mayor Borer...

The West Haven Voice has published a letter from Mayor Picard under the title of "FULL DISCLOSURE!". This letter gives the 28 main points (without the full 750 pages of supporting information) in so-called layman's terms... it's greatly oversimplified, but summarizes what was discussed at the Checker's Audit meeting.

Also published on August 20th on the Voice website, is Deborah Evangelista's article entitled "Session Explains Audit". I'd like someone to explain to me when Murray (from Checkers) said:

...that the 5-year capital plan was being used as “pocket money.”

I've seen a couple of articles now that seem to spin this meeting as Borer and his administration abusing the system. Murray, to his credit, did not do that -- instead, he stated FACTS.

If that wasn't enough to convince you that the Voice is on a witch hunt, take a look at this week's editorials:

• Fed Eye needed on bonds
• A Local Best Seller (beware that this one is written in slang... an annoying habit of their 'gossip' column.)

Clearly, Bill Riccio and the Voice apparently feel that Mayor Borer was trying to put them out of business... personally, I think they ought to stick to the facts, and keep their emotions out of it. There is enough information to digest without having some form of emotive slam on the former Mayor in each one of their articles.

New Haven Register Editorial - maybe more than Borer to blame...

The New Haven Register had an interesting editorial entitled "Audits confirm Picard’s fears" that discussed perhaps that the AUDITORS should have found these problems, even if the Mayor Borer's administration didn't... hmm...

Politics or Problems?

On August 17th, the New Haven Register article entitled "W. Haven official seeks probe of incident", talks further about an incident that I had bypassed, due to time contraints, which was assault allegation against the Finance Director Nalini Srinivas. If you missed the complaint which was filed with the West Haven Police by Benefits Administrator Yvette Cintron, she alleges that "Srinivas grabbed and shook her after she misunderstood a departmental policy."

Whether or not this incident truly happened, this alleged incident has now become political fodder. Councilman Stuart Arotsky, a member of the independent "A Better Future-4" party which former Mayor Borer had run under, apparently has contacted the police regarding concerns that Major Picard didn't report this incident of abuse citing employment harassment laws and the city's no-tolerance rules.

Mayor Picard indicated in the article that he offered to involve the police when meeting with Cintron; Cintron responds that "she believed the mayor wasn’t keen on her filing a police report." Arotsky goes one step further and says that Picard discouraged Cintron from filing a police report.

The New Haven Register also had an August 16th article entitled "City Hall worker accuses finance director of assault" which details the allegations. It explains that Cintron weighed her options with the Union prior to disclosing the incident, and that she has been suffering from emotional distress.

According to this article:

According to Cintron, she had been repeatedly subjected to Srinivas’ verbal abuse, including condescending remarks, and a "hostile" work environment created by Srinivas shortly after Mayor John M. Picard hired the finance chief on March 1.

The issue culminated on July 21, Cintron said, when Srinivas allegedly grabbed Cintron’s left arm and proceeded to violently shake her because Cintron — a three-year finance employee — unknowingly attempted to help a mayoral secretary obtain office materials under a policy Srinivas had changed but allegedly failed to notify Cintron about.

What is disturbing about this allegation is that apparently, Cintron isn't the only one complaining about Srinivas. According to the article, "at least two other employees in the finance and tax office, respectively, have complained to interim Personnel Director Robert Sandella that Srinivas has screamed at them and acted rudely."

I'm back...

A quick note to our readers - I took a break from posting last week, but I'm back... parden the back log while we bring you back up to date...

West Haven to get additional $2.7 Million

For a change, here's some good news. Reported in the New Haven Register article entitled "West Haven in line for extra $1.3 M", West Haven is apparently entitled to about $2.7 million in reimbursements from the state for unsolicited state refunds for the school projects. $1.3 M is being hailed as an 'additional windfall'.

Of the initial $1.4 Million, the state has already approved $627,000 from a first request for $633,000.

This comes after consultant Ed Arum of Torrington met with the city Building Oversight Committee in order to search for potential monetary returns from the state.

Apparently, this estimate of reimbursements could climb as high as $3.2 million, but the state is likely to reimburse about $2.4 million.

Needless to say, we'll take it.

I don't believe that this money is in the budget... every little bit helps. I wonder, though, how many 'little bits' are going to be 'discovered' here and there. I still feel that we are 'artificially broke'.

More Comments from our Readers on Campaign Promises

"West Haven Lover", an avid reader, also had this to say on August 16th (sorry for the delay):

What a difference a year makes….

I found this article in West Haven News from last year during election time. I thought it might be interested for your readers to see how really far off election promises can be! I have added comments about the status of each promise after his quote. [Editor's note: I've put those comments in green italics].

11/04/2005
Picard quotes: West Haven News
John Picard, Democrat

John M. Picard has served on the West Haven City Council for four years, two of which he has served as Chairman of the Council. He is currently employed as a financial advisor for American Express Financial Advisors, and holds licenses for registered representative, certified financial planner, and life/health insurance.
"Leadership, responsibility, and accountability - I believe those things are sorely missing in West Haven right now. The only way to improve West Haven is to improve leadership, and to surround yourself with good people - on boards and commissions that will think for themselves," said Picard.

(Based on today’s New Haven Register article, Picard’s Finance Director “shook one of her employees” when she did not understand a departmental policy – now that’s the kind of “good people” we need working in our City Hall)

What is the most important issue facing West Haven and what are your plans to address that issue?
The most important issue facing West Haven is the enormous tax burden. West Haven tax payer's have faced both the reduction in City services and a growing Mill Rate because of the total lack of leadership & borrowing and spending practices of the current administration, the lack of fiscal responsibility, the enormous debt, and the dismal economic growth. We need to address the mill rate by controlling spending, holding our elected officials accountable, and improving our economic development. None of this will be possible without a change in leadership.

(My taxes have increased by $1,000 per year. I have heard now that Picard’s plan is to kill us with taxes this year, and then next year – an election year – lower the rate dramatically. I don’t know if it is true or not, but I for one will not forget the pain I am feeling this year.)

The Savin Rock Urban Renewal Plan, a 40-year redevelopment plan that preserves the shoreline area as open space and free of development, expires in March 2006. What plans do you have for the shoreline area?
The shorefront is West Haven's most precious natural resources and needs to be preserved. To preserve this commodity, we need to place this area in the Land Trust to protect it from being developed for years to come. The current administration has had the last 14 years to protect this land and has failed to do so. Other protection options, such as working with the planning and zoning department, are not sufficient to preserve this undeveloped tract of land because of the liberal waiver and variance options afforded businesses and residents.

(To date, Picard HAS NOT signed the Land Trust Agreement, one of his key issues with the former administration)

What plans do you have to encourage economic development in West Haven?
To improve West Haven's Economic Development we need to go back to the basics of business. The Mayor needs to be the biggest advocate of our town, knocking on business owners and encouraging them to come to our City. We need to improve the ease of doing business in City Hall. By lowering our debt to ease the tax burden, offering incentives to attract new businesses, a lot of hard work by the Mayor, and revamping the economic development office; West Haven will be able to improve it's economic development.

(One of Picard’s first acts when he got into office was to close the Economic Development office, I have heard lots of comments about this during Council and City Budget meetings.)

What is your position on the property revaluations required by the state within the next two years and the current mill rate, which is the third highest in the state?
Property valuation has been used by the local politicians as an excuse for growing taxes. When property values increases, city's that control their operating budget should be able to lower the Mill Rate proportionally. In West Haven, as property values increased, the Mill Rate also increased or stayed the same. The politicians would like you to believe that your tax bill is higher because your property is worth more. However, a fiscally responsible government would allow a proportional reduction in the Mill Rate so that your taxes would remain the same regardless of the increase in property value. It's appalling that West Haven has the 3rd largest Mill Rate in the State. Our tax situation is directly attributed to the current administration's total lack of leadership and their borrowing and spending practices. We need to control spending, ensure a fiscally responsible and accountable government, and vastly improve our economic development.

(No comment)

Currently the city's overall debt is at an all time high, what will you do as mayor to reduce this burden?
West Haven is the more than $250 Million dollars of debt burdening our City and our taxpayers. We need to have a full forensic audit of finances by an independent audit firm to identify the wasteful spending and opportunities for debt reduction. We also need a year-round qualified finance board that can help guide the Mayor and City Council to make the best decisions with respect to our finances. We need to start doing the little things right, for example, by saving 2 cents on every dollar we would save $2.6 Million dollars a year, we need to ensure every contract goes out to bid, and we need to put a system of accountability in place, beginning with the Mayor and Finance Director.

(I think the Mayor is doing a good job to try and reduce the debt; however he is certainly not taking all contracts out to bid.)

What other issues do you think will be important to the upcoming mayor's term?
In addition to the issues above, West Haven's Mayor in the next two years will face many challenges including, the question of fire district consolidation, the challenges of delivering the best education to our City's youth, and maintaining and restoring City services to help improve the quality of life of all citizens. However, the most challenging issue for the Mayor will be managing change. We've all heard the empty promises and campaign slogans of the current administration. In desperation, my position relative to certain issues is often distorted by my opponents. I am looking to re-establish an open and honest government, to ensure the best people are in place and to hold them accountable, and to convince the business community that West Haven is a booming City with optimum potential.

(This is where I take the most issue with the Mayor’s performance so far. He has cut services – including now underfunding our Education System, the one thing that can really draw new (tax-paying) residents. As a person with students in the West Haven System, I find this deplorable. I am willing to pay slightly more taxes – just don’t cut the services)

The Town and Lawsuits...

On go the list of lawsuits against the town. The latest lawsuit as reported by the New Haven Register article entitled "Woman sues Picard, city to get job back", is by former deputy tax assessor, Janet L. Aiken. You may recall the Mayor, citing job-related insubordination, fired Janet on May 19.

The article is an interesting read - apparently Mayor Picard is being sued as an indivdual as well as in his professional capacity.

Sadly, this is more costs that the taxpayer will ultimately bear, whether or not the suit achieves its goal of financial relief as well as restoration of Janet to her job.

Comments on the Audit - One of our Reader's views...

In case you missed the comments by West Haven Lover on Lower West Haven Taxes: Dirty Politics, Criminal actions, or Poor Accounting? , I'm reposting them here for you to see. There's lots of good information and great points being made here.

West Haven Lover - when you read this -- Email me at westhaventaxes@yahoo.com. I'd like to send you an invitation to become a poster on this blog.

Points to consider:
1. Mayor Picard has indemnified Checkers form any legal issues that may arise with the findings of the forensic audit. This is actually against our City Charter – and (according to the accounting people I have spoken with) very uncommon in a situation like this.
2. One of the key findings of this audit has to do with the issue of the City and its BID process. Specifically, the former administration was criticized for not taking construction projects out to bid. According to the City Charter, any project totaling over $3,500 must go through a bidding process. HOWEVER, this forensic audit was not taken out for bid. I go to many of the City Council meetings – and as I best recall, only one Council Member, Nancy Rossi, had issue with the audit project not going to bid.
3. I have been unable to get all of the “Attached Exhibits” for further analysis. They are not available on the City’s website. These are invaluable in the complete analysis of the forensic audit.
4. If you read the Summary of Findings – you will note that a majority of the 28 points are duplicate/saying the same things. This is to add to the volume of the findings, and also make things look worse than they are. In fact, the basis of ALL of the commentary in this lengthy document is centered around 3 projects. (for example if you read through, points 8 and 9 are restatements of the points covered in points 1 through 5).
5. The night of the audit presentation, the representative from CHECKERS was very clear, that when a school project is completed, the state comes in to audit the project. The state has cleared the city on all previous projects, with the exception of the Mackrille, Seth Haley and West High projects. I would question why we are going back through these three specific projects and pointing out to the state when mistakes have been made, (and in some cases the projects aren’t finished.) This ultimately (most probably) is going to lead to the city having to repay monies back to the state. At a time when our city is under such a budget crisis, why would we do this????? Also, based on testimony from Sawyer and Legg – I would have liked them to be able to look at some of the information in advance so they could have spoken more intelligently about the documents in question.
6. None of the City Council members from previous terms were interviewed. As you will note the team from CHECKERS referred to the Council’s confusion about bonding issues during the presentation from CHECKERS at the Bailey School. Why did they not get interviewed? Furthermore – and more importantly, on page 185 of the document it speaks about bonding – and the Mayor’s responsibility in the bonding process. You will note it is actually the City Council that approves all bonding – the Mayor then just applies his signature. And again as Picard was the Chair of the Council during several of the years in question why was he not interviewed as a part of the process?
7. I am not sure exactly who Ronald Bailey is (because they did not put his title as they did with ALL OTHER INTERVIEWEES… ) but during his interviews, that in my opinion were somewhat damaging, Tom Reilly, Mayor Picard’s Father-In-Law, sat in. Very interesting.
8. Regarding the summary points only:
a. Point 1 – “The city has exceeded expenditures…” – no where in the document have I found where this has been quantified as a percentage of total capital projects that the city has undertaken in those years.
b. Point 5 – “The city’s over bonding will yield cash deficits in future years…..” This assumes stagnant tax revenues; which will NOT be the case given the incoming Wal-Mart and other businesses in the Saw Mill Road area.
c. Point 6 – “The city has improperly charged certain expenditures….” In total, $139,582 of misclassified expenditures were found over a 5 year period. If you consider the total budget for those years is about $625M – as a percentage this is only 0.022 (less than a quarter of a percentage). In most companies today, that would be an OUTSTANDING percentage over 5 years. Additionally, CHECKERS failed to definitely prove that these expenses were not directly associated with the projects. (i.e. Dunkin Donuts could have been purchased for the morning crew on one of the projects. Yes, it should have been charged as a misc. expense and not to the project, but this is not an uncommon practice in accounting for large projects with lots of expenses associated.)
d. Points 10 and 11 – Again, here the audit is assuming stagnant tax revenues in their analysis.
e. Point 22 – A criticism is made by the audit firm for the City being in strict compliance with State Law on document retention. So I assume the audit firm is suggesting we go against State Law for future document retention matters?
f. Point 25 – “The City has failed to properly educate the City Council about bonding procedures”, as I have pointed out, the Mayor signs off on bonding versus initiating it. If the City Council was unclear about bonding WHY did they vote to approve the bonding?
g. Point 26 – “There is a lack of communications by City departments”, that is a very big leap. We are talking about 3 projects here – if you look at the whole scope of what the City does, this is really a very small piece. The auditor can say that on “specific projects” there was a lack of communication, but he cannot say that about all projects.
h. Points 14 and 28 are again duplicates.


What I have found in the documents is basically three projects that have gone awry – and some mistakes in accounting. Most certainly these mistakes need to be taken care of – and checks put in place so in the future it does not happen again.

However, I can not find any, ANY form of illegal or criminal actions amongst the findings. I find it disappointing that our current Mayor has mentioned criminal allegations in at least three separate statements to the taxpayers and or media. (I am certain there are more).

This has to stop – we are messing with people’s lives. Let’s just correct the mistakes and move on with making the city an even better place to live.

8/14/2006 11:16 AM

Dirty Politics, Criminal actions, or Poor Accounting?

Today's New Haven Register article, entitled W. Haven left city deep in red contains the best coverage of last evening's city counsil session with Checkers that I've seen to date, as well as detailing the skepticism that many people feel about the audit.

I liked the well stated summary which leads off the article:

The administration of former Mayor H. Richard Borer Jr. kept the city tax rate artificially low by using grants intended to finance capital projects for day-to-day city expenses and by using accounting techniques that will hurt the city’s finances until at least 2025, according to a forensic audit revealed Thursday.

and the many accurate quotes from Keith Murray, the Checkers director of investigations and general counsel who was the primary speaker at the meeting.

As well as the accurate coverage of the meeting, there is equal coverage devoted to a rebuttal by former Mayor Borer and his legal counsel, Paul J. Dorsi. While Borer did not attend the meeting, he was given a copy of the report on Thursday, and pointed out that:

the audit "is silent" on any proof of fraud or corruption.

and went on to say that he will defend and stand by his actions while in office, that he has done no wrongdoing, but instead acted appropriately with the information he had at the time. It is clear that he feels that this is a political vendetta, aimed directly at him.

Attorney Paul Dorsi disputes the findings of the entire report, and came up with the memorable quote:

"They (Checkers’ investigative team) draw a lot of inferences without any proof," he said. "Figures don’t lie, but liars figure, and Mayor Picard and the guys and gals at Checkers have been doing a lot of figuring lately."

A main bone of contention for Dorsi is the fact that no one has explained WHY the items that Checkers has claimed is improperly classified as Capital Plan expeditures are improper -- and that's an important distinction.

Next up is Mayor Picard's meeting today with the state Office of Policy and Management, where he will share the findings of the Checkers report. According to the spokesperson for OPM, if illegal activities are found, that the city would be advised to contact the authorities.... stay tuned.

West River Crossing - Bad news and Potentially Good News.

According to today's New Haven Register article entitled Future of West River project uncertain, the predevelopment agreement with West River Crossing, LLC has expired. West River Crossing, LLC, who was to gain tenants for the redevelopment of 30 acres of industrial riverfront properties along the West River and New Haven Harbor, apparently failed to show up for a critical meeting. The city may put the project out to bid for a third time since the project was first envisioned in 1997, OR it may create a public-private partnership (if possible by law).

That's the bad news... and one really does wonder if this is just another way of trying to get rid of companies and people that were associated with Mayor Richard Borer's administration. If it does go out to bid, though, it's stated that West River Crossing, LLC will have a chance at bidding again.

The good news is that the city is in separate negotations with United Illuminating (UI) to be a tenant at the site. UI has been openly looking for a new location for its New Haven headquarters. According to the news article, should UI come to West Haven, that would be worth about $4 million per year in tax revenue.

WTNH - who is to blame, and what was this really about?

WTNH's take on the meeting was interesting, and one that it bears well to keep in mind. While Mayor Picard is quoted as having said "No fiscal controls, no fiscal responsibility, no accountability in place" about the money mismangement of the past 10 years while Mayor Borer was in office, the following statement from the WTNH report is one that I've wondered about:

Others say, it only created more confusion because during the years in question Mayor Picard himself was the chairman of the city council so he would have hired the city auditors and okayed most expenditures.

WTNH goes on to quote Mayor Borer:

"What they're trying to do is mask the fact that he had to raise taxes when he promised everybody during the campaign that he was gonna lower their taxes," Borer said. "He actually doubled everybody's taxes and he's trying to point the finger."

Mayor Picard, I'd like to say that you can't have it both ways -- if there were financial problems over the past 10 years, you're going to have to take a share of the blame. You also can't sweep the fact that your budget means that West Haven taxpayers now have more taxes than they can afford. Something has GOT to give.

Did WFSB get different information?

WFSB's terms of copyright state "This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed." and I'll respect that by not going into detail. However, I really have to wonder if WFSB received some memo about the council meeting that I wasn't privy to, as their report has little to do with the meeting I attended!. I didn't hear that this was a story about Mayor Borer and corruption, as their online article would lead you to believe... it was about long-standing accounting problems within the city...

Forensic Audit Findings...

I went to tonight's poorly attended Town Council meeting where Mayor Picard and Checkers announced the findings from the $65,000 forensic audit. I have to think that the lack of notice caused only about 100 residents to attend. I noted, however, that apparently every news agency in the area including WFSB, NBC30, WTNH, and the West Haven Voice were there. Strangely, there were not many cameras inside the building - most of the 'mobile newsrooms' set up out in the parking lot. Most taxpayers were either politically connected (such as Republican chair Paul Frosolone and State Representive Paul Davis), or they were generally older residents, with most seeming to be between the ages of 45-75 or so.

Most of the commentary came from Checkers, who read through a summary of the 30 significant findings. Over and over again, it was stressed to the town council that they need to read all 720 pages of the audit's findings, not just summaries, in order to understand the full scope of what has occurred.

Checkers indicated that the scope of their investigations was limited to the allocation of funds earmarked for the 5 year capital plan being used for non-capital expenditures and to investigate the area of homeland security in the budget. It was made clear that Sawmill Road was not part of THIS audit, but part of something separate (more than $65K worth? Ugh). Nothing was said about Homeland security again, though.

Of the more than 700 pages of the findings, about 220 pages are commentary, and are available from the City Of West Haven's website. Click on 'Download Center' and search on 'Official City Documents'. Don't bother trying to download the big document - last I checked, it didn't work. Instead, download the 8 parts of the document (and don't pay too much attention to the labels -- they appear to be whatever part was the boldest in the part that split). A full version of the report is to be made available at each of the libraries, and apparently, you can pay $20 for a full version from Town Hall, too.

Much of the discussion centered around something I'm all too willing to believe is accurate - that the city isn't properly providing accounting of their projects, and there aren't enough checks and balances in place to assure that the Mayor and the City Council are doing their job properly. Checkers stated that while the accounting system that the town has in place (MUNIS) can provide the level of accounting and accountability needed, that the town was not using it properly in order to be able to provide the level of detail needed to run efficiently.

Checkers also said that it was clear from the Town Council meeting tapes, that no one has properly educated the Town Council or Mayor's office regarding the proceduring for bonding. The rules for state grants earmarked for capital expenditures and bonds changed in 1997 - but unfortunately, our accounting practices did not reflect those changes. This is the primary reason for the restating of the 2004-2005 fiscal year end which now shows a $4.7M shortfall, after having been stated as a $6M surplus. It's also why it is projected that there will be a $10M deficit for 2005-2006.

Checkers stated that bonding is the only financial instrument available to city governments that can financially bind future generations. The method in which we have refinanced the bonds have resulting in a large debt burden to be placed on the city for the next 10 years, particularly in the years of 2014-2019, where there will be over $900K of payments required on the bonds for each of those years. To make matters worse, because of the changes in rules for bonding, and the fact that the refinancing of the bonds wasn't reported to the state, we will be responsible for reimbursing the state for a yet undisclosed amount of money.

I'm not going to go into the full details of the meeting, which really were a reader's digest form of the report. I haven't read all the way through everything - and there's a lot to go through. Let's just say that there is a LOT of things that were said that were disturbing, if not strictly illegal. For instance, state financial record-keeping requirements are only 3 years, which is what West Haven has done, spreading earlier documentation. Unfortunately, the mistakes in accounting practice mean that this documentation would have been invaluable in sorting out the mess.

The bottom line is that it appears that it is going to be a time of tightening our belt, should we want our taxes to be lowered. It's time to take a good, hard look at how expenses can be tightened, and time to trim the fat.

How to sign up for News Alerts from the City of West Haven

I've been asked how I received the news alert from City of West Haven. It's simple to sign up -- simply go to:

http://cityofwesthaven.com/registerforannouncements.asp

and fill out the form. News alerts will be delivered to your email box as they occur. This is useful, particularly for short notice events such as the Checkers audit discussion at Bailey School this evening (5:30 pm!)

West Haven to release ‘significant findings’ of forensic audit Aug. 10

The City of West Haven released the following news advisory today:

West Haven to release ‘significant findings’ of forensic audit Aug. 10

Mayor John M. Picard will hold a special informational meeting at 5:30 p.m. Aug. 10 at Bailey Middle School to present “significant findings” of the long-anticipated forensic audit of the city’s capital grant expenditures under former Mayor H. Richard Borer Jr.

Corporate and financial investigators Checkers International Inc. of Fairfield, which conducted the audit, will present its full investigative report in the school’s auditorium, 106 Morgan Lane. The public is invited.

In December, the city hired Checkers, which employs professional accountants, fraud investigators and former federal agents, for up to $65,000 to scrutinize the Borer administration’s capital expenditures from 1995 to 2005.

Taxpayers 'Soundoff' in the New Haven Register

In response to yesterday's 'Soundoff' question in the New Haven Register, by far the largest response was from West Haven residents, whose quotes included:

It's a bad situation. A lot of people are selling their homes -- Tex

I am trying to cope the best way I know how -- Vince

Mayor Picard stood on my doorstep with his family prior to the election and promised me faithfully he would reduce taxes. He is a liar. -- Jerry

I don't like it, but I believe in Mayor Picard. He is trying. -- J.

We have to cut back. And the city must cut back. Three fire departments make us the laughingstock of the nation, and they should be cut first. -- A.

It is a mandate by the state that makes us pay those high taxes. --Joe

West Haven needs to get its act together. There is no need for three fire chiefs. And the Board of Education needs to stop spending on things they don't need. --Mark

This city needs to get a rein on its sepnding or nobody is going to want to live here and it will be a ghost town. --Anthony

I am nearing retirement and instead of cutting back my work schedule, I am having to crank it up. --Elizabeth

It means my husband and I cannot retire next year as planned. --Barb

Picard will get paid when I get the money. --Mary

It would nice if all our fire chiefs would buy houses from the seniors who cannot afford the new tax rate. --Gene

I support John Picard. He is our only hope of lowering the taxes. --Rich

Nearly 2/3 of the informal poll respondants were from West Haven -- and only two of those stood behind the mayor.

This does illustrate, however, that residents do not separate city and fire district taxes in their mind - both take money out of West Haven taxpayer pockets.

Governor Rell seeks FEMA funds for West Haven

An August 3, 2006 article entitled "Conn. Seeks Federal Aid for Damages Caused by June Rains" on InsuranceJournal.com indicates that Governor Jodi Rell is seeking reimbursement for 75% of recovery costs of about $2.2 million worth of damages due to the recent storms. While this is below the general state threshold of $4 million generally required for recovery, Governor Rell is reported as having said "This consideration of disaster aid by looking at significant 'localized impact' allows FEMA to provide assistance even when customary damage thresholds are not quite met in terms of statewide and county damage, as is the case in this situation.".

According to the article, there was $108,000 in damages in West Haven. FEMA reimbursements typically cover 75% of the damage estimates.

Harsh words in West Haven Voice editorial

The August 2 West Haven Voice editorial entitled "Civic Lesson Needed" has some harsh words for those who are upset by the taxes in West Haven; in short the message is "If you are unhappy with the West Haven taxes, you should propose a new budget solution and show complete understanding of how taxes are calculated". Ok, that's overstated, but the title of piece lent an arrogant tone to some very good points.

The editorial raises the point that West Haven taxpayers don't understand that the fire district taxes are not governed by the City of West Haven, but are entirely autonomous organizations, and that the rally speakers requested lower tax rates and a restored educational and public safety budget, but did not propose how to find that money.

In my opinion, I see that the petition and the rally was really a method (without litigation) to bring attention to the fact that taxpayers of West Haven feel that not enough was done to keep taxes increases at a minimum, and to gather support for supporters to sit down with the mayor and find solutions.

This was complicated by the invitation of Brent Coscia to the rally, unfortunately; as the piece points out, Brent was elevated to the heights of "ersatz spokesperson" of the West Haven Taxpayers Initiative (WHTI) by the media, and that he threatened to petition for a recall (which is not a recourse in Connecticut statutes) should the WHTI requests fail.

The fire district issue is also discussed at length; the problem, however, is that West Haven taxpayers receive one bill. They see West Haven taxes come to them as a whole, and that the City of West Haven collects the full amount. It's not surprising that many do not understand that the City cannot influence the fire districting.... after all, the City is the the collection agent for fire district taxes!

The article goes on to say:

We know the tax issue is an emotional one, and the taxpayers have a right to voice their concerns. What we’ve seen, however, is more emotion and an ignorance of the way things are done. This lack of understanding will do nothing to quell the frustration; in fact, it might exacerbate the problem.

I actually disagree in this case... with more involvement by the taxpayers, a responsible media can help to educate the masses. Taxpayers of West Haven, often known for their apathy towards understanding the problems of the city government, really seem to want to learn and get involved with the solutions.

While people have responded emotionally, SOMEWHERE, the facts have to be sorted out... which is why this blog was started. To find solutions, to find out what was emotion, and what was reality. A large source of information has been the media -- and as we find out, too often the media prints stories that do not just contain the facts (such as the Brent Coscia connection to the WHTI).

West Haven and Lawsuits - legal costs.

Today's New Haven Register has an article entitled "Election fraud claims tossed" which talks a ruling in two lawsuits filed against three elected officials who ran under former Mayor Borer's "A Better Future" slate were tossed out. The lawsuit alleged that these candidates (four registered democrats who were elected , and one registered republican who lost his bid) did not notify the electorate that they kept their party affiliations while running under the "A Better Future" slate, and that the GOP Registrar of Voters Jo Ann Callegari did not hold a meeting with Republican Town Chairman Paul Frosolone did not remove the republican candidate from the GOP rolls.

Corporation Counsel Peter C. Barrett defended the elected officials, and former corporation counsel Paul J. Dorsi defended Paul Frosolone... so who is picking up the bill? Is it West Haven taxpayers?

Over the past few years, West Haven political activists (and in some cases, 'gadflies') have become extremely litigious, costing taxpayers plenty in often non-budgeted funds.

Huge State Surplus...

According to an August 7, 2006 New Haven Register editorial, the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2006 has officially been ended with $940.5 million surplus (nearly $1 billion - wow.).

Over 1/4 ($245.6 million) will go to fully fund the Teacher's Retirement Fund for both this year and next.

$85.3 million will pay off debt from 2002-2003 that was used to balance a budget deficit. That budget year, the rainy day fund (the contingency fund, aka budget reserve) was entirely emptied.

This year, almost $455.1 million will be put INTO the rainy day fund (largest deposit EVER), which will make the balance of the fund $1.12 billion.

It wasn't disclosed what the remaining $154.4 million will be earmarked for.

While the editorial warns against feeling secure because economic times are due to change -- but this is a ton of tax revenue that the state has received... out of our pockets.

Wouldn't it be ideal if the state would decide what portion of the unaccounted for $154.4 million proportionally should be allocated to West Haven taxpayers and helped us out?

According to census.gov, in 2005, West Haven has an estimated population of 52,923 and Connecticut has an estimated population of 3,510,297 or roughly 1.5% of the population of the state of Connecticut.... 1.5% of the $154.4 million is $2.33 million - while it wouldn't solve all of our problems, that would be a nice start to help our budget crisis.

New Haven Register: West Haven's soaring taxes have lots of folks running scared.

While unfortunately it does not seem to appear in the online version, today's print version of the New Haven Register has another piece by Marissa Yaremich on the high taxes in West Haven.

Included in the article, are personal stories of West Haven tax payers who are unfortunately having to put their homes up for sale, and who are finding that the high taxes are making their homes a hard sale. According to the article, as of late last week, there were 549 single and multifamily homes for sale in West Haven at realtors.com.

According to local real estate agent Rick Chamberlin of Realty Partners CT, the length of time needed to sell West Haven properties has increased significantly, a fact he believes is compounded by the fact that real estate market in general has softened, butpeople are still trying to get top dollar for their properties. Chamberlin expressed concern that some of his clients trying to sell their homes could be forced into foreclosure if the tax situation doesn't come to balance soon.

In one case, a 76 year old woman who worked hard all of her life to pay off her West Shore home mortgage, thought her would have enough money to spend out her retirement. However, as her 2005 property revaluation (and although not mentioned in the article, the budget crisis in West Haven) has increased her taxes by 24%, she has put her home on the market. Sadly, while she can attract people to view the home, potential buyers have been scared off by the $5000 annual tax bill.

Many in West Shore would love a $5000 annual tax bill, though -- quite a few of us have gone to $7500, $12,000, or even $19,000 annually... crazy money. Some taxpayers in West Shore have increased by 100%; others have seen increases of $6000 + (more than the $4000 mentioned in the article).

There was another important point missed by the article, which stated in part:

The tax rate dropped but bills are higher because revaluation increased assessments on residential property far more than on commercial property.

This year's city tax rate dropped form 41.09 mills to 27.96 mills while the city budget rose from $134.4 million to $136.8 million.

The tax burden has disproportionately risen in the West Shore district, as compared to the Center and Allingtown districts. While some assessments in West Shore rose by 150% or more, some properties in the other districts saw much smaller increases, of only 50-70%.

Disappointingly, the article reported that while Mayor Picard sympathizes with those who put their houses up to sale because of the taxes, that housing sales have been soft in the Northeast this summer, and that neighboring communities too will have their revaluations soon, to bring their assessments up to the same levels as West Haven.

He even is quoted as saying that this is a similar situation to what the city went through in 1991 (when our taxes doubled then).

What that statement fails to address is that it is not merely the assessed value that West Haven residents are so up in arms about - it's the taxes, which many cannot afford to pay!

Today's New Haven Register Soundoff: Coping with taxes

Today's print version of the New Haven Register has a daily sound off of:

How are you coping with high property taxes?

Call 789-5732 or 1(800) 925-2509 ext. 5732 before 5 pm tonight to voice your opinion.

Department of Economic and Community Development softens stance

Good news as a followup to our blog post entitled "Did we pay it back or not???" -- According to the August 2 West Haven Voice article entitled "State sent 7 letters on CDEC funds", the Department of Economic and Community Development will not withhold future allocations to the city after phone calls were made and letters were sent to the agency.

This money may have been owed as much as 40 years ago, during Project 1 of the Savin Rock Development Plan (1966). While the last invoice is dated in 1994, apparently 7 letter have been uncovered as having been sent to the city (4 in 2002, and 3 in 2004).

More about the beaches

There was an interesting August 2 article in the West Haven Voice entitled "Beaches rebuilt" that gives more insight into the budget/funding for the replacement of the beach sand, and the state of the beach prior to the repairs.

Apparently, $600,000 per year is put into the 5 year capital plan for replenishing the beaches, and according to Beth Sabo, we don't often use that money. The article also states:

As part of its agreement with the state Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ New England District in Concord, Mass., the city is obligated to maintain its 3.5-mile public shore, which makes up 25 percent of Connecticut’s public beaches

The most extensive repairs included 19,000 tons of sand put into place across from Chick's on Beach street in an area of the beaches known as 'Savin Rock Beach'. A storm on June 2-3 apparently washed away the sand down to the early 20th century seawall.

Lots of other fascinating detail on how the sand was located, and shipped was included in the article.

Mayor Picard is requesting a $200,000 reimbursement from FEMA, and state rep Steve Dargon will be lobbying the state for $1M for future replenishments.

Different 2004-2005 Audit results reported...

The August 2 article by the West Haven Voice entitled "More Red Ink!" reports slightly different audit results from 2004-2005 fiscal year, but the news is still not good. According to the article, the audit firm of Levitsky & Berney of Woodbridge produced a draft audit that showed a $4.2 shortfall. (Given that this is from the draft audit, it's possible that the Voice had to go to print prior to the final findings, and that the New Haven Register article that we wrote about in the blog post entitled "Auditors revise 2004-2005 Results").

This article gives more detail on the grant money mis-categorizations:

A pattern of using grant money in the operation side of the budget has been seen and verified by the auditing firm, according to the draft report. It gives one specific example of what is thought to be a pattern by administration officials.

“Under reclassification of an error,” the company found city officials had “misdassified” some grant revenues and projects were bonded for more than their total cost.

“Subsequent to the issuance of the audit report, management discovered that some grant money received for School Construction Projects were misclassified as revenue to the general fund in current and prior periods, also some projects were bonded in excess of the net project expenditures,” the report states.

The Voice also states that according to unnamed sources, "grant money came into the city, put into the general fund, and bonds used to pay the city’s portion of projects were quoted in excess of what was necessary. The excess money was never put back into the grants that were shuffled to the general fund."

State Bonding laws changed in 1998, both in terms of how they can be categorized, as well as policies for how refinanced bonds should be handled. Concern is apparently being voiced (as given by that unnamed source) that the State will be asking for the reimbursement of funds that were in excess of what were needed, and that the Mayor will be looking to negotiate with the State. From the Voice article:

What is feared is the forensic audit now being conducted by Checkers, Inc. and some three months behind schedule might show more extensive use of grant and bond money for expenses.

“The mayor is more convinced than ever that people had to know what they were doing in the last administration, and is ready to have outside agencies look into possible criminal charges,” sources said.

Hmm.