On pages 8-9 of the forensic examination report, Kostin Ruffkess & Co. lists, as one of the “methods and schemes” by which town assets were allegedly “misappropriated,” the circumvention of and failure to follow the town’s bidding requirements.
Kostin Ruffkess & Co. looked at just three contracts, in the Community Services area, but the circumvention of and failure to follow the town’s bidding requirements was a problem throughout the town’s departments. It had little or nothing to do with the Ierardis.
Section 406(A) of the Charter makes it clear that the First Selectman is solely responsible for bidding out Town contracts (the Board of Education is responsible for education-related contracts).
Kopetz is now bidding out contracts, but why is he not responsible, as our forensic auditor says in its report, for the misappropriation of town assets by not following the Charter requirements in the past? Kopetz himself said publicly that the Town saved $1.4 million by fully bidding out the non-medical insurance contract. Why are we talking about how can we proceed against the Ierardis for misappropriation of town funds, but not against Kevin Kopetz?
When I raised this issue at this week’s Board of Finance meeting, there was, needless to say, no discussion. Acting chair Michael Peterson said that it wasn’t the bidding out of the insurance contract that saved us money, but the new bidder’s different plan. I responded that it was the open bidding of the contract that gave the town the opportunity to consider the new bidder’s different plan. He immediately said that I’d run out of time, although there was no time period specified and not many people left to ask questions or make statements.
Kopetz wants credit for the big savings in insurance, but not the blame for effectively giving away taxpayers’ money by not fully bidding out contracts in the past. This is misappropriation of funds not to put it into his own pocket, but into others’ pockets. From the taxpayer’s point of view, it doesn’t really matter where the money ends up.
There is also the issue of kickbacks. Unbid contracts often lead to payments to those who arranged the contracts, essentially rewards for a job well done. Kostin Ruffkess knows this, but does not seem concerned enough to look for possible kickbacks in North Haven. Or perhaps they’re not being asked to. Finding kickbacks outside the Community Services would be more embarrassing than what the Ierardis have been charged with doing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I am a fed up unaffiliated voter.Does the Democratic Town committee even have a chairman? Why do they continue to rely on the same few to do all the legwork? Are these 4 guys the whole Democratic party in North Haven? Do they think Janet with her endless blather could possibly back anyone in a dicey verbal situation? Sad, Sad Sad! I've said it before, if the Democrats lose this election, which could have been on a silver platter, it's their own pathetic fault!!!! Maybe they should call Dial-A-Stooge,like the Republicans do.They can get the number from Kopetz at the next meeting.
Has anybody heard Mr. Kopetz acknowledge that the practice of not getting bids was wrong?
Nicky,
The democratic committee does have a chairman, Mr.Peter Criscuolo. As far as Janet"s "endless blather", there are a great deal of people that agree with you on this. The debate reinforced this point and many feel that she has no tangible platform other than to capitalize on the problems that a few people in town government caused.
You have to decide, now that the people who caused the problems are gone, whether Ms. McCarty's endless blather, as you stated, is enough for you to vote for her.
You, and only you, can make that choice.
Unfortunately, the people who caused the problem are NOT gone. Yet.
Carl Porto donated $4,750 to Janets campaign including out of town shills from his office...Fully 1/3 of all the money she raised this reporting period came from Attorney Porto.....Think Carl is buying his way into the town attorney's slot... watch your wallet tax payers in North haven...Maybe janet wants to come out publicly and say that the town attorney services will not go to her biggest donor...how about a note somewhere in your web site mr. " I keep everything balanced" web master.....how did you miss that little tidbit..Hmmmmm.
In response to the most recent Anonymous, I never said I'm neutral or balanced.
What you wrote about Porto's contributions may very well be true. Where else could you have pointed this out but at the North Haven Info blog?
It's allowing comments from anyone in the community that makes this blog balanced, not what I say.
All I've said is that I'm an Independent and my positions are not partisan. I'm not real crazy about this town's Democratic party either, but I think they deserve a chance to run this town and correct the lack of transparency, the refusal to deal with conflicts of interest, the breaking of important laws, etc.
If they don't, then we should vote them out.
In response to the recent Anonymous who responded to Nicky about Janet McCarty's "endless blather," what is your talk about her blather other than blather itself?
She has a platform now, and has taken strong positions for many years. She argued for such things as bidding out contracts, delaying and phasing in revaluation, changing the budget process to comply with state law, full transparency (openness), a better ethics code, senior citizens discounts on property tax, etc.
You can agree or disagree with her positions, but it's far worse than blather to refer this way to a woman who has worked so hard for this town.
The right to speak comes with a responsibility. If you can't be specific, if you can't speak responsibly, then shut up.
In response to anonymous:
Vacuous accusations about "blather" are easy but don't penetrate the issues.
The fact is that, at best, Mr. Kopetz was asleep at the wheel. The corruption and mismanagement by his cronies happened on his watch.
He can't blame anyone else. He either mismanaged or was complicit in corruption. It doesn't really matter which. Mumble mouth and his cronies need to be retired.
For you, Mr. Wechsler, to accuse the last anonymous of not speaking responsibly speaks to your hypocritical nature.
Let's see, on previous blogs,you have referred to Mr. Kopetz as "Waldo", "corrupt morally", "deeply corrupted", a "deeply unethical person" and various other insults. You have a constituency here that refers to people as "Republicrooks", "thugs" and "criminals" and you never say a thing to them, even though many of those people being insulted are volunteers who are trying to do what is best in light of the 3 people who screwed this town up.
You are not only disgraceful in the language you use but continue to show your hypocritical nature for allowing one group of people here to hurl all kinds of insults and then criticizing the other group for mild criticism of your candidate McCarty.
Your various constituents should take a page from the one person who, despite his disdain for Kopetz, continues to conduct himself with class and in a professional fashion on this blog site and that is a person by the name of Jim Leahy.
The bottom line is that you, as the webmaster,are a smart guy in many respects but a disgrace in many other respects for the way that you conduct yourself on this site and for the way you allow insults and slanderous comments from the McCarty supporters and then for the way that you try to "stamp out" the Kopetz supporters. You have single handedly incited a "mob mentality" with one group while continually trying to "slap down" those who do not agree with what they see on this site.
Get used to hearing it, McCarty is a WEAK candidate and if she does not win this time then she is what she ends up to be, a four time loser in this town.
To the most recent Anonymous, in every case I gave details that led to my conclusions.
I have also criticized others, even my "constituency" as you call them, although I represent no one but myself, for calling people names.
I also use my name, so that people know who they are attacking, something you are clearly incapable of doing. You may be a candidate yourself, but we don't know, so we can hold your words against you.
I don't "stamp out" anyone. I disagree, and allow everyone to disagree and condemn me.
Who else in this town would allow himself or herself to be publicly attacked the way I do here?
You certainly don't. I can't slap down a shadow.
Keep calling me a hypocrite. Say it a thousand times. But you can't give an honest example, just a bunch of words taken out of context.
I stand by my words, (and probably to your surprise I AM voting for her) she is a well intentioned, good person however a poor candididate to put up against this STRONG REPUBLICAN MACHINE!! Her opinions and platforms come out like "endless blather" and that's exactly why she lost the first THREE times!
I am glad was finally able to incite some emotion on this blog because apathy is what put this town in the position it's in!
P.S. There are many times when I have watched you rambling on with your opinions Mr.Weschler, that I would like to tell to you to SHUT UP even though I believe in your cause.
Post a Comment