New Haven Independent

Posted by: Gary Doyens | February 22, 2008 10:02 AM

What a crock:

"The language in the contract is unfortunate," said Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. in a press release Thursday. That is lovers' language.

This is the exact language that our corporation council, city HR and the mayor negotiated together and renewed with the sweetheart pay raises and benefits we can't afford to win union support for his doomed run at the governor's mansion. This mayor has been around city government for more than two decades - and he's just now figuring out the lack of a bad boy clause screws the taxpayers and rewards the lawbreakers. The current proposal has been around for months with the mayor sitting on his hands.

Meanwhile, while our big vision mayor is busy selling the fairy tale of turning Route 34 into a garden spot - the actual nuts and bolts of running the city are rusting away. Perhaps John should get a new pair of glasses - blurry vision even for the next two years, is going to cost beleagured city taxpayers a fortune.

By the way - perhaps now would be a good time to ignore the arbitrator. Let the union sue on behalf of these crooks to get the money.

Posted by: James | February 22, 2008 10:03 AM

Disgusting. I understand the Union's job is to look out for their members, but to be so glib in their successful trouncing of decency is simply disgusting. New Haven voters and tax payers must be adamant in their demand to see the Union's contract changed. I would sooner do without police than pay an annual pension to these peverters of justice. There is no decency in this decision. There is, unfortunately, a matter of law. Unlike White, Kaspezyck, and Willoughby , we cannot ignore the law simply because it is inconvenient. But we can and must change the law. The punishment for abusing the public trust is early retirement on a pension larger than 90 percent of the population's annual salary? Absolutely and completely disgusting.

Posted by: WEBblog 1 | February 22, 2008 10:41 AM

The ruling "disemboweled" the city, boasted Willoughby's attorney, Norman Pattis. "They're falling on their sword for the day."

Why, oh why, am I not surprised.
Chalk up another defeat for New Haven Taxpayers.

This decision comes on the the heels of a recent court decision by another city employee who worked for the park department, applied for a new job at the public works department and was discriminated against by humane resources and public works due to age discrimination. The plaintiff was awarded $500K of our tax money.

"The language in the contract is unfortunate," said Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. in a press release Thursday. The city's position was that a city General Order, not the union contract, should have taken precedent in determining exactly when someone has retired".

Bad Boy" Clause Sought:
DeStefano said, "they don't deserve to be able to retire from the Police Department nor do they deserve the benefits that accompany that designation."

Now how weak are those two statements, considering that the contract language is clear on this subject and already affirmed by the arbitrator.

Mr. Mayor you continue to rely on your gut and the Corporation Counsel, neither have served you well.
May I suggest Mr. Mayor, that you go back and apologize to Patty DeFrancisco and beg her to COME BACK.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 22, 2008 12:10 PM

I am with james.

I have a question...
Can we ask for this to be added to the contract now as an amendment?? Or when is the present contract up?? And please FBI, PERF and who ever else is reviewing the police department. Can we PLEASE not oust anymore cops till we get this fixed!!

Posted by: Common Sense | February 22, 2008 2:10 PM

Weblog1 - I'm sure you were referring to Patty Cofrancesco.

Posted by: WEBblog 1 | February 22, 2008 2:58 PM

James:
Thank you for the correction. My apology to Attorney Patty Cofrancesco.

I would imagine she doesn't mind, it may as well be DeFranciso or any one else as far as she is concerned.

Posted by: Dan | February 22, 2008 9:11 PM

It's just another example that criminals have more rights then honest citizens. The corrupt cops made money through their corrupt ways and now will continue to live at taxpayers expense after they screwed us all over. If they weren't profitting from the crimes maybe they would have more incentive to clean up the activity.

I don't think their criminal activity should be handled any differently than a drug dealer. If a drug dealer is caught anything that he gained from the money made in a criminal activity is seized. A corrupt cop , however, that has probably used his illegal money for the same purposes doesn't lose his assets and is able to retire and collect more money in the form of retirement. Yeah...real justice. What a joke.

Posted by: Another loss | February 25, 2008 10:55 AM

Another loss for John Ward.
We must be keeping him on staff, because we like the underdog.
This guy has cost us millions and needs to go.