New Haven Independent

Posted by: Our Town | March 28, 2008 5:06 PM

More twists and turns than "Law and Order." Melissa did a good job of describing this one. Ya couldn't make it up.

Sad, sad, sad.

Posted by: Common Sense | March 28, 2008 5:17 PM

How much has the city paid out in lawsuits to city employees and their attorneys over the past decade? Quite a bit. We have rules and regulations, job descriptions, union contracts, civil service, a city charter, numerous Boards & Commissions, and we still can't get it right. Too much politics and not enough common sense. Who is representing the taxpayers?

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | March 28, 2008 5:56 PM

May be the city can get the money to pay this man
from king Johns raise he just got!!!!

Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | March 28, 2008 9:29 PM

I'm frankly tired of seeing attorneys like Diane profiting off the backs of taxpayers, complaining about the incompetents in the administration but historically suppporting it through elections. No problem for her to afford skyrocketing taxes in East Rock. All you got to do is sue the town one or two more times a year to pay for it! Then you start playing social activist and ram expensive schools and programs down your throat!

Keep smiling Diane! Soon, you can have the entire town to yourself.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 28, 2008 9:38 PM

I'm waiting for the Mayorga/DeStefano statement - which will inevitably be: "it's the state's fault because they don't fund our inflated PILOT claims at 100% - and they dump prisioners in New Haven."

Just pitiful.

Posted by: Paul Wessel | March 29, 2008 8:01 AM

It's a good thing that everyone involved figured out a way to resolve this that also protected the three City employees cited as defendants. It's hard enough trying to do public service jobs professionally in a tight fiscal environment - something which Dick Miller, Charlie Redd, and Rich Christiansen all have done admirably - without worrying about having to hire lawyers to protect your house for doing that job. I would expect this sends a note of reassurance to other existing city managers as well as applicants for the open Human Resources Director and Police Chief positions.

Posted by: facChek | March 29, 2008 10:53 AM

This is the same city ligation committee who voted to settle the Anatasio railroad tax exempt double dipping claim for 400K plus, rather than go to court.

In this case the committee voted to go to court in spite of over whelming odds against them, loss by decision, reversed themselves only to agree on a 425K plus attorney fee settlement.

"The city's insurance agency, AIG Domestic Claims, will pay most of that amount, $277,762. The city has to pay the remaining $150,000".

This equates to higher insurance premiums in the future for the city and an additional 150K added on to the city's current 14M + self insurance debt, which will be passed on to the tax payer.

Why do we need city representatives who make these kinds of thoughtless decisions. Get rid of John Ward and his settlement committee crew.

Hire Diane Polan, at least she has a concern about the way taxpayer money is being gambled away.

Posted by: Silent Observer | March 29, 2008 11:47 PM

I am amzed the public outcry is on waste of taxpayer money. Who won and who lost. There is never concern on the wrong doing. The wrong doing is reaaly the issue. In 2005 there were board of alderpersons hearings into complaints from staff on Richard Millers prejudice against certain groups. It was after a big problem with a white man harassing a black woman he ignored. This case with him being biased on another man proves the complaints made against him then as a jury found him guilty and the city just paid out 400,000 plus. All the board of alderpersons did in 2005 was take Millers job away at public works. If you look at city budgets Miller kept his same salary at engineering as he had at public works, over 100,000 a year. Mr Prokop only gets 90,000 a year. So the city supports the wrong doer at tax payer expense. The only good thing here is Reed and Richardsen are off the hook. They were only doing what there boss told them. The board of aldermen is responsible for this one for keeping Miller on after they had knowledge he was abusing power. Reed and Richardsen are lucky the city did this only because they do not want to frighten away a new police chief. Remember Waring abused his power and lost his house. The city would not protect him. The next law suit will be Waring suing the city as he was not given equal treatment to Miller. How much will that one cost us all.

Posted by: William Doriss | March 30, 2008 9:13 AM

I wonder if the City will settle my federal lawsuit, now in the Appellate Court: #4907 and 5487, Doriss v. City of New Haven? (Make sure you put a lot zeroes on that check!) You lose, New Haven. I want mine.

Posted by: Edward_H | March 30, 2008 11:38 AM

"As a taxpayer, I'm appalled that the city chose not to settle the first time," said attorney Diane Polan.

Was Diane apalled enough to take the case pro bono? Just curious, not saying she does not deserve her fee.

Posted by: OH WELL | March 30, 2008 7:20 PM

I agree HIRE DIANE POLAN.She doing her job what the problem?The gamble is hold them or fold them.

Posted by: Sarah28 | April 1, 2008 1:38 PM

Edward_H

New Haven Legal Assistance Association is only two blocks down from Diane's office. YOU give them a call at (203)946-4811, or better yet drop on by their office at 426 State St, (let me know if you need directions).

The rest of us need Diane Polan (and others like her) in this town.

Posted by: Edward_H | April 1, 2008 4:41 PM

Sarah28

New Haven Legal Assistance Association is only two blocks down from Diane's office. YOU give them a call at (203)946-4811,

What in my post made you believe I need to give them a call?

or better yet drop on by their office at 426 State St, (let me know if you need directions).

You gave me their address. Why would I need you to give me directions?

The rest of us need Diane Polan (and others like her) in this town.

Did you somehow come to the conclusion that I said Diane Polan was not needed in New Haven? If so how?

Posted by: Sarah28 | April 2, 2008 1:22 AM

I was just suggesting a readily available source of pro-bono resources; since YOU were wondering and "Just curious, not saying she does not deserve her fee". That's all!

Now, I am NOT suggesting that Ms. Polan does not do, NOR will never do, NOR has never done, NOR should not do ... pro bono work.

But, since YOU my friend brought up the "appalled-pro-bono" connection, (paraphrasing what you so you eloquently quoted), I bet you that, "As [...] taxpayer[s], [the folks at New Haven Legal Assistance Association were just as] appalled that the city chose not to settle the first time"!

What say you, Amigo?

Posted by: Edward_H | April 2, 2008 10:21 AM

Sarah28

"What say you, Amigo?"

After reviewing you responses I believe you did not get the meaning of my original post. I will try to make it simpler:

Was Diane appalled enough to take the case pro bono, thereby relieving the taxpayers of New Haven the additional cost of her fees? Just curious, not saying she does not deserve her fee.

Many people are appalled or offended by many things , until an opportunity to make a personal sacrifice in profit or comfort presents itself.

I bet you that, "As [...] taxpayer[s], [the folks at New Haven Legal Assistance Association were just as] appalled that the city chose not to settle the first time"!

Irrelevant,the folks at the NHLAA had no ability to affect the amount the case would be settle for as Diane Polan did.