New Haven Independent

Marshals Lose Towing Gig; Foreclosures Next?

by Andrew Mangino | May 30, 2008 7:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (34)

Apparently, the sensitivity training didn’t work out.

As part of an overhaul of its embattled towing program — following spring revelations by the Independent of favoritism, double-dipping, error and deception in the system — the DeStefano administration last month ordered that state marshals, among other involved parties, undergo procedural retraining, including lessons in sensitivity toward the public.

But at an aldermanic-committee meeting Thursday night, city officials went one step further, announcing that marshals have now been removed from the towing equation altogether. Meanwhile, two aldermen, Jorge Perez and Robert Lee (pictured), are pressing for a complete overhaul of the city’s use of marshals, including on foreclosures. Their proposal comes before the full board on Monday.

Politically connected marshals, who have been getting a lucrative city job identifying cars to be towed because their owners owe taxes, are getting the boot.

Four city-appointed constables will now fill the role state marshals once served, Tax Collector C.J. Cuticello explained Thursday. That means city employees will fill the role with no extra cost to taxpayers.. New Haven is simultaneously transitioning to the VioAlert technology for dealing with cars whose owners have unpaid parking tickets; that immobilizes the cars instead of requiring a tow, saving parties time and money.

“We’ve made some major changes,” Cuticello said. “We essentially have eliminated the need for state marshals.”

At first the city was going to keep the politically connected marshals in their plum job, but first have them enroll in “sensitivity training.”

Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts — who testified before the Board of Aldermen’s City Services and Environmental Policy Committee Thursday night alongside Cuticello, City Controller Mark Pietrosimone and Transportation Department Director Michael Piscitelli — said officials crafted the new policies with three goals in mind: clarity and consistency; a reduction in costs; and an “easier experience” for residents.

Despite the announcement, questions surrounding the use of marshals by the city are unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

Marshals took center-stage in the towing debate after the Independent reported in early April that marshal Peter Criscuolo did not tow Rev. Boise Kimber’s car even though the City Hall ally and well-connected community leader owed hundreds of dollars in parking tickets. And in a separate but related matter, filings revealed that Criscuolo, a fundraiser for Mayor John DeStefano, raked in $196,087 working for the city. Another marshal, Democratic Town Chairwoman Susie Voigt earned $132,000.

After arriving half an hour late at City Hall, Fair Haven Heights Alderman Robert Lee pressed officials on whether the new towing procedures would be enforced equally on all citizens, regardless of position or connection. “We’ll take a strong stance,” Smuts promised, to ensure polices are “applied fairly and consistently across the board.”

As expected, Lee also distributed an advance copy of a letter to Mayor John DeStefano Jr. in which the alderman calls for Criscuolo to be “suspended from consideration of any services on behalf of” New Haven, for Voigt to be “eliminated” from any city-related work “to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest,” and for Cuticello to be placed on probation for one to three years and face “possible termination” if he does not follow “all procedures” with the city’s Bootfinder program.

Asked to respond after the meeting, a visibly distraught Cuticello (pictured, far left, after the meeting with Aldermen Carl Goldfield and Alex Rhodeen) said he was previously “not aware” of the letter’s existence and, on first read, “shocked” by its contents. He declined to comment further.

In a new twist, Hill Alderman Jorge Perez — who did not attend the committee meeting—confirmed in a telephone interview Thursday he will introduce a bill at the Board of Aldermen’s full session Monday that calls for a new marshal-accreditation process for New Haven.

The bill would require state marshals hoping to carry out business in the city to first obtain a special license. Any marshal called by the city’s Corporation Counsel, Office Tax Collector’s Office or a private attorney would need to be on a master list of licensed-for-New Haven marshals in order to be employed.

The proposal’s crucial — and potentially controversial — tenet is its required rotation system designed so that no one or two individuals would ever again receive the brunt of the work, and, by extension, the bulk of the cash.

“It’ll be a new way to make sure that work for marshals is distributed in a fair and equitable way,” Perez said. He emphasized that he had not discussed the matter with Voigt or Criscuolo so as not to be “perceived” drafting the bill in response to any one, or two, marshals. “It’s really more about having a transparent government where everyone gets a fair chance, and then people can’t say, ‘You’re getting [the job] because you’re the town chair’ or not.”

Voigt could not be reached for comment Thursday night, and her voicemail box was full.

Criscuolo defended his work at length in this previous Independent interview.

The committee meeting Thursday was sparsely attended, with a handful of Community Watchdog Project members dominating the audience. The only member of the public slated to speak — Alan Felder (pictured), the Watchdog group’s “co-strategist” — interrupted the session out of order, calling Criscuolo a “creep” and announcing to the room that he was growing impatient and had to leave soon to pick up his child.

Although he was nowhere to be found when called on later, he told the Independent in an interview that he sees towing as a “moral” matter: old, impoverished women shopping at Walmart, for example, should not face the stressful situation of finding their vehicle missing upon leaving the store, he said.

Also to speak at the meeting was Robert Oliver, an attorney representing several towing companies. He said that while “no one likes to come out of the theater after they’ve seen the new Indiana Jones and see that their car has been towed,” towing could reap benefits for the city . Besides, he added, the towing companies cannot help but feel some “resentment” that the city is employing the out-of-town VioAlert instead of local outfits.

After the meeting adjourned, Fair Haven Heights Alderman Rhodeen, who chaired the meeting in the absence of fellow Fair Haven Alderwoman Erin Sturgis-Pascale, said although no official action was taken, the testimony helped to clarify for aldermen — and hopefully the public — the city’s hitherto ambiguous, and at times contradictory, towing and delinquent-tax-collection procedures. That process is an ongoing one, he said.

Previous coverage of New Haven’s towing industry:

Mayor’s Favorite Marshal Rakes In $196K

“They’re Thieves”

Marshals Sent To School

DMV To Towing Companies: No Sealed Bids

Third Towing Scrape Detailed

Clergy “Exemption” Detailed

New Towing Probe Sought

$200 For 4 Hours

Towing Program Halted

Kimber Gets Off The (Towing) Hook

“We’re Not Double-Dipping”

Alvin Goes For The Chevy

Towing Co. Ducks Tax Bill

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: mr. october | May 30, 2008 8:42 AM

So did Kimber ever pay up or not?

Posted by: joey | May 30, 2008 8:48 AM

Funny, A wast of time glad this article did not kill a tree.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | May 30, 2008 8:56 AM

Congratulations to the Aldermen/women who initiated this effort and to ensure a consistent policy for tax collection and ticket collection. We applaud such efforts! Now we want the remainder of the alders to vote to support this legislation on Monday!!!

Posted by: James | May 30, 2008 9:02 AM

Two sides to the coin. The city is overspending and lining the pockets of political hacks. Glad to see that there is some momentum for change.

Other side of the coin:
old, impoverished women shopping at Walmart, for example, should not face the stressful situation of finding their vehicle missing upon leaving the store

Old Impoverished Woman should pay her taxes. If Old Impoverished Woman can't afford to pay her taxes, she should seek aid or take the bus. Why do people in this city see the law as an inconvenience that they will abide should they have the time and energy to do so? Why do people feel so entitled and yet, at the same time, take no personal responsibility for their actions or place in society at large?

Posted by: James | May 30, 2008 9:06 AM

Sorry for the double posting. I just saw Jeffery's post and reminded myself to try to live by Andy's advice and be more positive. While I indicated that I welcome change, I did not expressly thank and congratulate those alders and their supporters for trying to do what is right and exposing waste and excess. Thanks, guys!

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 30, 2008 9:20 AM

HERE HERE Jeffery!
We have a group of Alders that have stepped up to the plate and have truly worked on behalf of the citizens of this city. And bills such as this are a step in the right direction.

Bravo on the work guys!!

And thank you for being our rep's ... real rep's!!!

Posted by: Bruce | May 30, 2008 9:22 AM

Jeez, it's getting so that you can barely dole out lucrative political favors anymore. How the heck is a guy supposed to thank his election machine??

Posted by: Bruce | May 30, 2008 9:27 AM

...sorry, one more thought.

"That means city employees will fill the role, with no extra cost to taxpayers."

Are these employees working for free? What is different about this arrangement, other than city employees are paid rather than marshals?

Posted by: facChek | May 30, 2008 10:47 AM

Not so fast..

I'm not willing to shower the city with kudos, not with their record of show and tell, promise this and do that.

Let's wait and see who is invited to "eat" now, as a result of this proposed change to the tow and collection practice.

Posted by: been booted | May 30, 2008 10:58 AM

As someone who was recently booted, yes I owed parking tickets and yes my City Hall connection was out of town, I would like to add something to this report. The immobilizing boots do not elimiate the need for towing. You only have 12 hours to pay your bill, in cash. If you don't, then they remove the boot and tow your car and charge you a few more additional fees. Tell those tow companies to sit tight, they'll get the biz they know and love.

Posted by: joey | May 30, 2008 12:32 PM

It has nothining to do with the tow company sitting back and waiting. the booting as well as the towing is a city controlled collection program for back taxes and past due parking tickets. Understand that towers cannot take a vehicle with the city giveing the go ahead.

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | May 30, 2008 3:54 PM

Great mother of Abraham Lincoln!

Is this for real? No more Marshals on the trucks? What is happening in my old city? Are the agents of change and progress truly seeping their philosophy into the policies and practices of the administration? More sacred cows taken to the slaughter! I think I hear the un-dead ghost of Frank Altieri rolling over in his grave screaming out "John don't listen to the agents of change!"

Posted by: Resident | May 30, 2008 4:10 PM

Good Idea!

Posted by: been there done that | May 30, 2008 6:14 PM

Ok it all sounds good...alderpeople finally waking up..ok a few...
But how abot the illegals at such places like church ..do they get the same EQUAL TREATMENT or will John applogize again and throw it off the books....we will see....amen

Posted by: been there done that | May 30, 2008 6:18 PM

One more thing .. people with there city ID card..maybe John will give them a free tow card for 1 time deal.....hey maybe i will get one now...

Posted by: nfjanette | May 30, 2008 6:38 PM

Meet the new boss - same as the old boss.

Posted by: James | May 30, 2008 7:12 PM

Corrupt sherifs became corrupt marshals. Marshals become constables? Are we doing anythign other than changing the name of the position and the recipiant of the patronage cash?

More info, please. It's a serious question. How is this any different, and how is there no additional cost to taxpayers? If these people are on the rolls right now, they must be performing a task (he says naively). If they are currently employed in a task, then wouldn't they require overtime or, if they cut back on other duties, wouldn't somebody else need to pick up the slack? Curious as to how the proposal would work.

Posted by: che15 | May 30, 2008 8:06 PM

IT IS TRULY amazing how weak new haven is getting. senativity training for people who are sent out to collect taxes from dead beats. give me a break! i have watched people jump in there cars like idiots as a tow company attempted to tow the vehicle. can anyone tell me how CAA, schools, police, fire, public works, and every other useful and useless program is funded? TAXES. my advice to my fellow residents, dont buy an escalade, bmw, mercedes or whatever if you cant afford the taxes. dont park in improper spots cause you r lazy and dont want to walk(believe me with the amount of overweight people in new haven the walk would help). things need to be paid for one way or another so if you dont want your car towed pay your bill like those of us who r responsible. thanks

Posted by: -fairhavener- | May 31, 2008 1:04 AM

While the VioAlert system seems like a better idea than straight up towing at first glance, it only takes a little thought to realize what a scam it is. As BEEN BOOTED already pointed out, a person has only 12 hours to pay the bill in cash. Now, if you owe taxes or tickets it is your responsibility to pay them and you will probably not garner any sympathy from fellow citizens since it is our money you owe us, but this VioAlert boot system is not set up to "immobilize the cars instead of requiring a tow, saving parties [sic] time and money" as officials claim, it is set up to immobilize cars with a GREAT probability that they will be towed AS WELL.

No? Then why is the time limit 12 hours? Wouldn't 24 hours be more fitting for a system that is supposedly set up to "save parties' time and money" let alone be an "easier experience" as Smuts claims? I probably don't need to run through a few scenarios to make this point obvious.

I would love to see the data that shows the number of people who got booted AND towed versus JUST booted in the first year. I can't wait. I know I'm right.

Second, I love how Smuts promises, "We'll take a strong stance [to ensure polices are] applied fairly and consistently across the board", after Alderman Robert Lee "pressed officials on whether the new towing procedures would be enforced equally on all citizens, regardless of position or connection". If that is the case, then why in the "Municipal Tow Policy", that was handed out that night, under the "VEHICLE RELOCATION POLICY", does it say that the officer has DISCRETION to either relocate and return the vehicle OR TOW TO THE TOW YARD? Furthermore, if you make it to your car in time ("within one (1) block") you can get your car without being towed further. That is, if the officer allows it since it is up to his DISCRETION. Nice, purely genius.

That doesn't sound like a recipe for "fairness and consistency" to me. It reads to me as if "special people", or people in "special areas" will be relocated and returned (or save their cars from being towed), and the rest of us get skewed.

Third, only two aldermen brought up the pure insanity and anarchy that is unleashed ("like locusts", as one alderman pointed out) upon the city by tow trucks, their drivers and companies every time there is a street sweeping. These clowns consistently run red lights, blow through stop signs, speed at incredible rates down neighborhood streets (even when children are present), drive the wrong way down one way streets, and show a complete and utter lack of respect for city residents and public safety. How is anyone supposed to respect the system when the primary "enforcers" for the system behave like this?

And where was our street calming savior? If there is one violator of calm streets it is the tow truck drivers on shakedown...er... I mean street sweeping days. I mean come on, the system is set up so that the more cars they tow the more money they make, which means the faster they go, even if it is the wrong way down a one way street. And Smuts said they're not supposed to do this. Oh, really? Yeah, that'll be the day when this is enforced. Who wants to hold their breath?

Posted by: joey | May 31, 2008 3:59 PM

The towers are not the enforcers of the system the appointed constable is in charge! towers have no say.

Posted by: kris | May 31, 2008 6:15 PM

old impoverished women should NOT be shopping in walmart when she cant afford to pay her taxes.Old women should get her priorities straight

Posted by: Erin Sturgis-Pascale | May 31, 2008 10:03 PM

I apologize to my colleagues and the public for not being able to attend and chair this committee meeting.

I spent the day in the hospital writhing in agony with a kidney stone. I was in no shape to attend although I was prepared, especially as the outlaw behaviour of the towing companies in New Haven is a frequent constituent complaint, as well as a source of personal outrage.

The time has certainly come to clearly define the relationship the city has with towing companies. Illegal and uncivil behaviour must be grounds for immediate termination with any party that does city business, towing companies included.

Posted by: Edward_H | June 1, 2008 11:36 AM

Erin Sturgis-Pascale

Illegal and uncivil behaviour must be grounds for immediate termination with any party that does city business, towing companies included.

I wish we could hold city employess to the same standard, especially the "uncivil" part.

Posted by: -fairhavener- | June 1, 2008 7:29 PM

Thanks Erin - we didn't know. I hope you're OK.

Joey, constables are not driving the tow trucks. They're not even around most of the time. Towers do have a say in how they operate their vehicles. Get a clue.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | June 1, 2008 8:42 PM

Fairhaven I agree with all of the above. Their discretion?? That really bothers me. Now I am sure that is in place for streets like Orange st. to protect the businesses who customers are towed. Which I do see a need for. But this can turn into a very bad thing. And again target low income community's. I to will want data in a year to see what communities are targeted.

I will say something about the 12 hour rule...all the cars I have seen with the boot sat their for several days at least in the downtown area. So I am hoping that was to let people have time to come up with the cash.....at least give people till payday.

Posted by: DingDong | June 2, 2008 12:05 AM

"give people till payday"

While that's certainly very compassionate of you, CedarHillResident, those cars might also be taking up a valuable parking spot in front of someone's business.

Posted by: old woman | June 2, 2008 7:49 AM

Kris you make a good point about old woman at wal-mart....i'm old and bold but pay my tax to New Haven...yes on time....the city wants to make money have them go to wal-mart and ticket cars in the handi-cap parking spots...any hour day or night...i ask one latino if i can park there since he had no handi-cap sign in window or no plate on car at all he told me he has the right because he is sitting in his car..come on give me a brake.....thanks for listing old and bold in new haven

Posted by: joey | June 2, 2008 8:55 AM

FairHavener
Get a clue you say? Did you do your research before your fingers started typing? Not likely. Yes there is a bad apple here and there just as there are in any place of buisness. A car can not be towed without police ordering it towed! In the case of taxes or tickets the car can not be towed with out the go ahead from the tax collecters office and yes they are there till 10,11 and somtimes midnite and start at 5 am in some cases. a tower takeing a car with out that is no different then you or I driving off in someone else car. Most complaints of towers is due to people being p-off that there car was gone when they came out to go somewhere as you Fairhavener are very well aware of!!

Posted by: architect | June 2, 2008 9:55 AM

what's the real difference between a marshal and a constable anyway?

Posted by: -fairhavener- | June 2, 2008 12:42 PM

Joey, tow truck drivers certainly do tow cars without a marshal or constable present or approving. The way you describe it may be the way it is supposed to be, but tow truck drivers are also supposed to follow traffic laws and we all know they don't do that either, as you Joey, are very well aware of.

Posted by: -fairhavener- | June 2, 2008 12:48 PM

Posted by: joey | June 2, 2008 1:29 PM

the only towing with out proper approval is done in the case of private property were there is an agreement between the property owner and the tower. Not saying that it doesn't happen i am sure it does but not as you depict it. another case with out approval would be the repo man who are private contractors not working for a tow company. with that said, I am happy to meet someone who has never broken a traffic law. nice to meet you fairhavener

Posted by: cedarhillresident | June 2, 2008 2:05 PM

Joey
Again the story of my neighbor and the story of the yale student on Bradley st. In both instances no marshal. The neighbor instances we band together and would not let them take the car until a marshal showed up. Because she had just bought the car and they where towing it because the previous owner owed taxes...she had just registered it that day and had the plates and papers...do you know they still towed it!! And it took a week for her to get it back at no cost to her and no we are sorry!! The Yale girl was body checked by a slimmy tow driver (yuck I still feel for her he had no right to even touch her) I was told cops were called on that one.

Posted by: -fairhavener- | June 2, 2008 9:34 PM

Joey, you may be the greatest guy around, but I am sorry but you are just wrong. Maybe you are just misinformed, I don't know. Cars ARE towed without marshals, constables, or police. In addition to the countless people who have written about it over the years, and people posting in this very article, my own car was towed half way down my street on a street sweeping day without cop, constable, marshal or ticket. It was 3pm and the street was already swept early around 8am. When I aggressively stopped the tow truck driver driver he quickly released my vehicle. I mention this because it is not some hearsay example, but my first hand experience with corrupt towing companies towing illegally.

Marshals Lose Towing Gig; Foreclosures Next?

Comments

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed