New Haven Independent

Posted by: omerta | June 5, 2008 8:38 AM

This is a complicated idea and still political. Restricting the work to committee chairs is just pay back. The easiest and cheapest way to do parking tickets and forclosures is to give the work to cops as overtime.

Posted by: Yair | June 5, 2008 8:52 AM

Perez's plan has great merit and is the first step in fixing a serious problem we have in this country: some people earn more money than other people. In fact, I would recommend we apply this philosophy in all areas of public service: all city employees, regardless of talents, education or work history, should earn the same salary and be rotated through all jobs (fireman, secretary, janitor, police, legal counsel and mayor) on an impartial basis.

Posted by: sandstorm | June 5, 2008 10:08 AM

This suggestion is long overdue. It might seem
reasonable, in deference to Smuts's suggestion,
to inquire of the attorneys as to any sheriffs
that they would deem unworthy of licensing because
of dereliction of duty or unseemly behavior.
The attorneys should be required to rate the
marshals on a pass/fail system once or twice a year.

This system is not unlike the towing protocols.
It seems fair and equitable! I hope that this does
not languish in committee the way that so many
worthwhile initiatives do when there is no political incentive to facilitate.

Posted by: Carole | June 5, 2008 12:30 PM

Yair:

Nice sleight of hand in defining the issue as "some people earn more money than other people."

Without disputing the "talents, education or work history" of the two marshals in question, we should ask: How much of those qualities does it take to serve foreclosure papers? Is there any evidence that the 50 marshals who signed up for city work, but didn't get any, are unqualified to do the job?

The issue is not talent, education or work history. The issue is assigning city work to those who raise money for the mayor, and excluding those who do not. If you want to defend that practice, do it head-on instead of changing the subject.

Posted by: James | June 5, 2008 1:56 PM

That cute, Yair. But your forgetting about market economics. Some people make more money because they have skills that others don't. If there is a limited supply of a skill, the market rate trends higher. Most anybody can sweep a floor. As such, the market rate for such a job is quite low. Not many can perform brain surgery and the market rate is commiserate with that scarcity. Though I'm quite sure you know how the basic idea of a labor market.

What the marshals do is not particularly skilled and does not require any great amount of specialized knowledge. But because these jobs are controlled by certain political entities and the market is kept closed (a cute little oligopoly), there is no room for completion to establish a market rate for these services. The point is that these marshals are being grossly overpaid for work that many are suited to do and could do for less money. Why should the taxpayers subsidize their personal incomes because these marshals' relationship with the mayor and their ability to fund raise for him?

See, while you stated out trying to liken Perez's plan to communism, the current system is more akin to the Soviet style of communism we saw in the 1980s and 90s where the market was controlled and manipulated by the government. Break the monopoly and stop trading taxpayer money for political favor.

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | June 5, 2008 2:22 PM

Carole I could not agree with you more. This is not about adding people to the work list as much as it is taking someone off the list.

The referenced Advocate article discusses two Marshals that want to work for the foreclosure attorneys - Barnes and Paolillo, Sr. There are around 50-60 Marshals in New Haven County and many, or all of them if offered would take some work. They used to have a "High Sheriff," usually from the Valley or the suburbs, that decided who got what jobs when and where. Foreclosure attorneys never had any say in the process. And neither should the City which they don't.

As I read the Perez language it never mentions disqualification from the list based on being related to the purchasing agent or any Alderman. At a minimum that needs to be included considering this is more about keeping people off the list rather than putting them on a list, right Jorge?

I believe the intent here is two fold: a) take Criscuolo and Voigt off the Marshal list as they are too close to DeStefano; and b) put Marshals like Paolillo, Sr on the list as he and his son (a.k.a Al the Undertaker) hate DeStefano.

Carole, so right you are.

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | June 5, 2008 2:25 PM

Hey how about this idea: an ordinance that rotates the City's use of business it does with banks. I mean why should the city use one or two banks instead for ten.

Posted by: James | June 5, 2008 5:16 PM

Shill, your analogy falls flat. If another bank offered a better rate of return to the city, the city would (or should) do business with that bank. What we're seeing here is the equivalent of doing business with an bank that charges you exorbitant fees because you're buddies with the manager.

Posted by: Yair | June 5, 2008 6:55 PM

True, I went too far with my analogy. I was responding in part to a tendency I've noticed around here to always assume that if someone is making a lot of money then something is wrong.

With respect to the marshal system, I agree it seems crooked -- not exactly because a couple of marshals are getting all the work, but because work like this shouldn't be done in this way at all. Why can't a city employee do it as part of their regular job, for a salary? The current system naturally generates either corruption and favoritism, or as with the proposed fixes, extra bureaucracy.

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | June 5, 2008 8:02 PM

This plan is nothing more than a ruse to take work away from two individuals that are close to the Mayor - period. This is not about clean government, it's about getting rid of a couple of the Mayor's guys - Criscuolo and Voigt.

Look if it would really work better to have a rotating list of Marshals the City would have done it already. All they care about is getting the tax dollars that are due - trust me I was there. They don't care who does the work as long as they are aggressive in their collections. I have said it before and I will say it again, Marshals are nothing short of bounty hunters on scofflaws. Timid, mild mannered individuals need not apply.

This is just an attempt for Jorge to show that he can take down two of the closest people to the Mayor. By doing so he hopes it sends a message to others that he can knock out anyone.

Posted by: James | June 5, 2008 10:41 PM

Wha? Shill, are you trying to tell me that the city always does what is most cost effective and efficient? If there were a better way the city would be doing it, so the current system must be best? Ergo, the city is run as best as it can be in this, the best of possible worlds? I don't know what to say to that. I've just sort of got my head cocked to one side like a confused puppy.

Seriously? You don't think there are people out there that can do the same job for less? No corruption or patronage in the system. Criscuolo gets the work because he's just so damned good at it? If he didn't raise all sorts of cash for the mayor, he'd still be getting the call and making money had over fist because nobody else out there can do what he does? I don't care if all the work is done by a single person, as long as the fees are reasonable and the process is transparent and efficient. But this process is all sorts of inefficient and pays well beyond the skills involved.

Honestly, I usually find you insightful and level headed. I can't believe that this is what you're saying. Can you enlighten me? Or are you really the Shill you claim to be?

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | June 6, 2008 9:06 AM

James allow me to clarify my statement. There are times that the city can alwyas improve or do more efficently the work that gets done - we both agree on that.

The question is on Criscoulo. Now unless something dramatic has changed in NH since my days the foreclosure attorneys pick the Marshals they use. ALL attorneys pick the Marshals they use for anything - tax warrants, liz pendence, divorce papers, etc.

Criscoulo is a go getter, but that is also what gets that guy in trouble all the time. He gets the work from the attorneys because they know he gets the papers served in a quick manner which lets them draft more writs.

The rates that the Marshals charge are all set by statute which were voted on by the general assembly. For some legislators to pass Marshal rate increases and then argue that cities should regulate those rates is intellectually dishonest to say the least. They are the enablers that establish the rates.

I guess that legally the city could just hire someone as staff and have them do the service work - just as they could by keeping all the foreclosure attorney work in house. But to do so you need to hire staff and it is much cheaper and efficient to just outsource the work to outside law firms and Marshals.

In this case would the city do better by having the work done in-house? I believe that answer to be no. having outside law firms write the writs and Marshals serve the papers makes more sense.

Do we need more than 4-5 Marshals doing the work to serve the some 300-400 writs a year? Only if the intent is to keep these Marshals from making too much money. Its not a work load isues, I bet you could have the job done with 2-3 Marshals. Rather it is an issue of keeping one or two people off a list to show that you are the guy with the juice that can take work with people close to the mayor - thats all this is.

If Perez is so darn upset over somebody making too much money why doesn't he introduce language to regulate paycheck chasing places or the rent-a-centers that act as nothing more than loan sharks? Arguably these places have greater impact on residents lives than an individual that serves tax warrants on scofflaws. But again this is not Perez's aim. He isn't really looking to fix anything rather to monkey up the works and prove that he is still relevant to any political process in the city.

Let me recap my tirade here. Yes the city can and should do some things more efficiently - hiring a "city" marshal isn't one of them. Criscuolo hustles but I agree that does not mean he should get all the work. Perez's intentions are to make himself relevant by showing he has enough juice to take work from supporters of the mayor.

One last thought here: how much longer will DeStefano let Perez act as if he is running for Mayor before the other shoe drops and there is all out war? All I have to say to Perez is "beware not to wake the sleeping giant." Jorge you are borrowed time at the pace you are going.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | June 6, 2008 9:31 AM

I just want to thank Jorge for leading the way to a better and honest New Haven. It is not just this one thing that needs to be fixed! I is a ton of these one things that are hurting this city. This is a start. But if you review the wasteful spending within the different departments (if we can get the papers) there are other cases similar to this one. So to make a stand on one leads to change in others!!

Posted by: Tim Holahan | June 6, 2008 11:25 AM

After organizing a panel discussion on the budget in April, I've spent a fair amount of time at meetings of the BOA Finance Committee and the full Board lately, trying to educate myself about the budgetary and decision-making process.

My sense about Jorge Perez is that his desire to see a more open and accurate accounting of the way the city spends its money is genuine. I'm not suggesting that he's above politics, but this proposal seems reasonable on its face. If it needs some tweaking to make it work better with the reality of the foreclosure system, call your alder or Jorge and suggest some changes, but don't reject it out of hand.

It is wrong that the three most-highly-paid marshals chair Democratic Town Committees in the greater New Haven area. Whether or not that reflects actual patronage, the appearance is unacceptable.

It is even more wrong that politically-connected marshals would grant special dispensations to politically-connected citizens, as has been clearly documented in these pages. In well-run institutions, people who behave in that way are dismissed.

Posted by: Exiled Italian Shill | June 6, 2008 11:27 AM

Cedarhill - how does the Marshal Plan save the city money and where is the wasteful spending in forclosure attorneys and the Marshal service? I do not understand your comment.

PS - Are you aware that Perez created a $180,000 hole in the budget? Not very "honest" or "better" of him was it? Look what he did in fire overtime and and a fake attrition cut of a cadet dropping out of the police academy.

Posted by: James | June 6, 2008 11:28 AM

Shill, thanks. Makes sense. Part of my concern is that marshals are overused. They are sent out in situations where a lesser tactic could achieve the same goals and there seems to be a lot of redundancy in the system. But you are absolutely correct that if statute dictates pay, then it would seem more reasonable for Perez to attempt to reduce rates rather than spread work around.

As for Perez's political ambitions, I'm not familiar enough with the creatures that lurk City Hall to agree or disagree. But I will agree that your "giant" is sleeping and has been asleep at the switch for the last 3 or 4 years. He could use some waking up.