Sections
Neighborhoods
Features
Follow Us
NHI Newsletter
Legal Notices
Some Favorite Sites
- 5 Snacks After 10
- Abram Katz
- African independent
- At Risk for HD
- Back To Basics
- barista
- Branford Eagle
- Business NH
- Conn Art Scene
- Cornwall-On-Hudson
- Crosscut
- CT Business Litig
- CT Capitol Report
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Enviro Headlines
- CT Green Scene
- CT Law Tribune
- CT Local Politics
- CT Mirror
- CT News Junkie
- CT Watchdog
- CTV
- Design New Haven
- Gotham Gazette
- Hartford Guardian
- Josiah Brown
- Karman Turn
- La Voz Hispana
- Laurel Club
- Len's Lens
- Magrisso Forte
- Media Attache
- Media Nation
- Medical Intelligence
- Middletown Eye
- MinnPost
- My Left Nutmeg
- NBC Connecticut
- NH Advocate
- NH Register
- NH Review of Books
- NH Youth Map
- Northampton Media
- OneWorld
- Only In Bridgeport
- Oral History Project
- Reddit NH
- Road To Greenness
- Saved By Design
- See Click Fix
- Smartpill Design
- Specials In NH
- St. Louis Beacon
- Taste Of NH
- Tom Ficklin
- Valley Independent Sentinel
- Voice of SD
- VT Digger
- WFSB-TV
- WPKN Today
- WTNH
- Yale Daily News
- YourCT
Government/ Community Links
- Advocate Calendar
- Agency on Aging
- Animal Shelter Volunteers
- Arte Inc.
- Arts Council
- Beth El Keser Israel
- Bike New Haven
- Chamber of Commerce
- Children's Museum
- City of New Haven
- CitySeed
- Citywide Youth
- Community Loan Fund
- Community Mediation
- ConnCAN
- Creative Arts Workshop
- CT BAEO
- CT Tech Council
- Dariba Referrals
- Data Haven
- Elm City Cycling
- Elmseed
- Empower NH
- Friends Of Wooster Sq.
- GAVA
- Habitat For Humanity
- Info New Haven
- IRIS
- Jazz Haven
- Jewish Federation
- Job Finder
- Junta
- Labor History
- LEAP
- Legal Aid Network
- Literacy Coalition
- Magrisso Forte
- Mary Wade
- Music Haven
- New Haven 828
- New Haven Chorale
- New Haven Reads
- New Life Corp.
- NH Bulletin
- NH Land Trust
- NH/Leon Sister City
- NHS
- Orchestra NE
- PAR
- Parents Available to Help
- Pat Dillon
- Peace News
- PechaKucha
- Planned Parenthood
- Police
- Promoting Enduring Peace
- Public Allies CT
- Public Library
- Public Schools
- Public Works
- Rainbow Girls
- Register Calendar
- REX
- ROOF
- SAMA
- SCSU Events
- Share Our Voices
- Shubert
- Solar Youth
- Soul-O-Ettes
- Squash Haven
- United Way
- Urban Design League
- Urban Resources Initiative
- Ward 25 Blog
- Ward 26 Blog
- Westville Chabad
- Westville Renaissance
- Westville Synagogue
- Workforce Alliance
- Yale Events
- Yeshiva NH Shul
- Yeshiva Of NH
- Youth Continuum
Audit: Marshal Shook Down Businesses
by Melissa Bailey | Jun 22, 2010 11:17 am
(35) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author
Posted to: City Hall, Legal Writes
A politically connected marshal managed to “coerce” a $5,000 delinquent tax fee from a business that had already paid up—and “misrepresented” facts in order to collect a $2,000 fee on a $133 tax bill.
Those details leap from a scathing, previously unreleased audit that led the city to overhaul how it collects delinquent taxes.
The audit, by RSM McGladrey, Inc., was released Monday to the Independent as a result of a Freedom of Information request. The city hired McGladrey on Nov. 25, 2008, to investigate a series of taxpayer complaints about how the city handled the administration of tax warrants to collect unpaid tax bills. The city released two drafts of the audit dated March and May 2009. The city never made the audit public.
Click here to read the May report.
The reports center on the conduct of state marshal and mayoral fundraiser Peter Criscuolo (pictured). At the time, Criscuolo was the city’s highest-grossing marshal, and its only go-to man for hunting down personal property tax scofflaws. Whenever a business hadn’t paid its personal property tax, the city would hire Criscuolo to issue an alias tax warrant. By law, he could collect up to a 15 percent fee on the overdue tax bill.
After interviewing taxpayers, auditors came up with eight examples where Criscuolo had collected excessive fees based on “coercion,” an erroneous tax warrant, or misrepresented facts. The marshal is no stranger to accusations of aggressive or rule-breaking tax collection—click here, here and here for other stories. Criscuolo did not return phone messages requesting comment for this story.
The city pulled Criscuolo off the tax-warrant beat for a while, reformed its procedures—and has since resumed giving him work.
Exhibit A: Rite Aid
Using a verbal threat, Criscuolo collected a $5,426 fee on a tax account that was not delinquent, according to the audit. Here’s what happened, according to the McGladrey report:
Rite Aid Corporation was issued a $30,458 tax bill for personal property tax for its store at 46 Church St. (pictured), due July 2, 2008. The company cut a check for the full amount on June 18; the check cleared on June 25.
On June 24, however, the office of former city Tax Collector C.J. Cuticello erroneously issued a tax warrant for over $36,000. Criscuolo served the warrant at the retail store in person. He “threatened to seize the taxpayer’s business,” the auditors found.
The manager notified Rite Aid’s corporate office, which called Criscuolo by phone and explained that the taxes had been paid. The taxpayer left phone messages with Cuticello’s office, but none were returned.
“To avoid a disruption to their business,” Rite Aid agreed to pay $16,143. The company cut a check for that amount, which included $5,426 in marshal fees. Thus, Criscuolo collected over $5,000 on a tax bill that was already paid in full, auditors concluded.
“He appears to have done so to a reputable business by coercion,” wrote Michael J. O’Neill, director of RSM McGladrey, who prepared the report. O’Neill noted that the errant warrant stemmed from the tax collector’s office. That office “failed to properly oversee this matter and to institute procedures” to keep track of how warrants were managed.
Exhibit B: LaFarge North America
Criscuolo was dispatched to the New Haven Cement Terminal on Waterfront Street to collect $133 in outstanding taxes. Using a phone call and a letter instead of an official tax warrant, he made off with a $2,015 fee by “misrepresenting” the amount of taxes due, according to the audit.
In this case, the auditors found there might have been improper collusion between Criscuolo and Cuticello’s office. Here’s what happened, according to the McGladrey report:
LaFarge paid two personal property tax accounts on Aug. 9, 2008, but underpaid by $132.79. As is common procedure, the tax collector issued a warrant for the outstanding amount as well as the next tax bill due Jan. 1, 2009. The warrant summed to $4,569.
LaFarge cut a check on Oct. 7 for $13,426.93. The check was too big—it represented the amount the city had demanded on Aug. 6, before LaFarge had paid up on its two accounts. The tax collector’s office sent the check back “without any cover letter or explanation.”
Then LaFarge heard from Criscuolo in late October with a new demand for $15,679.65. Criscuolo didn’t issue a tax warrant. He wrote a letter on his own stationary and made a phone call. The company complied with the demand. Criscuolo wrote that the amount due comprised $2,015 in marshal fees, a couple hundred dollars in other interest and fees, and $13,426.93, which was exactly the amount of the company’s rejected check.
The tax collector was “unable to explain how Criscuolo would have been aware of the amount of the erroneous check,” O’Neill wrote. “The information needed to perpetrate this scheme could have been gained without city authorization, or with the assistance of city personnel.”
O’Neill concluded that Criscuolo “misrepresented” the amount of the warrant to the taxpayer. The tax collector’s office failed to open an investigation into the matter in order to determine how Criscuolo learned about the rejected check, or to evaluate Criscuolo’s conduct, O’Neill wrote.
Reached Monday, city Comptroller Mark Pietrosimone said the auditor misunderstood the role of city personnel in that incident. He said the city found no need to reprimand anyone in the tax collector’s office. Tax Collector Cuticello was on his way out at the time, he noted.
Cuticello retired in May 2009. He did so of his own volition, not because of the problems found by the audit, city spokeswoman Jessica Mayorga said.
“I never left because of that. I left because I had an opportunity to retire and do different things,” Cuticello said Tuesday. He served nine years, during which time, he said, he instituted extensive controls and policies that were absent before. He said he left the office “in the best shape it had been in 15, 20 years.”
“It wasn’t confusion with my office,” Cuticello said of the instances cited in the audit. “It was confusion with the assessor’s office. There were multiple accounts sometimes for the same tax that the assessor’s office created. When the assessor does something and sends it to the tax office, as far as I was concerned it’s a legitimate account.”
Exhibit C: F.J. Dahill Company, Inc.
Though F.J. Dahill company had already paid its taxes, Criscuolo threatened to shut down the business, extracted a $23,000 tax payment, and made off with a $3,528 fee, according to the audit.
As in many of these cases, the problem started with an erroneous tax warrant: The city double-billed Dahill for a $17,697.04 tax bill and issued a $23,515.78 warrant on Oct. 2, 2008. Here’s what happened, according to the audit:
Criscuolo made a phone call. He “threatened to seize the taxpayer’s business, despite the taxpayer’s explanation that the taxes were not delinquent.” Dahill called the tax collector, who acknowledged the warrant had been issued in error.
Despite that fact, Cuticello “did not compel Criscuolo to relent in his efforts,” O’Neill wrote. Later that same day, Criscuolo knocked on the company’s door and continued to demand payment. Dahill told Criscuolo that the city had admitted the error. Criscuolo called the tax collector’s office, then accused the company of lying, according to the audit.
Criscuolo told the taxpayer that Cuticello was out of the office and could not have spoken with Dahill. He said he’d come back the following day to collect payment. The next day, Dahill wrote a check to the city for the erroneous tax bill. Criscuolo wouldn’t accept a check to the city. He demanded the check be written out to him personally. He claimed he was waiving the marshal fee, according to the audit. Dahill cut Criscuolo a check for $23,515.78.
In November, the taxpayer got word from the city that he was delinquent on his tax bill, because Criscuolo had passed along only $19,987.78 to the city on behalf of the taxpayer, and had kept $3,528 for himself.
Exhibit D: Sargent Enterprises, Inc.
In this case, the Sargent hardware company tried to pay its taxes directly to the city, but was allegedly forced to pay Criscuolo a full $538 in marshal fees. Criscuolo paid the taxpayer’s bill directly from his own bank account, and failed to prove that he had served the warrant within the 90-day time limit required by law, according to the audit. Here’s what happened, according to the audit:
The company owed $1,735.83 on a July 2008 tax bill. A warrant was issued in October for $3,581, which represents the amount past due and early collection of the January 2009 bill.
Sargent paid the $1,735.83 bill directly to the city on Jan. 23, 2009. Despite that payment, Criscuolo went after Sargent for the full tax warrant. Criscuolo cut a $1,845.98 check from his own trustee account on behalf of the taxpayer on March 11. He told the city he had received $2,383.98 from Sargent, and charged the full $538 in fees, despite the fact that Sargent had already made a payment directly to the city. Criscuolo’s check was deposited with the tax collector 39 days after Sargent paid Criscuolo, according to the report.
O’Neill found this case “problematic” on two fronts: According to a new city protocol, the tax collector wasn’t supposed to take money directly from a marshal. And Criscuolo failed to prove that he had issued the warrant before a Dec. 16 deadline.
Exhibit E: PXG Health LLC
In this case, Criscuolo collected an $8,000 fee on a $852.30 delinquency, according to the audit.
The taxpayer owed $852.30 on its July 2007 property tax bill. As is allowed by law, the tax collector issued a warrant on Oct. 2, 2008 for not just the delinquency, but the next payment due. The warrant totaled $56,837.77. Criscuolo charged a $8,000 fee, just under the 15 percent cap.
In another case, Criscuolo was given an erroneous warrant from the tax collector’s office for the Levy Dental Group. The marshal “threatened to disrupt their business unless payment was made.” The taxpayer called Cuticello’s office, but did not get a call back for “several days,” according to the audit.
Comptroller Pietrosimone said most of these cases were referred to the outside auditors after taxpayers complained to the city. He said the city conducted its own internal audit to address the problems, then hired McGladrey for extra support.
“No Documented Procedures” In Place
Four pages of each of the 12- and 13-page reports were devoted to Criscuolo’s conduct. Based on the above cases, the auditors concluded the city should stop using a single marshal to serve all its tax warrants. At the time, the city would hand Criscuolo as many as 500 warrants all on the same day in October, according to Pietrosimone.
The system was “inefficient” and disorderly, auditors noted: Several warrants, some with large balances, were never served. Two checks were found among warrants that were never sent to the tax collector for deposit. The volume of warrants “precluded timely service,” and the city did not communicate regularly with Criscuolo to see if taxes had been paid, auditors found.
In putting together the audit, McGladrey interviewed taxpayers whose checks had been refunded. In several cases, the tax collector’s office rejected taxpayers’ payments because the case had already been sent to Criscuolo for collection, auditors found. In some cases, checks were mailed back with “little or no explanation.”
Futher, auditors found “no documented procedures” for picking which accounts to be warranted, selecting and overseeing state marshals, tracking the status of warrants, and how the marshal is supposed to pass along payments to the tax collector.
McGladrey suggested the city stop using only one marshal to serve tax warrants. It suggested the city write guidelines for criteria for selecting marshals; consider hiring more marshals for the job. It also suggested getting rid of marshals and instead appointing city staff to serve as constables to serve warrants instead, using the revenue from fees to fund the new positions.
Pietrosimone said the city rejected that last suggestion—the tax collector is already a “constable,” according to the charter. The city opted to create a new system that spread out the work between more marshals.
A New Way Of Serving
The city was already working on the new system while auditors were investigating. In May 2009, aldermen passed a new law by which the city would go out to bid for marshal services, with the hopes of driving costs down.
Eight marshals responded. They agreed to lower their prices, including capping tax warrant fees at 10.5 percent, instead of the 15 percent allowed by state statute.
The new tax warrant system was rolled out in October 2009. For the first time, property tax scofflaws got letters advising them they were about to be hit with a tax warrant. If they didn’t pay, their accounts were added to a tax warrant list. The list was sorted according to how much they owed, with the biggest debt on the top, said Pietrosimone (pictured).
Under the new system, each of five marshals got only 20 warrants to start with—instead of one man getting 500 all at once. They had weekly or bi-weekly meetings with the new tax collector, Maureen Villani.
“We’re forced to keep better track of the warrants now,” Pietrosimone said.
Pietrosimone said the new tax warrant system has drawn no complaints—except for one from a strip club, involving marshal Billy Nolan. Click here to read the Register’s Mary O’Leary’s report on that.
Criscuolo is still working for the city, serving tax warrants. Asked what repercussions the marshal suffered as a result of the scathing audit, Pietrosimone said once the city learned about the various complaints around December 2008, the city pulled all the marshal’s warrants.
“You have no more authority to serve any more warrants. You’re not doing anything else for us until we get all this straightened out,” the city told Criscuolo, Pietrosimone said.
Mayoral Chief of Staff took Criscuolo aside and had “conversations” with him, Pietrosimone said. When the bids were reopened in early 2009, Criscuolo jumped back into the tax-warrant work.
“He followed the process,” said Pietrosimone. “As far as I understood, he was still allowed to do the work because of the type of repercussions that we did,” by yanking the remaining warrants and talking to him.
“He’s been made aware of the concerns, and changes have taken place,” added spokeswoman Mayorga.
Post a Comment
- Commenting has closed for this entry
Comments
posted by: throw the book on June 22, 2010 11:58am
... I hope one of these businesses files a criminal complaint and that this guy has the book thrown at him.
And the City can’t figure out what businesses are talking about when they say New Haven isn’t business-friendly. I hope the EDC and the Chamber get involved in making sure this never happens again.
posted by: Westvillelocal on June 22, 2010 12:43pm
Clearly there are at least 5 documented cases in which a state law has been broken by a city employee but yet he continues to be given work?
Johnny, have any comments on this or are we just supposed to ignore this too?
posted by: streever on June 22, 2010 12:45pm
Mayorga, does it kill you to have to say such ...things? I hope so. In my personal experience you are an intelligent person with a lot of integrity. Unfortunately this is the administrations way: hire smart capable people and make them apologize for horrific mistakes in governance that should never have happened.
Between this and the statement that he was going to “talk to the other marshals about their low bids” it is simply idiotic for the city to continue to use this man. Yes, I know he is extremely connected, but just tell him how it is and move on.
posted by: streever on June 22, 2010 12:48pm
Dear businesses screwed by this man: please sue the city. The only way to get my fellow citizens riled up over these shenagians is when the city taxes are affected, and I am sure you can nail them to the wall with a lawsuit over this.
The other option is for City Hall to simply start operating honestly, transparently, and without the high levels of corruption and patronage that plague our city, but I have little faith that they will without some financial incentive.
posted by: Justice on June 22, 2010 1:22pm
... In January, in person, I changed my car registration at DMV, to my new town. So far this month, the City of New Haven tax bill has not showed up in my new mailbox. In an injustice, state law puts the responsibility on the taxpayer to pay, not the town to take responsibility for competently delivering the bill. I know from past experience how time and again NH can screw up paperwork. After moving a 1/4 mile within New Haven and having my tax bill go to the old address the first year (my fault) and two more years (City’s fault). That second year they blamed DMV, DMV said they had my new address on a computer file that went to New Haven, but the address was later changed. Of course, the dunning letters reached me! Whatever…
posted by: Louis on June 22, 2010 1:38pm
Each taxpayer mentioned should contact the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office with a complaint.
posted by: concerned on June 22, 2010 1:44pm
The FBI should investigate this guy - ... Forget about continuing to serve warrants - why is he still walking around with a badge?
posted by: Dominik on June 22, 2010 1:52pm
Please File a Complaint as Public Citizens against this Marshall to:
State Marshal Commission
Administrative Offices
165 Capitol Ave., Room 483
posted by: Sunday on June 22, 2010 2:37pm
There need to be a major investigation by the state not the city it’s obvious they are ripping off the tax-payers. The city will never admitt to any wrong doing. Remember these are the people who pay top dollars to the Mayor’s campaign.
posted by: William Kurtz on June 22, 2010 3:23pm
This [guy] could teach Joe Barton a thing or two about “shakedowns.”
posted by: new haven resident on June 22, 2010 3:41pm
WITH A LITTLE BIT OF WORK IT WILL BE JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE A INVESTIGATION REACHES THE ROYAL THRONE OF QUEEN JOHN
posted by: Electedofficial on June 22, 2010 3:58pm
I am perplexed why the city of New Haven continues to allow this vendor to do collections on our behalf. The marshal commission should consider each and every allegation of improper collections.
posted by: New to NH on June 22, 2010 5:36pm
Criscuolo is still working for the city? You’ve got to be kidding. Fire him, and then fire the person who re-hired him after they got the results from the audit. The Mayor needs to come forward and explain why he would allow this to happen and immediately rectify the situation. Rite Aid and other business shouldn’t be harassed by shake down artists hire by the municipality. They PAY the taxes!!!!!
posted by: mm on June 22, 2010 6:51pm
Any anecdotes about his escapades as Johnny Boy’s fund raiser? I bet they’d be interesting too.
posted by: streever on June 22, 2010 7:45pm
Another citizen filed a complaint which Blumenthal, which I seconded: I won’t out him unless he wants to put his name on here.
I also sent complaints to Jodi Rell, the Ethics Commission, and will follow up with the State Marshals tomorrow.
On a related note to Mr Criscuolo, this is a story about him and businesses in North Haven:
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/10/21/news/metro/b1-nhsigns-art.txt
posted by: cedarhillresident on June 22, 2010 8:26pm
I read this several times, trying to figure out HOW THE HELL does city hall even try to say we talked to him!!! Ya know what this is not what is pissing me off. What is pissing me off is ALL the crap that this administration repeatedly is doing to the taxpayers of this city!! Not only should this jack be investigated and prosecuted APPROPRIATELY but SOMEONE IS OKing this crap!! that person need to be made an example of, to the fullest extent of the law!
posted by: deeply concerned on June 22, 2010 9:00pm
... The real questions that need to be answered is who made the decision to appointment Criscuolo the only person to collect back taxes, and for what reason. His major fund raising roll with DeStefano’s campaign’s need’s close scrutiny on all levels. Did DeStefano dictate to departments he was the guy to get special privileges? Was he given specific details to target campaign contributions and where these contributions from people doing business with the city? Was he a part of a pay to play scheme? A full investigation is needed by law enforcement to fully understand what might have taken place and to assure the citizens of New Haven that this administration is in full compliance with the laws that govern this state. The citizens of New Haven deserve no less.
posted by: Doyens on June 22, 2010 9:15pm
This story is about officially sanctioned and supported corruption. It is a breach of trust and an abuse of taxpayers and is nothing short of extortion - unjustly threatening to seize a business and shut them down if inflated tax payments and fees aren’t immediately paid. The fact that Criscuolo is connected and a fundraiser for the mayor justifies this unscrupulous behavior? Is this the mayor’s payback for helping raise dollars and turn out voters?
How can taxpayers have any faith in City Hall when after nearly 30 years at the top of city government, 16 years as mayor, we are still plagued by thievery and abuse? Does anybody wonder why all the manufacturing jobs are gone? Why any business aside from Yale and YNHH of any girth has fled?
Peter Criscuolo stole from these businesses and he was aided by the tax collector’s office who mismanaged and willfully and needlessly set high tax warrants. Why? Because it’s legal or to help Criscuolo get higher fees because he’s a connected guy that helps the mayor?
Why does the tax collector assume the tax assessor has the accounts right? The checks and balances were not in place. While I’m glad some of that has been restored with these new protocols, the fact that it went on for years and that Criscuolo is still working for the city after these disclosures is unacceptable. The mayor’s message to citizens is that lying and misrepresenting facts is just dandy.
With such egregious cases, Criscuolo should have been summarily dismissed and the report should have been forwarded to the Attorney General’s office and the marshall’s service. Instead, it collected dust and after a short cooling off period and a fireside chat by the Chief of Staff, Criscuolo is back in business.
This is the latest example of an emerging pattern and practice of gross mismanagement and unreliable and irresponsible contracting at the highest levels of City Hall.
The idea that New Haven could ever be a “shining city on a hill” is a mirage. From dishonesty about graduation rates to budget matters; from union negotiations to development deals; from double dippers to dubious contracts, it’s a fiscal and ethical house of cards in which taxpayers cannot possibly have any confidence.
posted by: cedarhillresident on June 22, 2010 9:22pm
One more question…is this not some form of Racketeering?
Rico!
posted by: concerned on June 22, 2010 11:24pm
NHI - nice job editing my perfectly rational comment. why was a portion ... edited and replaced with an ellipse? way to suppress free speech…
[Editor’s note: We adhere to laws governing libel. Even if the commenter’s not hiding behind a false name.]
posted by: JB on June 22, 2010 11:51pm
This guy ... is suitable for employment by the city administration? What a scandal.
posted by: will on June 23, 2010 5:27am
Criscuolo’s conduct amounts to “theft by deception” doesn’t it? ...
posted by: Anone on June 23, 2010 8:40am
Doyen,
Step one step further:
A lot of money that was not owed was paid by businesses because it was cheaper than fighting it.
The same is true now with O’Brien’s arbitrary tax assessments.
That money goes into the city’s coffers and never is repaid. Same is true now, businesses are paying taxes they know they don’t owe because they have no choice.
So, you have to include that fact, that the net effect of this has probably been that it has filled the city’s coffers of needed cash it mostly will never pay back.
The city probably anticipated this post game discussion, the possibility of the press covering it, same as with O’Brien/assessor’s policies now. The idea that no one knows what they are doing when they are doing it is absurd.
Destefano has ways had an us versus them attitude and knows exactly how much people will take, how much they will grouse to the press, grovel, resign themselves, how much they will ultimately take from city hall. The answer is, a hell of a lot, more than in lots of other places. C’mon everyone, let’s not be naive.
He’s no idiot, he is expert at what city residents will take and not scared to push his weight around to protect his legacy and continue to lead this city, self servingly and not particularly comptently I might add.
Didn’t the city ultimately get away with it in the case of these tax warrants? Didn’t lots of businesses end up paying the taxes they don’t owe even if the city finds itself stuck paying a couple back?
Ditto for individuals?
Wouldn’t Destefano ultimately call this a success and won’t he do the same for what O’Brien is doing now at the tax assessor’s office? Once it is over, and audited, and criticized by experts and litigated by those few that can afford the headache and expense, isn’t it racked up as yet another success? Don’t you think Destefano knows this is the process?
Isn’t that the strategy?
Let’s get real. It is naive to suppose city hall is so naive as to not know what it does.
posted by: Cedarhillresident on June 23, 2010 10:18am
Wow this is just sad
share your feelings at this email address
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
posted by: Guy Lombardo on June 23, 2010 12:16pm
I can’t believe this guy, Peter Criscuolo, is still paid by the city. You would think that because of all the trouble he has been involved with in the past, that they’d want nothing to do with him. Sometimes nepotism is stronger than logic.
...
posted by: ouch on June 23, 2010 9:29pm
oh my god…what the hell is going on in new haven….and don’t tell me the mayor does not know….he should be investigated like Hartford mayor perez…...i am sick and tired of this administration…
posted by: cba on June 24, 2010 8:22am
If the accusations in this story are true, [he] should be made to disgorge all of his illegal fees and pay damages for overcharging.Where is Blumenthal on this guy’s actions ? No where because he is ... local chairman for the Democratic party.
posted by: les palfuss on June 24, 2010 11:19am
audit one year ago an did nothing maybe he’s involved too. also what about the three city employees who fir terminated rregardingwrong doing at stage door johnnies
posted by: David Cameron on June 24, 2010 2:43pm
The conduct described above and in the McGladrey audit certainly should be reported to the State Marshal Commission and the Attorney General.
But if the companies mentioned above were in fact subjected to verbal threats to pay taxes and fees on accounts that were not delinquent, paid taxes and fees based on misrepresentation of the amounts due, or had a portion of their payments withheld from the city by Mr. Criscuolo, they - and any other taxpayers who have had similar experiences with a marshal -should refer the matter also to the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office in Rocky Hill for possible investigation.
The CSAO has a unit - the financial crimes bureau - that investigates instances of government corruption and other offenses against public integrity, including financial crimes. The address is: Chief State’s Attorney’s Office, 300 Corporate Place, Rocky Hill, CT 06067.
posted by: CapeCoveKayakClub on June 24, 2010 5:16pm
As long as the Mayor continues to use threats and intimidation as his greatest management tools for those serving below his “reign”, then stories such as this will continue to reveal themselves. CJ Cuticello was serving the mayor as a valuable employee as long as his collection numbers were up, going so far as to chase cars like a dog in the street. “Don’t tell me how you did it, just get it done” has been the mantra in DeStefano City Hall offices since day one. He now has chosen to put all his eggs in the Ned Lamont basket in the hopes of becoming Director of Economic Development should Lamont win the Governors race, thereby extricating himself from future problems surrounding his Bully Pulpit Administration. Dan Malloy is looking better everyday.
posted by: cedarhillresident on June 25, 2010 6:19am
Cape
I was watching a Ned Commercial this morning and he said He will be fighting the pay to play people…..then he alines himself with Johnny??
posted by: will on June 25, 2010 7:20am
Regardless of where the fault can ultimately be traced, I hope the right people/companies read this blog - especially Cameron’s comment above. I don’t care what his boss told him to do. If I were these people I’d want a pound of flesh big time!
posted by: Annex Resident on June 25, 2010 11:11am
I will push the city to get rid of the marshals from the work all together. It’s shameful and it must stop. The city is suppose to work on behalf of city residents. This battle will be fought at the ballot box. This is not the end of this. Heads will roll if I have any say.
posted by: will on June 25, 2010 12:35pm
I still can’t fathom this article and the liaise fair attitude. I guess my LI background makes me a little more dramatic about such things or maybe politics there are a bit more transparent and nobody would dare think they could pull a stunt like this and get away with it. Whatever it is, the above story would be followed by at least a News 12 piece showing the guy being escorted in handcuffs. What gives? Almost every comment above talks AROUND the content of the article.
