Elicker Fires Bartlett; Bartlett Vows To Fight

How in the world does a politically appointed hack end up with a 4 year contract as a city employee? Even the Mayor doesn't get a contract???

Draining the swamp

Let's hope this action was thoroughly vetted and conducted by the new Labor director, who has extensive knowledge of labor law. New Haven does not need another huge labor lawsuit.

Bartlett continues to do damage to the city...

About Time Notes:

The Alders should bar any further multi-year employment contracts. Not like the NHBOE had a spending freeze ; then kept spending.

Mayor Elicker has many years of graft and corruption to wade through. This is not a situation that can be blamed on any one mayor but it sure can be blamed on the DEMOCRATS, who have had a stranglehold on the NH Mayor's Office since 1954. They have wrecked this City, sold it to Yale, and extracted graft like little kings.
I hope Elicker can handle this and he has my support to do the job right!

Has there any serious discussion of increasing the term for mayor to 4 years. It is not enough time for a new mayor to actually do something nor is it enough time for voters to judge. The above article highlights the other problem. Contracts and appointees will over lap elections and administrations. We are a big enough city not to treat the position of mayor as if we are a small suburb.

No, no George! Term limits is what we need on a local level. Then, I could go for a 4 year term. Also- term limits on state and federal offices as well. The citizenry would have to vote on this to change the charter, are you up for a fight??? No more sweet contract hires for 4 years with sweet buy-out clauses, either.

1644, I also hope the termination was vetted. But there will be a lawsuit in any case and the city will incur substantial costs even if it prevails.

Kevin: There's already an absurd CHRO complaint, which means a lawsuit later. Hopefully, the prospective litigation costs have been balanced against the two years salary still owed under the contract. It too bad we don't have a "loser pays" litigation system, like most English law jurisdictions.

I don't know this person. I have followed the stories that have dogged this individual, in this news source and elsewhere. He seems to have been the inventor of his own professional demise, beginning under Harp's administration and now concluded under Elicker's. All I can say is, Dude, this is New Haven. In the city of New Haven, you don't get fired for being gay, black or male. Most times you don't even get fired for being incompetent. So, you must have really done some seriously stupid stuff to be terminated. Let's hope that your attempt to sue the city while playing the gay race card is greeted with the disdain it deserves and is quickly assigned to the judicial wastebasket labeled, "Next".

Kind of arguing both sides. 4 year contract too long, Mayor term too short.
Keep the mayors term at 2 years. If the mayor's good, he stays in. If he's bad, we can get him out without waiting 4 full years.

It may have been a cheaper price tag for the city to offer Mr. Bartlett a "going away" package.

Surely, everyone knew that Mayor Ellicker was going fire Jason. But at what cost to the taxpayers?

Sadly, this move wasn't made by Harp, but left up to Ellicker instead.

If Jason was fired unjustifiably by Ellicker, as was Nicole Jefferson by Harp, then the courts will award him accordingly. But this begs a more salient question. We cannot allow our egos to consume us by firing persons we do not like or disagree with; and while doing so, ignore the financial hardship levied upon the citizenry.

Pivoting......

If a four year term were currently in existence, then I would be supportive of it. But it isn't. And for those protectionist who are lobbying for such an idea, if you have just moved to NH, then you get a free pass, but if you have been living in NH for multiple years, where were you when the mayor was not Ellicker?

@Brian L. Jenkins
There is nothing "protectionist" or new about raising the issue of a four year term for mayor.
Periodically through the past several years, the subject has come up. In order to change from a 2 year to a 4 year term, the City Charter must be changed. There is a procedure and a process to get that done.
Among several reasons for change, a primary reason to change to 4 year terms is that it would be more cost effective. Elections as well as campaigns cost a lot of money. Having them every 4 years saves taxpayers money.
Having mayoral elections at the same time as presidential elections would increase voter turnout. That would be another plus.
These are two strong arguments for change in New Haven that have absolutely nothing to do with the present Mayor, Justin Elicker.
If the charter were to be changed in this regard, it would not automatically expand the current term of the Mayor. ELICKER would have to stand for re-election under a new charter rule expanding the term.
Talk of charter change to a 4 year term is not some slick, sinister, secretive, diabolical scheme to protect Elicker. It would be a wise move for New Haven to make regardless of who is currently in office. The two issues are not connected.

@Brain Been a resident of New Haven 32 years arrived I think Dielettos last election, Daniels delaying of Prince John's coronation and his eventual ascension to the throne. It just seems for a new mayor to begin will be 6 months then the next year its gearing for re election it's hard to really judge a mayor in a year and a half by three and a half we should know. Two years only helps the career bureaucrats to continue wheel power behind the scenes.

Okay, here we see a situation with two stories and the real reasons that trigger something like this. When a new chief comes in it is custom to review, assess and clean house. When emotions are brought into the mix, the formula becomes resistance. Ask, are allegations true? It sounds like to me more than what is being presented to the public. Pero, el que sabe, sabe. Till the tale tells the truth.