Minita Sanghvi has an item on her agenda for the June 18,2024, Saratoga Springs City Council meeting to pay $49,946.60 to an attorney to represent Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran and his deputy, Stacy Connors, related to the on-call scandal. Sanghvi also has a resolution to transfer the city funds to pay for this. The language of Sanghvi’s resolution also authorizes more payments to the attorney in the future.
An actual bill or contract from the attorney or even the attorney’s name is missing. As the cost seems excessive on its face, it is disturbing that, as far as one can tell, the City Attorney has not reviewed a bill to determine if it is reasonable. It is even more disturbing that Sanghvi would put this forward for payment given the lack of documentation of the work that was done and a breakdown of the fees that were charged.
Readers may forbear my skepticism, but it seems more than coincidental that neither Sanghvi nor Moran attended the pre-agenda meeting this morning (June 17), at which they would have had to explain all of this. When Sanghvi’s deputy was questioned about the resolution and transfer of city funds to pay this bill, she declined to answer, telling the Council members present that Sanghvi would address the resolution at the Tuesday night meeting.
This is part of an ongoing pattern where Moran and Sanghvi add items after the pre-agenda meeting. This deprives the Mayor and other Commissioners of the ability to prepare for the Council meeting and denies the public of notification of the actions they are going to bring forth.
Here is a press release from Saratoga Springs Republican Chairman Mike Brandi and Sanghvi’s resolution.
SSSGOP Calls on City Council to Reject Moran’s Request for Taxpayer Funds for Private Attorneys to Respond to Criminal Subpoena
June 17, 2024
The Saratoga Springs Republican Committee is calling on the city council to reject the proposed resolution advanced by Commissioner of Finance Minita Sanghvi, which would provide $49,946.60 to pay the bill of a private attorney retained by Commissioner of Accounts Dillon Moran and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Connors in their defense against the criminal investigation related to the on-call scandal.
State Law and Public Officer Indemnification
Firstly, under state law, public officers are only entitled to indemnification in criminal matters after charges are dismissed or they are found not guilty. Taxpayers should not be burdened with the costs of a public official’s defense if there is potential for guilty conduct. This principle ensures that public funds are used judiciously and not in defense of potentially criminal actions.
Locally, Section 9-1 of the City Code provides for indemnification and defense of city officers in legal actions arising out of their official duty or scope of employment. It is an absurd proposition for one to claim that their official duty includes potentially criminal conduct. Certainly, the city would not be paying for a criminal defense attorney if an elected official were driving drunk in a city vehicle. This situation is no different.
Lack of Transparency and Adherence to City Policy
Secondly, neither Commissioner Moran nor Deputy Commissioner Connors have disclosed the identities of the attorneys they have hired. Nor have they provided a copy of the bills that are to be paid with this $49,946.60. Moreover, the city’s purchasing policy has not been followed to ensure that the city is obtaining a fair rate for these legal services or that the city is protected in the case of vendor misconduct. Attorneys retained by the City are required to produce evidence of certain insurance requirements, which has not occurred here. Finally, Section 8.1 of the City Charter makes it clear that only the Council may engage legal professionals. Moran has no independent right to retain counsel for himself at the cost of the City. Transparency and adherence to established procedures are fundamental to maintaining public trust and fiscal responsibility.
No Demonstrated Conflict or Incompetence in City Attorney’s Office
Thirdly, there has been no demonstration that the City Attorney’s Office is conflicted or incompetent in handling the subpoena. Precedents such as the cases of former Mayor Kelly and former Commissioner of Public Safety Dalton only involved the allocation of outside counsel after it was clearly established that there was a conflict of interest in them sharing counsel with the city. This crucial step has not been met in the current situation.
Chairman’s Statement
“Commissioner Moran’s brazen attempt to siphon taxpayer funds for his personal legal defense slush fund is not just inappropriate, it is an outright abuse of his position,” said SSGOP Chairman Mike Brandi. “The residents of Saratoga Springs should not be forced to bankroll his legal troubles, especially when there is no legitimate reason to bypass the City Attorney’s Office. Moran should not be allowed to play fast and loose with the law and then expect taxpayers to bail him out when he is found with his hand in the cookie jar. This blatant disregard for protocol and transparency is a slap in the face to every taxpayer and yet another blight on Moran’s already tattered record.”
Background on Investigation
The Saratoga County District Attorney has initiated a probe related to on-call pay for Saratoga Springs Deputy Commissioners. On April 24, 2024, Saratoga County Judge James Murphy III authorized subpoenas that were served on the city on April 25, 2024. The investigation is looking into misconduct regarding the claiming of thousands of dollars of on-call pay by certain city officers.
The SSGOP stands firm in its commitment to fiscal responsibility and transparency in government. We urge the city council to reject the request for taxpayer-funded private attorneys for Moran and Connors. It is imperative that taxpayer money is protected and used appropriately, ensuring that public trust is upheld.
Please contact Mike Brandi at this email with any questions.
Saratoga Springs Politics 
How ironic that Moran, who put up such a big stink about paying Meg Kelly’s legal bills for the AG’s witch hunt, is now expecting to get his bills approved without having to provide any information about what this attorney has actually done. And how sad that our Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi is facilitating all this as his co-conspirator.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Whether or not Commissioner Moran and his deputy are found guilty in this particular case, their legal expenses should be covered by the taxpayers. Refusing to do so would set an unfortunate precedent. Though both Commissioners Moran and Sanghvi as well as former Mayor Kim were critical of this practice when it involved the legal costs incurred by others in City government, it would be wrong deny coverage for actions associated with official positions.
The voters elected our Council members. The taxpayers must then take responsibility for their decisions. If there are concerns about their judgement or their actions, the next election is never more than two years away.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLike
Section 18 which the resolution to pay the bills specifically references that criminal charges are not covered per se. Should the official be found not guilty or should the state withdraw charges then the city would be required to reimburse them. This is covered under section 19 of the municple public officials act. As Brandi has pointed out, if an employee or official were to be driving a city vehicle on business drunk, the city would not pay for their legal defense.
LikeLike
If they were driving a City vehicle while drunk, they would be facing a serious charge of violating a vehicular traffic law applicable to everyone. The DA’s investigation is associated with a possible infraction which is directly associated with the official duties of an elected official and his deputy. Very different. Anyone who gets behind the wheel of a vehicle while drunk could be arrested for DWI. Only government officials can take actions that might be considered criminal violations associated with their official duties.
Also, a City employee operating a vehicle while drunk would hopefully lose his or her job and the City would not be required to pay for his legal defense of the DWI. However, the City would be liable for any damages incurred due to that employee’s operation of a vehicle while drunk. The City and the taxpayers are ultimately responsible.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLike
The resolution offered by Sanghvi specifically references Section 18 of the public officers law. That section specifically deals with indemnification of public officials in civil matters which, as far as we can tell, this is not since it is a criminal matter. Section 19 deals with the limits of indemnification for criminal matters. This is from section 18:
(b) Except as otherwise provided by law, the duty to indemnify and
save harmless prescribed by this subdivision shall not arise where the
injury or damage resulted from intentional wrongdoing or recklessness on
the part of the employee.
Section 19 indicates that the public official would only be covered if he/she is found to be innocent or the state drops the criminal proceedings. In that case the person would be reimbursed. It is reasonable that the public not pay for the defense of a corrupt official. In the case of Andrew Cuomo and Joe Bruno, both had to pay for their defense using their campaign funds. When they were eventually aquitted, the state reimbursed them. In fact, in the case of Cuomo the state found that his legal bills were excessive and only partially reimbursed him.
LikeLike
How long should it take for the DA to decide if Commissioner Moran and his deputy broke the law by changing the wording of the On Call Pay resolution well over a year ago. After all no one is above the law. Isn’t that what we’ve been hearing a lot lately?
LikeLike
Yet, does he need to present documentation and full transparency. Then, please note that last night Moran voted no to two Public Safety invoices because they were not “completed properly” while he took great pains to scold Commissioner Cole for not know how to do his job – This was embarrassing and the epitemy of classlessness. No one who wants to be seen as a leader should do this EVER!
LikeLike
Andrew Cuomo and Joe Bruno were well paid state officials with more than enough money in their campaign funds to absorb legal expenses. Commissioner Moran makes $14,500 per year. Having him be responsible for a $49,946.60 legal bill which is growing and is being used to allow his attorney to respond to the DA’s investigation seems unfairly harsh. Who knows when a prosecutor could determine that an official action on the part of an elected official could potentially be considered to be a ‘criminal’ offense. It is too arbitrary at this point in the investigation. It might be a different matter if he is indicted but, even then, there may be some justification for the City to use its resources to fight the charges.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLike
Chris-It doesn’t matter what you think should or shouldn’t happen with paying lawyers-the law is what it is
LikeLike
The City should use the same standard that Dillon wanted to impose on Meg Kelly, it only seems fair.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have I missed the Time’s Union’s Wendy Liberatore’s coverage of this subppoena. Perhaps she’s working overtime on her investigation.
LikeLike
Only the Gazette has covered it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is a serious issue that the wording of the law was changed after the passage of a statute.
LikeLike
The amount of money that a person makes, has nothing to do with breaking the law. Judges rarely give a damn about a person’s income when setting the amount of restitution, or setting bail. Young people with no money at all, still have to pay fines. I’m sorry, but Moran broke the law, and he will have to take his lumps. As a taxpayer, I find it disturbing that he intentionally disregarded legal opinions, multiple times, and yet he feels that I should pay for his legal bills. (pay upgrades, employee retaliation, On call pay).
Mr Kaufmann has repeated the section of the city charter multiple times in this story. Perhaps the readers should read it again.
The voters made a mistake by re-electing Moran and Sanghvi. This will probably not be the last of the lawsuits. Will we lose our insurance coverage again.
LikeLiked by 1 person