Former Saratoga Springs Public Works Commissioner Jason Golub and his lawyer, Karl Sleight, have promoted the narrative that City Court Judge Jeffery Wait’s recent dismissal of the case against Golub for “Official Misconduct” exonerated Golub and that Golub was a victim who, for unknown reasons, was the subject of a great injustice. This is hardly the case.
Regrettably, the media has provided them an uncritical venue to spread this false narrative.
The Times Union quoted Sleight: “As I said from the beginning, these charges were completely baseless. Today’s decision confirms that fact.”
WNYT television featured Golub saying, “These trumped-up charges have been a heavy burden for me and my family to carry for the past 10 months. The weaponization of law enforcement against me for political or personal reasons should be gravely concerning to everyone.”
However, even the most cursory reading of Judge Wait’s decision exposes the futility of their attempt at spin.
A Faulty Criminal Charge That Can Easily Be Corrected Is No Exoneration
The charges against Golub stem from a December 2023 incident when city workers performed work on their boss’s, Jason Golub’s, private residence. Golub was charged with “Official Misconduct”, a misdemeanor.
City Court Judge Jeff Wait’s decision asserts that the document charging Golub was “deficient” because it didn’t address whether Golub knew that the city employees working on his sink were on city time.
In legal terms, Judge Wait’s dismissal was “without prejudice.” If it had been dismissed “with prejudice,” then Golub would be cleared because no further legal action could be taken against him. As it was “without prejudice,” it meant that Saratoga County District Attorney Karen Heggen could simply resubmit the charge, amending it to explain why the prosecution believed Golub was aware of the impropriety of using the city plumbers.
So the basis of the dismissal was an easily corrected technical error.
While Heggen told the press that she believed her original complaint was legally correct, she declined to resubmit a corrected complaint for some unexplained reason. To say that her decision was deeply disappointing would be an understatement. Golub’s lawyer did not introduce any new evidence that would have provided some rationale for her decision not to pursue the case. If DA Heggen believed the charges were justified, it is difficult to understand why she did not continue to carry forward the prosecution.
Golub Never Paid The Plumber
Like the telltale question in the Sherlock Holmes story- why didn’t the dog bark in the night?-The prosecution might have asked Golub at trial, “Why didn’t you pay the plumbers?”
If Golub believed the city employees working on his sink were not on the clock, and thus not being paid by the city, why didn’t he offer to pay them? Did Golub think that the work being done on his house was free? Why did Golub think that Ken Dooley, whom he didn’t know, would fix his sink for free?
Ken Dooley, the city plumber, told the police he was ordered to appear at the Golub house not once but twice. We know that Golub was present both times.
In fact, on one of the visits there, Dooley was accompanied not only by Deputy Commissioner O’Neil but also by another DPW employee.
Are we to believe that Golub, who has a law degree from Columbia University, had three city employees come to his home to fix his sink, yet it never crossed his mind that they might be on city time? Why did he not bother to ask? If he just assumed they were not on the clock and being paid by the city, why didn’t he offer to pay them?
There are two possibilities. One possibility is that he felt so privileged that he never thought he was responsible for paying anyone. I guess that would make him innocent of the charge, but it would reflect poorly on him first as a lawyer who should have known better and second on being a thoughtless, ungenerous, and privileged human being.
The second possibility, of course, was that he knew they were there under O’Neil’s direction, were on city time, and were being paid anyway, so he did not need to reach into his own pocket. Of course, that would make him guilty of official misconduct.
Whatever the truth of his motivation for not paying for the work done at his private residence, the basic fact is that he should never have had Dooley and the others come to his house to perform a repair in the first place. A more ethical person in Golub’s shoes would have at least conceded that he used poor judgment in not inquiring about whether his employees were on the clock, and the entire matter should never have happened. Instead, he and his lawyer have dared to play the victim in all of this. They blame everyone but Golub for being charged.
Golub dismisses the idea that he bears any responsibility for this mess.
He and his lawyer continue to claim that Tim Coll somehow magically convinced state agencies to investigate false claims against Jason vindictively.
He blames his deputy, Joe O’Neill, for what happened. According to Golub’s logic, it was O’Neill’s fault for not warning him that Dooley was helping him on city time.
I guess Golub should also blame Dooley for irresponsibly coming to his home on city time and fixing his drain without warning Golub.
Golub’s arrogance in playing the victim reflects very poorly on him and again testifies to his sense of privilege and arrogance.
Jason Golub is, apparently, unfamiliar with the concept of responsibility.
Judge Wait’s Ruling
Saratoga Springs Politics 
What do you think about Messrs Coll and Safford plan to ticket homeless? Where should these few go? What is the City’s responsibility? The County’s?
LikeLike
The last paragraph of Judge Wait’s ruling states that ‘It of course goes without saying that the use of City employees on City time to work at a private residence using City supplies is improper ….’ Thanks Judge Wait for at least acknowledging that. It would be ‘improper’ and unethical for any member of the City Council to receive free services at their private residence or any other free personal services from a City employee whether that employee was on the clock or not. This would be especially true for employees who work in the department overseen by that Council member. Imagine if, as Commissioner of Public Safety, I had sought free security details at my home provided by off-duty cops or insisted on free annual fire inspections at my dental practice or sought a free revision of my will by the City attorney.
It should also be noted that other citizens in our community would not be expecting free services from DPW workers, whether during their working hours of not, involving two visits to their homes, to resolve domestic plumbing issues. The five members of our City Council do not have the privilege to be treated differently than the average citizen, whether it is a plumbing issue or a parking ticket.
This is not a serious crime. DA Heggen may have decided not to bring the case back to court for this reason. And, as I have said before, former Commissioner Golub may have not realized that City employees would have to make two trips to his house, possibly use City equipment and supplies and considered whether the workers were on or off the clock when in the home. I am willing to give Mr. Golub the benefit of the doubt with his admission that he would have done things differently if he had it to do over again, that he should have just hired a plumber.
Sadly, Mr. Golub is not taking the high road. He and Commissioner Moran continue to insist that this case constitutes nothing more than a conspiracy led by Commissioner Coll against former Commissioner Golub. There is apparently no admission that this incident represents at the very least a lapse in judgement and a failure to follow recognized ethical standards.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, I would like to hear more about the paving controversy if there is more to say. Many of us are upset about this blatant theft of services. Would like to know what addresses were involved, they should be exposed.
Scott Brandi President SKI/NY 518-796-3601 scottbrandi@iskiny.com

>
LikeLiked by 1 person