There is a point at which meaningless repetition takes on a comic theatre of the absurd dimension. Saratoga Springs Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran reached that threshold at the October 1, 2024, City Council meeting.
At this meeting Moran once again tried to get his fellow Council members to hire what would essentially amount to a personal attorney for his department.
Council members have repeatedly told Moran that the city already has an attorney and he cannot have his own. Even former Mayor Ron Kim rejected a similar request Moran made under the previous administration.
Fearless and oblivious to the absurdity of his fruitless demands, at the October 1, 2024, City Council meeting, Moran yet again submitted a contract for approval of an attorney on his agenda. This time, he added language about the attorney helping to review contracts, apparently hoping that no one on the Council would notice that the contract still also contained the original broad authority for attorneys to assist with “general legal matters.”
In the video, Moran waves a handful of papers, reminiscent of Joe McCarthy’s lists of alleged communists. Moran’s fist full of papers were allegedly city contracts that he said hadn’t been reviewed by the city attorneys. He did this knowing that his fellow Council members had been advised in the following email that every request he made to the city attorneys regarding contract review had been responded to on a timely basis.
His colleagues on the Council were clearly done taking his demands seriously. Their body language says it all. Even his loyal ally Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi failed to second his motion and pretended to be unaware of the vote as she shuffled her papers with her head down and failed to respond to the Mayor’s request for yeas and nays. Moran’s motion failed once again with his vote the only one in favor.
At one point, Dillon noticed that David Harper, the City Attorney, sitting in the audience, was chuckling. Harper is the nameless target of Moran’s fury in this video.
My wife Jane Weihe and I knew Tom McTygue for more than fifty years and in spite of our differences over the years were always quite fond of him and admired and respected his many accomplishments that contributed so much to Saratoga Springs.
In the mid 1980s, Jane and Tom ran competing slates for the Saratoga Springs Democratic Committee’s seats. Jane’s slate prevailed.
Their campaigns were prompted by differences over a proposed development at Exit 14. Tom supported it, and Jane opposed it.
Jane and Tom went on to run together on the Democratic slate in the city elections the following year. Tom’s response to the committee defeat was emblematic of the man and stands in sharp contrast to the toxic divisive world of politics on today’s Council.
“Our differences were over issues and never personal ,” Jane observes. “In contrast to the current Democratic Committee, there was room for our disagreements over the years. As long as I was direct with Tom about our differences, I felt there was never any acrimony.”
Tom was a doer who dedicated his life to improving the city through the many projects that are the foundation of Saratoga’s prosperity today. One of his crowning achievements was the restoration of the Canfield Casino. This was an enormously difficult and challenging project, but Tom loved the challenge. He immersed himself in the historical details and worked with the craftsmen who created today’s gem.
This was just one of many other projects, which included everything from organizing a team of young people who used an old fire truck called “Flower Power” in the summer to move throughout the city to water and maintain the many flower beds that McTygue added to the city landscape, to the more technical problems of resolving the city’s many drainage issues.
Tom did not have time for prolonged feuds because he always needed his opponents’ support for the next enterprise to improve the city that he loved.
Jane and I send our deepest condolences to his wife, Sandy, and family.
I expect that the readers of this blog are as tired as I am of the chronicles documenting Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran and Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi’s misrepresentations, badgering, and false statements.
This most recent Saratoga Springs City Council meeting on September 17, 2024, was particularly disturbing. Moran and Sanghvi simply used this meeting, as they have done regularly, to spread false information and berate and try to humiliate Mayor John Safford. The meeting included patently untrue statements by them, but because the Mayor’s and Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll’s responses are quietly civil, these two men are drowned out by Moran and Sanghvi.
Once again, the issue was filling the vacancy created when Jason Golub resigned his position as Commissioner of Public Safety. As described in the previous post, both Sanghvi and Moran had submitted badly flawed resolutions at the September 3 Council meeting that did not pass, calling for a special election in 2024. Moran had placed his defeated motion on the agenda (twice!) for the September 17 meeting.
Given the document from the New York State Board of Elections that was in the hands of all the Council members, why did Moran bother to reintroduce his resolution that had failed twice at the previous meeting, and why did the contentious discussion of a special election consume so much of the Council’s time and energy?
The State Board of Elections Letter
The Council had asked City Attorney Tony Izzo to seek an opinion from the New York State Board of Elections regarding the viability of holding a special election to fill Golub’s vacancy . The following was the Board’s response, which indicates, as I read it, that the special election pushed for by Moran and Sanghvi for this year cannot take place. The letter states, “Under state law, a vacancy that occurs after that date (August 5, 2024) would be on the ballot to fill the vacancy in November of 2025.” In spite of pressure from the city Democratic Committee, Golub left his position after this date.
Here is the letter:
Commissioner Coll and Mayor John Safford have repeatedly stated that they were in full support of holding a special election to fill this vacancy, but they wanted to make sure that such an election would be legal. Sanghvi and Moran have repeatedly characterized their position incorrectly as being opposed to holding an election to fill Golub’s vacancy.
This letter was circulated to all the Council members and their deputies. Despite Commissioner Coll’s interjection of its existence during the Council’s deliberations, neither Moran nor Sanghvi acknowledged it, nor did the press when it covered this meeting.
The letter does decline to address anything in the city’s charter related to elections and suggests that such questions should be directed to the New York State Attorney General’s Office.
So the language in the letter from the New York State Board of Elections can be read two ways.
Their declaration that there can be no special election until 2025 can be seen as unequivocal on the one hand. On the other hand, the letter declined to address the language in the local charter. This blogger considers it a stretch to believe that the letter allowed for the possibility that the language of the city’s charter superseded state law. Still, an argument can be made to that effect.
What appears crystal clear to this blogger is that the legality of holding a special election is, at a minimum, unclear. Coll and Safford were more than reasonable in asking our city’s attorneys to rigorously resolve the outstanding legal issues before proceeding.
A Resolution on a Special Election Passes
In the end the resolution put forward originally by Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi and then modified by Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran at the September 3 Council meeting was passed unanimously, but only after a significant friendly amendment offered by Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll was accepted requiring an opinion from the City Attorney that the election being requested by Moran was lawful.
Moran and the media focused on the original part of the resolution, proclaiming that an election to fill Golub’s seat before the end of the year would now be held. A careful look at the amendment to the resolution, coupled with the document from the New York State Board of Elections presented at the meeting, indicates that the legality of holding a special election in 2024 is, at a minimum, unclear.
Nevertheless, when the amended resolution passed unanimously, Moran proclaimed, “We’re having an election, people.”
Every major media outlet covering the meeting had headlines trumpeting Moran’s statement that with the adoption of this resolution, a special election will be held this year. More rigorous reporters would have taken note of the significance of Coll’s amendment.
It should be noted that reporters are not the authors of the headlines for their stories. However, it is reasonable to argue that the poverty of their reporting prompted these headlines.
Headlines In Local Media
Saratogian Newspaper
‘We’re having an election people’:Saratoga Springs City Council can start process on filling empty Public Works Commissioner seat’
Daily Gazette
Saratoga Springs to hold special DPW commissioner election by end of year
The Position of Mayor Safford and Commissioner Coll
Coll and Safford could have killed the resolution by simply voting no. This blogger views their response as both thoughtful and generous. They agreed to Moran and Sanghvi’s resolution as long as it included language requiring that the city’s attorneys determine the legality of the special election.
The part of the resolution directing the request for a special election to the board of elections will be meaningless if it is determined that the special election would be illegal.
I understood why Safford and Coll agreed to the compromise. They simply wanted to resolve the legality issue and end the toxic and pointless arguments.
It was especially ungracious that the last word in the discussion was Moran announcing triumphantly, “People, we will have an election.” Regrettably, he successfully got an uncritical press to publish headlines as though the issue were resolved. For thoughtful people, that “victory” is very much in doubt.
Filling The DPW Vacancy-Sanghvi and Moran have a plan but is it legal?
At the Saratoga Springs City Council meeting on September 3, 2024, Finance Commissioners Minita Sanghvi and Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran both tried to pass resolutions setting a date for a special election to fill the Commissioner of Public Works vacancy created when Jason Golub vacated the position. Notwithstanding their claims that their resolutions were based on alleged research and that they were following the city charter, both Sanghvi’s resolution and the modified one presented later by Moran were seriously flawed. Both resolutions failed. The issue was raised again at the September 17 meeting. More on that in the next post. For now-here is Round 1.
Sanghvi’s Resolution
Here is the resolution Commissioner Sanghvi put on her agenda for the September 3 City Council meeting:
A casual reading reveals the first problem with Commissioner Sanghvi’s resolution. It requests a special election, but there is no indication of who this request is being directed to. It’s kind of like “to whom it may concern.” As it turns out, there was confusion between Sanghvi and Moran as who this resolution was supposed to go to.
During the two discussions (more on that later), Moran and Sanghvi offered several explanations as to whom their request for an election would be directed. At one point, it was to the Saratoga County Board of Elections (Sanghvi), and at another, it was to the Governor (Moran), sometimes it was the Attorney General, sometimes it was the New York State Board of Elections.
Sanghvi’s resolution also set the date for the special election to coincide with the upcoming November 5 general election. She argued that doing so would save money and that, as it was a national election, it would draw the most voters.
While her arguments were valid, she seemed to have conveniently forgotten or chose just to ignore that the November 5 option had been off the table for some time. Jason Golub would have had to leave office by August 5 to allow for the 90-day window required to schedule a special election on November 5. I am told the city Democrats put considerable pressure on Golub to leave office by that date but were unsuccessful. Sanghvi had to be aware of all this.
Mayor John Safford and Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll explained that to adopt a resolution like this that sets a specific date for a special election, the city attorneys would first need to properly research the law and provide the Council with a clarifying memorandum to ensure that they would be requesting an election that was indeed legally allowable.
Sanghvi claimed that David Harper, the City Attorney, had approved her resolution and that sending this resolution to the Saratoga County Board of Elections would somehow initiate the election. Sanghvi asserted that it was the only way to determine what procedure should be followed. Why someone couldn’t just pick up the phone and ask this question without passing a resolution requesting an election be held on a particular date was never explained by Sanghvi.
Harper was called to the microphone and told the Council members that he had simply approved the resolution’s format, not its content. He told the Council he had no expertise in election law to determine whether the resolution was consistent with city and state law. He observed that further research should be initiated.
A Pointless And Acrimonious Deliberation
It was crystal clear that neither Coll nor Safford would support a resolution adopting a date for a special election without further clarification as to the legality of the request. This did not restrain Moran and Sanghvi from offering contradictory arguments or scurrilously and falsely implying and, at times, stating outright that Coll and Safford opposed holding any election to fill the vacancy.
Commissioner Coll responded to Sanghvi by noting that he had contacted the Saratoga County Board of Elections and was told that any date selected for a special election would, at a minimum, have to allow at least a ninety-day window so that members of the armed forces could receive ballots and return them. Coll noted that an election on November 5 would not allow for this, and so while he supported having an election, this date was a non-starter for him, and he could not vote for her resolution.
Sanghvi had repeatedly justified her resolution by stating that the city charter required a special election be held to fill a vacancy when it occurs on the Council.
While section 2.4 of the charter does call for a special election to fill a vacancy under certain circumstances, Coll noted to Sanghvi that her citations from the city charter did not include Section 12.2, which requires the city to adhere to state election law. Coll argued that while he supported having a special election, it was precipitous to schedule one before the city’s attorneys could properly research state election law and advise the Council on what the legal options were.
What Does the City Charter Say About Special Elections?
The charter has conflicting sections on elections. At one point, it authorizes the Council to set a date and to run special elections to fill vacancies. In another section, it says that state election law establishes the terms the city must adhere to.
City Attorney Izzo explained to the Council that the conflict arose due to the city’s history. In 1915, the city held its own elections, including the design of ballots and the timing of all elections.
Subsequently, the New York State legislature established the terms and conditions of elections. Commissioner Sanghvi chose to focus on the language from the old charter and ignored the revision related to state election law.
City attorney Tony Izzo had informed the council that state law supersedes the section of the law continually referenced by Sanghvi and Moran, but the two simply ignored his admonishment.
This is the key section from the charter she did not cite. It reads:
Provisions of the Election Law of the State of New York shall apply to all municipal elections and special elections of the City of Saratoga Springs and shall guide in all matters not provided in the Charter.
A primary election shall be held in accordance with Election Law of the State of New York in each odd-numbered year during the hours 12:00 noon until 9:00 p.m.
City Charter
The general municipal election shall be held on Tuesday succeeding the first Monday in each odd-numbered year, in accordance with Election Law of the State of New York.
Commissioner Coll Promotes Having The City Attorneys Research The Laws Before Any Action
Sanghvi And Moran Ignore Coll And Insist On A Vote (It Fails)
Sanghvi and Moran insisted that the Council adopt her resolution. As the discussion devolves, it becomes clear that the resolution has been crafted without the required research.
Sanghvi Agrees To Have The City Attorneys Research The Law And Advise The Council
Moran Insists His Colleagues Pass A Revised Resolution
Moran has somehow appropriated the authority to present the Department of Public Works agenda to the Council in the absence of a DPW Commissioner.
Despite Sanghvi’s resolution’s failure, he tweaked it, changed the date from November 5 to December 31 (New Year’s Eve), and moved to add this new version to the DPW agenda.
This was an outrageous abuse of the dubious role he had adopted in presenting the DPW business, and I am sorry the mayor did not rule him out of order.
Moran attacked Coll and Safford and insisted on a vote. Despite Sanghvi’s earlier agreement to accept having the City Attorneys research the issue, she seconded Moran’s motion.
His resolution was also defeated, and Sanghvi reverted back to supporting the City Attorneys’ research on the issue.
Moran Never Gives Up
It is worth noting that the agenda for the next Council meeting on September 16 included the exact same resolution by Moran for setting a date for a special election by December 31 twice. It appeared as part of his Accounts Department agenda and part of the DPW agenda. The next blog will explore what happened with his resolution.
Good Government Process
This dispute is the most recent unpleasant occurrence at the Council table arising from Dillon Moran’s repeated introduction of resolutions he knows will not pass.
There is a history of how governments effectively function.
An elected official who wants to pass legislation first engages his/her colleagues in private discussions, seeking their support. This is not backroom dealing, as the body must adopt legislation in a public process. If the official cannot gather a majority to support a resolution, the general course of events is that they accept that it cannot be passed and desist from pursuing it.
There are four good reasons for this.
If a member has questions or reservations, the proponent can respond directly to the concerns or agree to find answers to the questions raised.
If the legislation is doomed, it avoids unnecessary conflict at the table.
If it is doomed, it avoids wasting the time of his/her colleagues by not unnecessarily prolonging their meeting.
It has the courtesy of not prompting citizens who may oppose or support the legislation from wasting their time attending the meeting and voicing their concerns.
Of course, there are legitimate exceptions. A legislator may believe raising a doomed resolution will help inform the public. This should, however, be the exception. To chronically submit doomed legislation will, as we have observed over the last two and a half years, contribute to a toxic atmosphere that places performance over substance.
In Moran’s case, the purpose of many of his resolutions is not that they are passed but that they serve as foils for conflict and drama at the Council table.
Saratoga Springs Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran has been unsuccessfully trying for months to get the city to allow him to have his own attorney rather than rely on the city’s attorney. At the September 16, 2024, pre-agenda meeting, he insisted that he had the right to have his own attorney. When Mayor Safford indicated he could not support this, Moran announced that he and his staff would stop processing contracts for a month.
It is hard to believe that he will follow through on this threat, which would violate his oath of office as the Commissioner of Accounts.
At the August 20, 2024, Saratoga Springs City Council meeting, Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran presented the Department of Public Works agenda as the Commissioner of Public Works position is now vacant with the departure of Jason Golub for a position with the State of New York. I’m not sure exactly why Moran is playing this role. Nevertheless, Moran was the one to move the item on the Public Works agenda for the city to pay the attorney fees of Jason Golub and his former Executive Assistant Brooke Van Buskirk. They had incurred the fees using Oscar Schreiber as their counsel for interviews by the New York State Police regarding the ongoing criminal investigation into the on-call scandal.
The ensuing discussion about paying the bills for Golub and VanBuskirk was tortured. I have included the full video of that conversation at the end of this post for readers willing to endure the entirety of Moran and Sanghvi’s dubious arguments.
Key to all this is the lawsuit, which is still awaiting the judge’s decision, brought by Mike Brandi, the city Republican chairman. Brandi challenged the Council’s 3-2 decision on July 2, 2024, to pay the legal bills for Dillon Moran and Stacy Connors amounting to $60,000. Brandi argued several reasons why the Council should not have approved these bills. The most relevant one is Brandi’s contention that the city code for indemnification is too broad and conflicts with New York State law. I discussed this in an earlier post, but the basic issue is that while the city code allows for indemnification in civil and criminal matters, the state only provides coverage in a criminal case if the city employee/official is found innocent or the prosecution drops the case. Bills incurred in criminal cases are to be paid upfront by the defendants. They can then be reimbursed if they are cleared of the charges. The bills Moran and Connors incurred were related to the investigation of the on-call pay scandal, which is a criminal case. The bills put forth for Golub and Van Buskirk are for representation in the same criminal investigation.
Moran Rants, Sanghvi Pontificates, Coll Reasons
The evening’s discussion on Moran’s motion involved the usual rants by Moran, dubious legal advice from Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi, and repeated patient attempts by Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll to explain to them the legal issues involved.
At one point, Moran attacked Coll, demanding to know how he knew the lawyers’ bills were related to a criminal matter. Coll’s reply to Moran was simple: This is a NY State Police investigation, and they only investigate criminal matters.
Moran then launched into a rant denouncing Mike Brandi and his lawyer, Chris Obstarczyk, for suing the city, calling them “grifters” and inaccurately describing a previous lawsuit they won against the city.
Commissioner Sanghvi offered her own skewed legal theory about the city’s obligation to pay the lawyers’ bills by claiming that, notwithstanding the ongoing state police investigation and the seating of a grand jury over the on-call scandal, the matter can only be categorized as criminal once someone is charged. Coll attempted, without success, to explain to Sanghvi that this was not the case. Sanghvi continued to repeat this incorrect piece of information as if saying it more than once could somehow make it true.
In another piece of magical thinking, Sanghvi and Moran also dismissed the idea that Brandi might sue the city again if the Council voted to pay Golub’s and Van Buskirk’s bills. Moran opined that he did not operate in a world of hypotheticals. Sanghvi was similarly skeptical but insisted that if Brandi sued successfully, the city could claw back the money, not from the lawyers but from the city employees who hired the lawyers. She actually said that should the city lose, she would just go over to DPW and get the money from the two employees (I am not exaggerating, as the video documents). Even if Golub and Van Buskirk still worked for the city, which they do not, there is every reason to expect they would not simply acquiesce to Sanghvi’s request, and that this would lead to more lawsuits this time with the unappealing scenario of the city suing its own employees.
Coll’s Amendment
Commissioner Coll was the voice of reason. He tried to repeatedly explain that the main issue before the court in the case of Moran and Connors’ bills was whether or not the city could legally pay upfront for lawyers for city officials/employees in criminal cases. This same issue applied to Golub’s and Van Buskirk’s bills. A decision in the Moran/Connors case would give the Council guidance on how to deal with the new bills. Coll offered an amendment indicating that he thought Schreiber’s bills were reasonable and that he should be paid, but only pending a favorable decision for the city in Brandi’s most recent action re Moran and Connors bills.
During the discussion, city attorney David Harper would only say that it would be legal to pay the bill. That is really not the central question. Strictly speaking, paying the bill on the evening of the Council meeting was legal as it was not at that moment being challenged in court. It would have been helpful, however, if Harper had volunteered what problems paying the bill might precipitate if the court should rule against the city and/or Brandi sued over paying the new bill.
The real question was whether paying the Golub/Van Buskirk bills was prudent until the judge determined whether such a payment is lawful.
It will be a mess if the city pays the bill and Judge Freestone determines that state law overrules our code.
While Mayor Safford voted for Coll’s amendment, he turned around and voted to pay the bill when the amendment failed to pass. The motion to pay Schreiber’s bill passed with Moran, Sanghvi, and Safford voting in favor. Coll abstained, citing that he did not have enough information. It was troubling that Safford appeared so focused on the fact that Schreiber’s bill was reasonable (which it was) that he appeared oblivious to the broader legal issues.
Yet Another TRO
On August 26, 2024, Brandi’s attorney, Chris Obstarczyk, successfully sought a temporary restraining order blocking the city from paying Schrieber’s bill, pending a decision on many of the issues he asserted in the Moran/Connors lawsuit.
Commissioner of Finance Minita Sanghvi, who voted to pay Golub and Moran’s bills, said the city is obligated to pay their specialized attorneys, regardless of who they defend.
“If we hire somebody we have to pay them and that’s important,” Sanghvi said. “You can’t be making it political.”
She also said that not paying vendors can affect the city’s credit. Before the second suit was filed, she also assured the council that the city could claw back the funds from Golub and VanBuskirk if a judge deemed the city should not have paid Schreiber. Either way, she said Schreiber should be paid and that they can’t function by speculating if a second lawsuit would be filed.
Liberatore August 27, 2024
I couldn’t agree more with Sanghvi that if the city hires someone, the person should be paid, but there are some important caveats that she has ignored.
First, the city did not hire Oscar Schreiber. He was employed by Golub and VanBuskirk.
Secondly, there is the issue of what is legal. Hiring someone for some purpose must meet the legal obligations of the city and the state of New York. Whether Golub and VanBuskirk have a right to an attorney in a criminal matter is currently before a judge. Commissioner Sanghvi continues to deny that legitimate legal questions exist regarding the eligibility of Golub and VanBuskirk to counsel paid for by the city.
Consider that Commissioner Sanghvi’s job is to scrutinize all bills to ensure they comply with the laws of the city and the state. She seems to want to dismiss legitimate arguments about the wisdom and legality of paying these bills by falsely suggesting any opposition or even hesitation is “political.”
In fact, it is highly questionable that declining to pay an illegal bill would damage the city with credit agencies, but paying such a bill would do little to help the city maintain the credibility and trust of its insurance carrier.
Commissioner Sanghvi also improperly reduced the situation to whether or not to pay Schreiber when the amendment offered by Coll was that Schreiber’s bills should be paid if Judge Freestone determined that they fell within the law. No one at the Council table argued simply that the bills should not be paid. How Commissioner Sanghvi arrived at that understanding raises serious questions about her competence or just as troubling that she was attempting to “politicize” the issue herself.
Sanghvi Gets A Lawyer
Sanghvi announced at the Council meeting that the State Police have contacted her to schedule an interview related to the on-call scandal and that she has gone ahead and secured legal representation at $525.00 an hour [Readers may recall that Sanghvi has consistently dismissed the on-call issues as frivolous]. This is a higher rate than Robin Dalton’s and Meg Kelly’s attorneys, whose bills Sanghvi continually complains about. She went on at some length that, at the request of the City Attorney, she has provided the hourly rate and scope of work even though she was not required to since Moran, Connors, Golub, and Van Buskirk had not provided that information. Despite Commissioner Coll’s attempts to explain to her that since it was a criminal matter, it was unclear whether the city could legally pay her bills, she seemed unable to grasp the concept.
Commissioner Sanghvi is in a dicey situation. As the Commissioner of Finance, it is her department’s responsibility to protect the city by scrutinizing all bills. She also has broad authority over whether to pay bills submitted to her office. Strictly speaking, this whole scandal could have been avoided had her office rejected the bills submitted by three deputies who were clearly not eligible to be paid for being on-call. What her legal culpability is in this matter remains to be seen.
At $525.00 per hour, she could encumber quite a bill, which may or may not be covered depending on Judge Freestone’s decision.
Judging by her remarks and demeanor during the discussion, she appears oblivious to her situation.
The Times Union has run a story on the city hiring an attorney to represent it in dealing with the New York State Attorney General’s demands on Saratoga Springs following her office’s investigation and report on the city’s conflicts with the local Black Lives Matter group.
After rehashing the legal expenses the city has been enduring, reporter Wendy Liberatore notes that the Council is united on the need to hire outside counsel to respond to the AG. She then provides Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran a platform to attack fellow Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll.
Moran said he is skeptical about Coll’s sincerity to collaborate. He believes Coll and the police will fight the attorney general on proposed reforms such as training police on de-escalation, bias and community policing.
Times Union August 23, 2024
Moran goes on to make further accusations:
“We are cognizant of the fact we do not have enough legal talent nor appropriate legal talent to engage in the negotiation with the attorney general,” Moran said. “That we all agree on. … The problem is that (Coll) wants to fight the attorney general … His (requests for quotes) is written like somebody who doesn’t want to collaborate with the attorney general, but like somebody who wants to argue over every word in the (proposed attorney general) document [JK:Emphasis added]. … This could harm the city for years going forward.”
Times Union August 23, 2024
Unfortunately for Moran, it was not Coll who drafted the “request for quotes,” but the City Attorney, and Coll has invited all members of the City Council to participate in the interviews of the attorneys who respond to the RFQ.
Moran (and Ms. Liberatore) apparently did not bother to check the facts on this or his other allegations. The city police force, for instance, is already routinely being trained in “de-escalation, bias, and community policing,” so there will be no fight over those reforms as they have already been implemented.
I am in Chicago having participated in the march on Monday opposing my country’s funding of the genocide in Gaza.
I am a Jew and I grew up in a home where when my parents said never again they were not talking about only Jews but the slaughter of innocents of any nationality or race.
I know my gesture of marching is a small one but the images of Palestinians carrying maimed children is simply more than I can bear.
This war will not only devastate the people of the West Bank and Gaza but in the end will threaten the long term future of Israel.
Back in April, Saratoga Springs Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran published a Request for Proposals that would fund attorneys for his Accounts Department along with the Finance Department, and the Department of Public Works. I described his power move in some detail that month.
I had assumed he had dropped the idea but recently he received responses from a number of law firms. He has selected the firm Harris Beach. The award of a contract was put on his agenda for the August 20, 2024, meeting. His proposal was met with intense questioning from Mayor Safford at this morning’s (August 19,2024) pre-agenda meeting. Safford was concerned that Dillon’s proposal lacked any specific guidelines as to when and how the Harris Beach firm would be used by the three departments. Moran bizarrely argued that the guidelines could be figured out after the firm was hired. In the end it was clear that Moran did not have the votes to accept this contract and withdrew that item from his agenda.
If Moran is eventually successful, the toxic environment at Council meetings would then include dueling lawyers at who knows what cost to the city.
It is worth noting that at a Council meeting on October 18, 2022, Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi sided with then Mayor Ron Kim in opposing a similar proposal by Moran to have the city fund an attorney for him. Here is the record of that discussion:
At the time Kim and Moran were feuding and Sanghvi was Kim’s ally. Sanghvi has been silent on Moran’s latest foray and was not at this morning’s Pre-Agenda meeting
Comments
I sent requests to the three candidates that I am currently aware of seeking to fill the DPW Commissioner vacancy. I asked them to review Moran’s proposal and offer their thoughts. Sara Burger and Michael Ladd did not respond. The following is the response from Chuck Marshall:
“Commissioner Moran’s pattern of alleged mistreatment of staff, increasing litigation, and propensity for shifting responsibilities away from himself, has proven problematic for the city. During this period of mounting legal bills – already burdening taxpayers – it doesn’t seem fiscally responsible to contract for separate attorneys for Accounts, Finance, and Public Works.”
Moran’s Empire
With the resignation of Jason Golub, Moran has taken it on himself to represent DPW at the Council table thus expanding his presence.
Saratoga Springs Politics 