This is how our failing city operates

The headline read “Trenton union leader files suit against the city to have $40k returned after contract dispute”.

The story was about Dave Tallone, the head of the city’s largest union and his quest to have $40,000 returned to him by the city of Trenton.

Tallone had been charged with 15 counts of forgery and fraud in 2011 but the charges were dropped in 2013.  At that time, Tallone paid the city of Trenton $40,000 in case the city decided to pursue a civil case against him in the matter. They haven’t and he asked for his money back but hasn’t received it. So, Tallone filed a lawsuit.

Now, at first, this might seem only fitting and right. He put the money up in trust, it wasn’t needed and now he wants it back.

Unfortunately, it just isn’t that simple.  There are a lot of questions that need to be answered.

Background
If you are not familiar with or have forgotten the background in this matter, here’s a refresher:

From at least 2006 through 2011, Dave Tallone was paid by the City of Trenton to provide food for the Annual Spring Litter march. State law prohibits municipal employees and officers from doing business with their employer so Tallone used other names in an effort to cover his tracks.

Most often, he seemed to use the name of Adele Wright. Ms. Wright is Mr. Tallone’s sister. He also used the name of a Joseph Gresko who is believed to be a relative and/or friend of Tallone’s. The addresses used on the documents pertaining to the contracts were sometimes Tallone’s home address or that of his son (who has since passed away).

It had to have been common knowledge throughout City Hall he was doing this. It was Tallone who showed up to serve the food each day (presumably while still collecting his daily pay from the City of Trenton).

The payments for the food were deposited into bank accounts in the city employee credit union, of which Mr. Tallone was the president. One check was actually endorsed by the payee and then endorsed again with a signature reading “Dave Tallone.”

In the fall of 2011, Mr. Tallone was charged by the Mercer County Prosecutor’s office with 15 counts of forgery and fraud.  The charges were dropped in 2013 because the MCPO could not get Tallone’s sister to travel from her home in Nevada to Trenton to testify.

Tallone got his job back and was given his back pay. The day after the charges were dropped, he gave the city a check for $40,000. Ostensibly this was to be held “in trust” pending the result of any civil action the city might initiate in place of the failed criminal case.

Now Tallone wants his money back. The city hasn’t yet given it to him, so he’s going to court to get it.

Too many questions, too few answers
We have never quite grasped the whole way the case was handled from the outset. Nor have we understood how it went on for several years before being brought to the attention of the authorities.

From the New Jersey State Statutes:

40:69A-163. Interest in contracts or jobs forbidden

No officer or employee elected or appointed in any municipality shall be interested directly or indirectly in any contract or job for work or materials, or the profits thereof, to be furnished or performed for the municipality, and no such officer or employee shall be interested directly or indirectly in any contract or job for work or materials or the profits thereof, to be furnished or performed, for any person operating any interurban railway, street railway, gas works, water works, electric light or power plant, heating plant, telegraph line, telephone exchange, or other public utility within the territorial limits of such municipality.

L.1950, c.210, p. 509, s. 17-14, eff. June 8, 1950.

There seems to be no disagreement that it was Mr. Tallone who got the contracts. The Mercer County Prosecutor states, in a faxed letter accompanying Tallone’s legal filing that “Mr. Tallone maintains that any service under vendor contracts with the City of Trenton were [sic] provided in full and at the lowest bid.”

That’s pretty clear. Tallone got the jobs. It is also pretty clear that the by using the names of other individuals and effort was being made to circumvent the law.

The whole idea of Tallone having submitted the lowest quote is also questionable.

A purchase order issued for the April 2011 event was in the amount of $12,000 for “unlimited” lunches to be served. It was made out not in Mr. Tallone’s name. It was made out in the name of Joseph Gresko but at the address of Mr. Tallone’s residence.

Documents obtained from the city show two other price quotes for providing the lunches for the April 2011 litter march. One was from Heavenly Ham in Mercer Mall for 3000 lunches at $7.00 each ($21,000). The second was from Fred & Pete’s Catering in Mercerville. Again, 3000 lunches but at $6.00 per ($18,000). Note, the number “3000” not “unlimited.”

Why were two of the quotes for 3000 lunches but Mr. Tallone’s was for an “unlimited” amount?  Was it to make the bid appear even lower?

Who requested the quotes is not clear but we do know this, the entire Litter March was coordinated and paid for out of the Department of Public Works. Mr. Tallone, as an employee of the Sewer Utility, works in a division of the Department of Public Works. Is it possible Tallone was given access to the other quotes so he could come in with a lower price?

If you do the math, Tallone’s price wasn’t the lowest.

The city provided a roster of 37 “teams” representing 1904 people expected to participate in the litter march. The list noted some “no shows”, dropping the count to 1857 plus "staff". If we round the number up to 2000 people in attendance it’s a full third less than the 3000 lunches in the other quotes. If you divide Tallone’s “lowest” bid of $12,000 by a maximum 2000 attendees it comes out to $6.00 per lunch served. That’s the same amount as the well known Fred and Pete’s Deli was going to charge. It is very unlikely, given the list of 1857 attendees “plus staff” that the number of lunches served reached 2000. Let’s assume the 1857 participants were augmented by 43 “staff”.  That brings the total of lunches to 1900. Dividing the $12,000 by 1900 brings the price per lunch to $6.32, higher than the Fred and Pete’s quote.

Interestingly, documents show that Tallone was paid in full for the unlimited lunches on March 29, nearly three full weeks prior to the event. This is another irregularity. Vendors are not usually paid in full prior to delivering the goods or services. We can understand a partial payment to cover the upfront costs of materials, but full payment before delivery should never have occurred. Yet the purchase order was signed off by the then acting director of Public Works, Ralph Burzachiello. There was never a full accounting of the number of lunches served. What if the event had been cancelled due to weather? Would the city have gone back to Tallone and asked for the money back?

A copy of another PO for $8,500 was obtained from the city. This PO was for supplying and serving of “unlimited” continental breakfast for all staff and volunteers the day of the litter march.

The accompanying handwritten quote was broken down into two items. The continental breakfast for an estimated 2500 people at $2.00 per ($5000) and to supply and serve “unlimited” lunch for staff and participants estimated at 700 people extra at $5.00 per head ($3500). This PO was made out to Adele Wright and the address given was that of the condo where Tallone’s son lived.

We know that Ms. Wright was living in Las Vegas at the time, so how come her name is on the PO? Why wasn’t Mr. Gresko’s name used? Was this an attempt to splinter the quotes so that the cost fell below the minimum bid threshold? It should also be noted that this quote, requisition and purchase order were all dated AFTER the April 18 Litter March. So, after the before the fact payment of $12,000, there was an after the fact billing and payment for breakfast and MORE LUNCHES. Sounds like someone was helping himself to healthy seconds from the City's plate! How is it no one in the city finance offices caught that?

Another anomaly in this story is the lack of documentation regarding the vendor providing the food to the city. State law requires any individual or entity to doing business with the local unit to provide a Certificate of Registration. There appear to have been none sought or obtained for Mr. Tallone et al.

When copies of the 1099 forms issued to the vendor(s) for tax reporting purposes were requested, the city stated none had been issued because no Tax ID numbers had been provided. Another violation of law but the city went ahead and repeatedly engaged Mr. Tallone in contracting for the food for the litter march, year after year without reporting his income.

Where were the controls? Who was ignoring or directing to be ignored the most basic rules for purchasing and payment by a municipal government?

The highest levels of management had to know this was going on. How else could so many rules have been overlooked in allowing Tallone to get the contracts?

In 2011, it was acting Public Works Director Ralph Burzachiello who signed the PO for the
lunches.

In 2010, then Public Works Director Eric Jackson signed some of the paperwork submitted under Gresko’s name. 

Why hasn’t the MCPO investigated the city side of this issue?

Tallone acknowledges he did the work, yet the PO’s were issued under the names of others. Isn’t that in and of itself fraud? Why was the MCPO’s case so dependent upon the testimony of Ms. Wright that it couldn’t proceed without her? What was Mr. Gresko’s role in all of this? Was the use of his name in combination with different addresses just another attempt to hide the real fact that Tallone was getting the contracts illegally?

A big if
If Mr. Tallone, Mr. Gresko and Ms. Wright actually had some sort of catering business, it was not properly registered with the state. They didn’t provide proper tax identification numbers to the city. Due to Mr. Tallone’s obvious and acknowledged involvement, they are banned from doing work for the city anyway.

How did any of this escape the notice of the department directors and others who had to sign off on the paperwork?

With all of the above unanswered questions it is somewhat understandable that, on the advice of counsel, Mr. Tallone would pay the city $40,000. It seems pretty obvious that any civil action taken by the city against Tallone would result in him having to make restitution for the money gained from his prohibited contracts.

Or does Mr. Tallone think that the current administration would rather give back that $40,000 in the hopes of putting this story to rest without having to answer any of those pesky questions above?

Dave Tallone got his job back. He has reportedly received his back pay. Seems to us he has pretty much been made whole. Why shouldn’t he make restitution to the city for at least some of the money he received through the illegal contracts?

He should leave it as is and drop his lawsuit requesting the return of the money.

Or maybe it would be better for the matter to proceed, publicly, in the courts so the world can see and hear how the successive administrations in the City of Trenton have broken and ignored public contracting laws and how no one, including the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office, has stepped up to take all the parties to task.

Objection!

In a recent article by Times reporter Alex Zdan, readers were treated to tidbits from the transcripts of the Grand Jury proceedings that resulted in the indictment of Stanley “Muscles” Davis and others.

Davis, you will recall, pleaded guilty in a scheme where the Trenton Water Works employee would do private plumbing work while on the city clock, using city equipment and materials.

The Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office conducted an investigation and sting operation that resulted in an undercover officer paying Davis for doing work on a Home Avenue residence.  Davis and two others were arrested in December of 2010. The Grand Jury heard testimony later that month and into January 2011.

Zdan reports that the transcripts of the Grand Jury proceedings reveal the jurors asking questions about the possibility of indicting Mayor Tony Mack, Davis’s half-brother, as part of the case.

Shortly after taking office in July of 2010, Mack made changes to the overtime rules at the water utility that would allow Davis to work more hours and raise his income. This change also provided Davis with the opportunity to access more of these potential installations done on city time with city resources while receiving direct payment from the homeowners.

While rumors of this scheme began circulating in the summer of 2010, the Mayor chose to do nothing about it.

At one point, Councilman George Muschal recounted in testimony before the Grand Jury that he approached the Mayor about the allegations against Davis. The Mayor’s reported response was,

“George, my brother is a career criminal. If he gets caught, it’s on him. It’s not on me. You got to remember, I’m the mayor of Trenton. I’m Teflon. I can’t be touched.”

With all of this, Assistant Prosecutor Jim Scott warned the jury off of indicting the Mayor.

Zdan’s article includes the following quotes from Scott:

“If there are two plausible explanations that could exist, you should give the target of your investigation the benefit of the doubt and not return an indictment” Scott said, according to the transcript from the Jan. 14, 2011 hearing.

“But I would submit to you at this point that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute the mayor at this point,” Scott told the grand jurors.

Scott told the jurors that Mack’s lack of action on those complaints was “the closest call” that could lead to an indictment, but that inaction could be attributed to the “amount of issues that were facing the mayor” shortly after he took office.

“In this particular case, I would submit to you that Mayor Mack has a tremendous amount on his plate,” Scott said, according to the transcript. “He inherited an administration where there was complete turnover. And the budget issues that the city of Trenton faces are enormous.”

INHERITED AN ADMINISTRATION WHERE THERE WAS COMPLETE TURNOVER?!?!?

Objection!

Upon taking office on July 1, 2010, Mayor Tony F. Mack knowingly and deliberately dismissed key personnel who had experience in running the city. Even IF, and it is a huge IF, the Mayor was intent on remaking the administration, common sense would call for a gradual transition in order to guarantee the continued smooth operation of city functions.

The mayor did not INHERIT a vacant administration. He caused it.

Further, the mayor had at his side a seasoned and knowledgeable acting Business Administrator in the person of William Guhl. Guhl, who was volunteering to help get the Mack administration off on the right foot, left one month into the term. Why? Because the mayor would not heed the sage advice being given to him.

For Assistant Prosecutor Scott to suggest that the problem of turnover in the city administration was “inherited” is just plain wrong.

 

It’s not my fault. I didn’t cause it.

That was the punch line to an old George Carlin routine that poked fun at the trend of denying responsibility for anything bad.

It has become the theme song of the Tony Mack administration.

The Times’ Matt Fair wrote a story about the city being out of compliance with the Section III requirements for local work force participation in CDBG funded projects. In that story is the following quote: 

“These grants were in place when we took office,” acting business administrator Anthony Roberts said in an e-mail last night. “We will continue to make corrections to irresponsible proposals submitted by the Palmer administration just as we have with many other ill-advised projects.”

The key phrases in the Roberts defense: “in place when we took office” and “irresponsible proposals submitted by the Palmer administration.”

The reality is slightly different.

At his very first Town Hall meeting as Mayor, Tony Mack told a rapt and attentive audience at the North 25 housing complex all about his grand plans to refurbish several parks.  Astute watchers of Trenton politics knew that the funding was in place for years and at risk of being lost if action wasn’t taken. The only thing the Mack administration did was put the wheels into motion.

So…if that was the case, which administration is responsible for seeing that the contracts are let according to the Federal rules? The Palmer administration, who applied for, received and then sat on the money or the Mack administration that actually signed the contracts?

Nobody with any sense would argue that Palmer did no wrong. But after almost two years “in charge”, Tony Mack’s finger pointing has gotten tiresome.

Similarly, in stories published in both the Times and theTrentonian, the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office has put the city of Trenton on notice that it is in violation of the state’s Open Public Meetings Act. In a letter sent to Municipal Clerk Leona Baylor, the prosecutor cites the fact that the city is behind in approving and posting city council meeting minutes as required by law.

Both papers report the reasons given for being behind are that the clerk’s office is short-staffed, the workload because of OPRA requests from citizens takes priority, and…wait for it…they were behind when I got here.

In Matt Fair’s Times article, Municipal Clerk Leona Baylor is quoted as saying:

“The minutes have always been behind. They’ve never been current. They were behind when I first got there.”

The city website posts meeting agendas going back to 2006. There are a little more than a dozen meeting minutes that appear to be missing from between Jan 1, 2006 and Dec 31, 2009.  From Jan 1, 2010 the minutes start appearing less frequently. Interestingly enough, when the Mack administration took over on July 1, 2010, meeting minutes were approved pretty consistently for the first four months or so. Then there was a steep drop off of minutes being approved.

So, yes, Ms. Baylor, a problem existed prior to your arrival and prior to the Mack administration. The problem went away for a short time and then came back with a vengeance.

Whether complying with OPRA requests or completing the meeting minutes in a timely manner is a burden or not, it is the law. And it is the duty of the clerk's office to follow the law.

We all recognize the failings of previous administrations and some of them cannot be corrected now. But that is not an excuse for failing to follow federal grant guidelines, state statute or common sense. 

After almost two years at city hall, there is no one to point fingers at except those who are on the job today.

Apparently, Crime* does pay

You remember back in November when the story broke that long time City of Trenton employee and AFSCME local president Dave Tallone was charged by the Mercer County Prosecutor's Office with fraudulently obtaining city contracts, right?

You don't?

Then read Lisa Coryell's article from the Times, November 11, 2011.

And you remember when, on the heel of those charges, the City of Trenton issued a release stating that Mr. Tallone was to be suspended immediately without pay?  If not, here's the press release on the city website.
 Well, what if we told you that Mr. Tallone has not missed a day of pay in the past two plus months?

We didn't either. that is not until we checked his payroll records and discovered that Mr. Tallone has been collecting "sick pay", "holiday pay" and, of course, his "longevity pay" ever since his alleged suspension. 

Seems as though Mr. Tallone was never technically suspended. Sources are saying the city, in the persons of acting Business Administrator Anthony Roberts and/or acting Public Works Director Harold Hall, never provided Mr. Tallone with the required Loudermill hearing and notice of suspension.  There doesn't seem to be any reason to not have provided this "due process" to Mr. Tallone. He didn't even have to be present for them to hold a hearing and draft a notice to send to him.

The city just didn't seem to do it in the 30 days allotted.  So now Mr. Tallone enjoys a taxpayer paid vacation while awaiting the disposition of his case.

Was this by design or default?  Maybe Mr. Bocchini or the new state Attorney General should seek answers to that question.

UPDATE: The Trentonian has posted a story on line here wherein highyl paid contract labor attorney for the city Steve Glickman claims that Tallone's charges were not serious enough to allow suspension without pay.  Glickman goes on to explain that Tallone could be suspended with pay, but that would be like giving him a "paid vacation." 

Mr. Glickman, what is Mr. Tallone getting now but paid for not doing anything?  Sounds like a paid vacation to us.
*We use the term "Crime" here to make the reference to the old saw that crime doesn't pay. We fully recognize that Mr. Tallone was only charged with criminal acts and as yet has not been found guilty of any crime.  Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Hey, Joe?

Remember this:

Trenton official arraigned

Published: Monday, February 26, 2007, 10:35 AM Updated: Monday, February 26, 2007, 11:05 AM
By Ralph Curcio/The Times

TRENTON - Longtime city Finance Director Christine Stankiewicz, who was indicted last week on charges of official misconduct and theft by deception, appeared in court this morning. Stankiewicz was arraigned before Superior Court Judge Maria Sypek, who entered not guilty pleas on her behalf.

Assistant Prosecutor Doris Galuchie said the 57-year-old woman had allowed employees to take improper time off work and falsified payroll timesheets. Stankiewicz, who has no prior criminal record, was released on her own recognizance.

© 2011 NJ.com. All rights reserved.


Recap:

The Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office raided city hall, removed Stankiewicz from her place of employment and she was indicted for allowing employees to take improper time off work and falsified payroll timesheets.

So the question is, where is the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office now?

The city of Trenton appears to have improperly employed one Nathaniel M. Jones, Jr. as the Director of the Municipal Courts for the past year. There are some problems with this:

• The position of Court Director does not appear to exist under the city’s administrative code
• Mr. Jones is not a bonafide resident of the city of Trenton
• Mr. Jones has a criminal record (that he appears to have tried to avoid disclosing by avoiding a thorough background check)
• Mr. Jones has proven to be highly ineffective in the apparently non-existent position.

Yet, to date, nothing has been done about this. Surely, this bears scrutiny that would no doubt result in some sort of charges being filed.

As Kevin Moriarty said in his blog the other day:

I think one can make the same claim of … Mercer County Prosecutor Joseph Bocchini. For over a year, Bocchini has been investigating, collecting evidence (and had evidence provided to him), convening grand juries and more; with very little to show for it. He has indicted a few Water Works employees including Mayor Mack’s half-brother, but there has been precious little other movement from his office on any other matter.

I think Mr. Bocchini may also have a “terminal case of the slows.” Going forward, I expect this to be one of several articles that will turn up in the future when one Googles “Joe Bocchini” and “Tony Mack.” What will the others say?

Maybe this article will turn up on that Google list.