fbpx
Skip to main content

The Blogger Is In Chicago


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.

Dillon Moran’s Gratuitous Attack On Tim Coll

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.

Commissioner Moran Resurrects His Very Bad Idea to Hire More Lawyers

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 Howard 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 Howard 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.

Filling The Impending Vacancy For DPW Commissioner – Another Mess

In a front-page story in the August 6, 2024, edition of the Daily Gazette, Sara Burger announced her candidacy to replace Saratoga Springs Public Works Commissioner Jason Golub, who is leaving this position to take a job with the state. On the very same day, she apparently emailed the executive committee of the Saratoga Springs Democratic Committee, withdrawing from the race. Then, apparently, she reversed her decision again, reaffirming her intention to campaign to replace Golub.

According to a story in the August 7, 2024, edition of the Times Union, the Saratoga Springs Democratic Committee had selected Burger over Gordon Boyd, who also sought the position.

I texted Burger on August 7, 2024, and asked for clarification.

Ms. Burger never replied.

I then emailed Otis Maxwell, the chair of the Saratoga Springs Democratic Committee, asking if I could have a copy of her email. He never replied.

It is reasonable to assume that Ms. Burger mysteriously withdrew from the race and then re-entered it.

I think it is reasonable for Ms. Burger to directly address the incident and, assuming she did withdraw and re-engage, explain her decisions.

The Word Partisan Doesn’t Work

Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran has asserted that because the number of registered Democrats is greater than the number of Republicans in the city, that the person selected by the Democratic Committee should be Golub’s replacement.

It is important to understand that for the group currently in control of the Democratic Committee, being a Democrat is not enough. As we saw in the last election cycle when the Committee refused to let three Democrats interested in running for City Council even address the full Committee, any candidate they will even consider, let alone endorse for this current vacancy, must be loyal to the current faction in control of the committee and a fan of Moran and Finance Commissioner Sanghvi.

In contrast, outgoing Commissioner Golub told the Times Union:

‘…his replacement should not be a partisan pick, but one who would work well with the staff. He also told the mayor he would be happy to chair the committee [a committee that would vet and recommend a candidate].”

Times Union August 7, 2024

The Democratic Committee quickly announced on Facebook that they “would like to assist in identifying candidates for the DPW position” and that anyone interested in the position should contact them. When Otis Maxwell, the Democratic chair, however, was contacted by a registered Republican who was and still is interested in the position and has qualifications for the job and a history of working well with city officials and residents of all political persuasions, he was told that the Democratic Committee was only interviewing Democrats.

Ironically, Otis Maxwell, the Democratic chair, had told the Daily Gazette

“we are looking for the strongest candidate, and it would be great if we found somebody who was somewhat apolitical and just had great qualifications and wanted the job and that might help the other side approve them.”

-Daily Gazette July 26,2024

The committee then went ahead and endorsed Sarah Burger, a former Democratic chair who is highly partisan and who has no qualifications. So much for looking for the strongest candidate who might help the “other side” approve them. Note also that Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll is a registered Democrat but has automatically been delegated to be on the “other side.”

In ironic contrast to the hyper-tribalism of the Democrats who view being a Republican as being the personification of evil, it is the local Republicans who have demonstrated tolerance and the willingness to look beyond party registration in considering who to support to fill Golub’s position. Readers will recall that they endorsed Tim Coll, a registered Democrat who successfully ran for Public Safety Commissioner in the last election.

Mike Brandi, chair of the Saratoga Springs Republican Party, told the Times Union that he is:

“available to speak with anyone interested in the position to discuss my committee’s priorities for the Department of Public Works. … While the local Democratic Party has refused to interview independents and Republicans for their recommendation to fill the position, our priority is what is best for the city.” 

Times Union August 7, 2024

Probable Grid Lock

There is currently controversy and confusion over when an election to fill Golub’s position can take place. Moran claims that he will make it happen on October 29, 2024. Without going too far into the weeds, this is highly unlikely. It remains unclear when a special election will be held.

In the meantime, the only way to fill the position, pending an election, would be for a majority of the Council to vote for a candidate to serve as Commissioner until a special election can be held. This would require three votes, and with Golub gone and the two Democrats supported by the Committee, Moran and Sanghvi, committed to Sarah Burger, this seems unlikely.

A number of people have expressed interest in potentially filling Golub’s position. They are either independents or Republicans with little history in the scrum of city politics. Given the public stance of the city Democratic committee, though, it is highly unlikely that Moran and Sanghvi would consider any of these candidates and, therefore, that a majority can be found.

Only time will tell.

Moran and Golub Play Fast And Loose With Senior Center Lease

There is a tentative plan for RISE Housing and Support Services to lease the building owned by the city of Saratoga Springs at 5 Williams Street that was used for many years as the city’s Senior Center. RISE hopes to locate its administrative offices there while Bonacio Construction renovates RISE’s office facility at 127 Union Street. Following the renovation, which is estimated to take six months to a year, RISE will relinquish the former Senior Center building and move back to their previous location.

Former Mayor Ron Kim’s history of trying to make the Senior Center into a twenty-four/seven, low-barrier homeless shelter has complicated the process for RISE. Given the Center’s proximity to the Saratoga Central Catholic School, Kim’s plan produced visceral opposition from parents whose children attended the school. This history has bred an atmosphere of fear and suspicion towards the current proposal for RISE to now use the facility.

The plan is now for the City Council to vote on a lease of the Senior Center at their August 6, 2024, meeting.

Regrettably, the agenda published on Friday, August 2, did not include an item authorizing the lease, nor was there a copy of what was being proposed.

How To Create A Toxic Environment

Normally the Commissioner of Public Works would be responsible for bringing a lease like this to the table as this office is responsible for the city’s buildings and facilities. For whatever reason, Jason Golub, the current Public Works Commissioner, has declined to play this role, although he has told people that he plans to vote to approve the lease.

Instead Golub has handed off this responsibility to Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran. While we are told that Moran plans to put a proposed lease up for a Council vote Tuesday (August 6, 2024) this item does not appear on his agenda nor has any document been posted anywhere on the city website for public review.

Unconfirmed rumors of what will be in this proposed lease abound.

There are reports that at least three versions of the lease are circulating.

Moran has told people that the reason that the lease was not on the published agenda was that it needed further work.

As both Moran and Golub refuse to respond to my emails, I have been unable to find out why Golub has refused to sponsor the resolution or what changes Moran thinks are required.

One source claims that Moran has said that there will not be time to make the changes before the pre-agenda meeting on Monday morning, August 5. This means that neither the Council members nor the public will have seen the proposal prior to Moran asking the Council to take action on Tuesday night.

Golub’s Troubling Behavior

Discussions about this plan began last fall so there has been plenty of time to craft a lease and to properly inform the public of its contents and meet with citizens to hear their concerns. That responsibility rested clearly on Golub’s shoulders as DPW Commissioner. Why he has abrogated that responsibility and allowed Moran to take over is unknown.

The Need For A Special Meeting

I have repeatedly written about the Faction’s (Moran/Sanghvi/Golub) indifference to the need to inform the public in a timely way about actions the Council plans to take. Rather than publish proposed resolutions in the agenda, which is posted on Friday nights, they regularly prefer to wait until the Tuesday nights of Council meetings to share what they plan to do.

It is no wonder that the Catholic school community is skeptical about the lease’s terms.

The only solution is to table Moran’s proposal, hold a special Council meeting to consider it and publish the proposal prior to that meeting at a time that will ensure the community has time to consider it and address the Council with their concerns.

Dillon Moran and Stacy Connors-the Bosses from Hell

Have you ever wondered what it is like to work in Saratoga Springs city hall for Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran and his Deputy, Stacy Connors? A lawsuit brought by a longtime and well-respected Accounts Department employee, Lisa Ribis, gives some chilling insights.

Ribis filed her complaint on June 18, 2024, accusing Moran of “wanton, reckless, malicious, and/or intentional….actions…” which violated New York Civil Service Law. Lisa Ribis is now the second Accounts Department employee to sue the city and Moran over his treatment of employees in his department.

Among the charges Ribis makes in her suit against Moran and Connors is that she was the subject of ethnic slurs made by Moran. This is alleged to have occurred at an office meeting on September 15, 2023, at which Moran, his deputy Stacy Connors, assistant clerk Barbara Brindisi, and assistant purchasing agent Stefanie Richards were present as well as Ms. Ribis. During the course of this meeting, Moran referred to Italians as “guinea WOPS.” Ms. Ribis was the only person present of Italian heritage.

Ribis’ complaint also alleges that Moran made a number of false accusations about her. One of the more bizarre accusations Moran is said to have made is to claim that Ms. Ribis spit on activist protesters. Anyone who knows Ms. Ribis would know that this is totally unbelievable and out of character. Should there be any doubt in anyone’s mind, one need only recall the distance between the protesters and where Ms. Ribis sat when she was taking Council meeting minutes and ponder what would have been the reaction of protesters had this occurred. Are we to believe that Commissioner Moran was the only person to have noticed this miraculous act of long-distance targeted spitting at a public meeting?

As disturbing is the lawsuit’s listing of the number of times Moran told individuals that Ms. Ribis was to blame for the changes in the On-Call pay document that led to the District Attorney’s investigation and the subsequent $61,000 attorney bill submitted by Moran and Connors.

Some Background

On April 15, 2024, Saratoga Springs Commissioner of Accounts Dillon Moran suspended Lisa Ribis from her position as Secretary of the City Council in an attempt to terminate her. As Ms. Ribis’ job was protected under the city and state civil service laws, Moran lacked the authority to fire her. Instead, she suffered one month without pay and subsequently was barred by Moran from returning to her job while receiving full pay until a hearing can be convened before an arbitrator to judge the merits of Moran’s action.

Moran issued the first and only formal, written criticism of Ribis when he suspended her. For those not familiar with what is required to terminate an employee, barring some egregious event, there needs to be a clear and thoroughly documented record establishing that the proposed termination is based on a chronic history of violations.

It is a testament to Moran’s impetuous and inept management that he would presume that he could prevail in his effort to fire Ms. Ribis, who has no documented history of complaints about her job performance. A darker possibility is that he is willing to waste public money to indulge in reckless, vindictive behavior.

Ms. Ribis has faithfully served the city for nineteen years, during which time she has received no criticism for her work. In fact, she has enjoyed wide respect and affection from her colleagues throughout the city.

Commissioner Moran’s campaign to terminate Ms. Ribis goes back to 2022. It all began following public comments made by her husband, Joe Ribis, at the Council meeting on February 1, 2022, during which he criticized the Council. On February 15, Ms. Ribis was removed from her duties of taking Council meeting minutes. She believes this was because of the comments her husband made. By May, Moran was requiring her to check in with Deputy Commissioner Connors every morning to find out what Connors wanted her to do that day. Ribis was the only employee in the Accounts Department required to do this. As Connors did not come to work at a regular time in the morning, this made Ribis’ work day challenging, to say the least.

As apparent retribution, Moran also refused to compensate Ms. Ribis for overtime related to her role in taking the minutes of the Council meetings. Ms. Ribis had been receiving this compensation routinely for years. In January 2023, Ribis won a grievance against Moran over his refusal to allow her to accrue compensatory time that she was contractually entitled to. His arbitrary decision to deny her compensation for overtime made no sense outside of harassment.

Moran’s False Standard For Removing Ms. Ribis

Moran’s campaign to terminate Ms. Ribis was based on alleged problems with the minutes of Council meetings she took as the Council secretary. It is interesting to note that while multiple sources report Moran accusing Ribis of altering the documents related to on-call pay, this was not cited by Moran as a reason for the firing in his suspension memo.

It is also worth considering the performance of the person he replaced Ms. Ribis with.

Under the New York State Open Meetings Law, the city is required to post the minutes of meetings publicly within two weeks. During the years Ms. Ribis was responsible for this, she scrupulously met this requirement.

Before Ms. Ribis’ suspension, Moran insisted that Deputy Connors review the draft of the minutes before allowing Ribis to upload them to the city’s website. Connors frequently ignored the required timeline in returning the minutes to Ribis for posting. This tardiness resulted in the violation of the state’s two-week requirement.

The person appointed to replace Ms. Ribis no longer has her work reviewed by Deputy Connors but routinely posts the minutes late in violation of the New York State Open Meetings Law.

In fact, the quality of Ribis’ successor’s minutes has been seriously problematic. The minutes contain many errors in punctuation and incomplete sentences. Some have the wrong dates, and most refer to Supervisor Matt Veitch as Mike Veitch.

In an especially troubling incident, Ribis’ successor misrecorded a statement Lew Benton made during the Council’s public comment period. Benton’s remarks cited Moran’s mishandling of the procedures to pay his $61,000.00 legal bill, arguing that he had violated the city’s purchasing policies. This blogger recalls Moran’s body language during Benton’s remarks. He was not happy.

Somehow, Ms. Ribis’ successor inverted Benton’s remarks in the minutes. Instead of citing Moran’s failure to adhere to city requirements, her minutes had Lew supporting the manner in which the bill was to be paid.

It is hard to understand how she could have made such an egregious error. Benton wrote to Moran (see the email at the end of this post) asking that the record be corrected. Rather than having the courtesy of responding directly to Benton, Moran had Ribis’ successor email Benton, agreeing to correct the record. The minutes have never been corrected. [Revised July 26, 2024, The minutes were revised but the revision still was not correct.]

Rather than suffering Ms. Ribis’s fate for allegedly failing to properly manage the minutes of Council meetings, her successor has not only been promoted and enjoyed an increase in salary, but Moran got civil service to upgrade her position, resulting in a further rise in pay.

A List of the Allegations In Ribis Lawsuit

  1. At a council meeting on February 1, 2022, Ms. Ribis’s husband, Joe, criticized the council.
  2. On February 15, 2022, Ms. Ribis was removed from council meetings and “told to sit at her desk.”
  3. On March 16, 2022, Ms. Ribis was told she would no longer receive accrued compensatory time or receive overtime pay after more than thirteen years of doing so.
  4. The overtime she accrued for a March 15, 2022, meeting was denied.
  5. A fellow employee who took over her meeting responsibilities was granted flex time and/or accrued compensatory time.
  6. On May 3, 2022, Ms. Ribis was instructed to inquire every morning of Deputy Connors, what Connors wished for her to do that day. Ms. Ribis was the only employee in the accounts department required to do this.
  7. In April of 2022, Moran falsely accused Ms. Ribis of spitting on activist protestors.
  8. In January of 2023, Ms. Ribis prevailed in her grievance regarding her right to compensatory time that Moran had denied her.
  9. According to the filing, on May 17, 2023, assistant city clerk Barbara Brandisi and another employee in the accounts department told Ms. Ribis that Moran “…was making it seem as if the plaintiff (Ribis) was to blame for various difficulties with the agenda.”
  10. On January 10, 2024, Ms. Ribis received an email from Moran requesting that she provide another employee with full access to her password-protected files. On January 12, 2023, Ms. Ribis advised Moran that to do so would violate the policy she signed with the IT department.
  11. Following this incident, Ms. Ribis asserts she was”shunned” by Moran and Connors, who refused to speak to her.
  12. On February 16, 2024, Moran reassigned a portion of Ms. Ribis’s duties to the Mayor’s secretary.
  13. On the evening of February 16,2024, Ms. Ribis received a call from a resident advising her that Moran was accusing her of altering the contents of a city resolution. Ribis responded that this was false.
  14. On March 1, 2024, at a meeting convened by Moran with Connors, Executive Assistant to the Finance Commissioner Samantha Clemmy, Deputy Commissioner of Finance Heather Crofcker, and Assistant Purchasing Agency Sefanie Richards of Accounts, Moran asked Connors if the purchasing policy was added to the city council agenda. Connors responded that she “gave it to the secretary (Ribis), but she didn’t load it in time.” Moran responded that “she (Ribis) can’t even do her [expletive] job.”
  15. In reference to item #14, Connors gave the document in question to Ms. Ribis at 11:57 a.m., when the cutoff to add items was 12:00 p.m. Ms. Ribis advised Connors at 12:03 p.m. that she tried loading the document, but the system had locked out at noon. Connors responded at the time that she was aware that the system closed promptly at noon.
  16. On March 5, 2024, Ms. Ribis met with Mayor Safford and his assistant, Susanna Combs. During the meeting, Ms. Ribis advised the mayor that she believed Moran was accusing her of causing the “on-call” pay issue. Mayor Safford confirmed that Moran was blaming her for the change. The change would have made Connors eligible for the additional pay.
  17. On March 20, 2024, Deputy Mayor Joanne Kiernan told Ribis, “you do know Commissioner Moran is blaming you for the ‘on-call’ mess.”
  18. On March 21, 2024, Mayor Safford told Ms. Ribis’s husband that Moran planned to fire Ribis for forging a document. (As far as I know, this allegation was never included in the reasons officially stated for Ms. Ribis’s termination).
  19. On April 1, 2024, during a pre-agenda meeting, Connors publicly stated that the March 19, 2024, meeting minutes should be pulled from the agenda because they were “hard to follow due to sentence structure, punctuation, and tense – meaning point of view is first, second, and third throughout the minutes. They require edits and adjustments for clarity and context. Once minutes are approved, they are a permanent record of the meeting. It’s important they be accurate.” Since Ms. Ribis’s employment in 2005, this is the first time that the minutes have ever been pulled from the agenda due to errors.

Final Thoughts

It is important to acknowledge that these are allegations made by Ms. Ribis’ lawyer, Philip G. Steck, and this blogger is unaware of a response from whoever is representing Moran, Connors, and the city.

Still, for some of us who have observed Moran, these accusations have the ring of authenticity.


Lew Benton Email Re Incorrect Statement Attributed To Him In City Council Minutes

From: Lew Benton <lewbenton@gmail.com>
Date: July 1, 2024 at 12:48:55 PM EDT
To: dillion.moran@saratoga-springs.org
Cc: John Safford <john.safford@saratoga-springs.org>, Tim Coll <Tim.Coll@saratoga-springs.org>, minita.sanghvi@saratoga-springs.org, Jason Golub <jason.golub@saratoga-springs.org>
Subject: Correction to Draft June 26, 2024  City Council Meeting

Dear Commissioner Moran,

It has been brought to my attention that the draft minutes of the City Council’s Special June 26 meeting misrepresent my statement during the meeting’s Public Comment period.

The draft minutes attribute the following statement to me.

 PUBLIC COMMENT

“Lew Benton, of Saratoga Springs, commented on the proposed resolution for payment of legal services that had been planned to be presented to the City Council at the June 18, 2024 City Council Meeting and thenwithdrawn. Benton commented he could not find the resolution that enable the use of an assignment for legal liability. Benton commented he may be incorrect in the statement there were no resolutions for a legal liability assignment, and stated that he was unable tofind one. Lew Benton recommended the Council to reference Public Officer Law Section 18 regarding determination ofdefense and indemnification of officers and employees of public entities. Benton commented thatthe prerequisites to a resolution are the City Charter, City Code, and Public Officer’s Laws. Benton commented that the City Attorney’s pay attention to the issues and Benton recommended the assignment of independent council for this issue.

I have reviewed a transcription of my comments.  I made NO such suggestion that  …an assignment of independent counsel for this issue.” be made.  Attributing this false statement to me turns one its head the essence of my statement: i .e., that no assignment can be made unless and until a City Council approved contract with the independent counsel has been reviewed and approved.

In significant part the transcription of my remarks included the following: “Thus far I have bot been ale to discover any resolution that was previously adopted by this council that would authorize the assignment of special independent counsel to any member of the council or authorize payment.  The City Charter is clear. No such arrangement can be entered into without benefit of formal contract approved by the City Council.”

I did not recommend assignment but rather informed the Council that it was without authority to adopt the resolution on the finance commissioner’s agenda unless and until a Charter demanded contract was authorized.

Please delete the false statement in the draft minutes and insert “Thus far I have bot been ale to discover any resolution that was previously adopted by this council that would authorize the assignment of special independent counsel to any member of the council or authorize payment.  The City Charter is clear. No such arrangement can be entered into without benefit of formal contract approved by the City Council.”

Thank you.

Lew Benton 

70 Railroad Place

Saratoga Springs

Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll Sets Record Straight On Ticketing Of Lex Figuereo

Saratoga Black Lives Matter leader Lex Figuereo was ticketed in May for failing to file the declaration required by the city for groups holding demonstrations. This prompted a variety of responses from BLM supporters, including the New York State Attorney General’s office. The Capital District Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) organized a demonstration objecting to Figuereo’s ticketing. The AG’s office sent a menacing note to the city, bizarrely elevating the filing of a simple form to somehow violating Lex Figuereo’s freedom of speech.

All those who have objected to Figuereo’s ticketing share a fundamental misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the declaration (for a start, it’s not a permit) and how the city responded. In an attempt to set the record straight, Saratoga Springs Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll wrote the following letter that appeared in Saratoga Today.

Letter to Editor Saratoga Today:

I am reaching out directly to all Saratogians to explain what has occurred with the recent issuance of Appearance Tickets related to Saratoga BLM. The Appearance Tickets were issued because the primary organizer of two BLM demonstrations failed to file demonstration declarations.

DEMONSTRATION DECLARATION

The City of Saratoga Springs requires by Code that any group planning to demonstrate must file a document called a “demonstration declaration.” There is no fee for the declaration and this requirement was established by the City in 2005.

The purpose of the declaration is to provide a way for the Department of Public Safety to work cooperatively with groups organizing demonstrations to ensure that the demonstrators and the public can be safe. As an example, two groups wanted to demonstrate in the same area during the Belmont Festival so alternative locations were provided and agreed upon.

This declaration process is administered by the Accounts Department, and each declaration, if completed properly, is approved. In 2024, the following organizations have filed demonstration declarations that were approved; Saratoga Peace Alliance, Jewish Federation, Horseracing Wrongs, and CSEA. Therefore, the only organization that has refused to comply with this ordinance, thus far in 2024, is Saratoga BLM.

APPEARANCE TICKETS

It should be noted that the issuance of an Appearance Ticket is not a custodial arrest. No person was placed into custody, handcuffed, or processed. The Appearance Tickets were served upon Mark Mischler who is representing the leader of Saratoga BLM.

It should also be noted that the pre-planned, non-violent, protests were not interrupted.  In fact, the SSPD took appropriate actions to keep the demonstrators safe when they blocked traffic on the streets in Saratoga Springs.

I want to be clear that I strongly agree with the issuance of the tickets because not doing so would be a violation of the Constitutional Right to Equal Protection, in violation of the 14th Amendment. More specifically, we should not treat Saratoga BLM differently than the Jewish Federation or Horse Racing Wrongs or any other group.  As noted, doing so would be a violation of the 14th Amendment and a violation of the basic tenet of unbiased policing.

Saratoga County Supreme Court Halts Payment to Moran’s Lawyer

Dillon Moran’s Legal Bills Grow: Will The Council Approve Them Tomorrow Night?

Dillon Moran’s Legal Bills Grow: Will The Council Approve Them Tomorrow Night?

Tomorrow night, July 2,the Saratoga Springs City Council will decide whether to pay bills that Accounts Commissioner Dillon Moran and his Deputy, Stacy Connors, have run up when they hired a private Manhattan attorney to represent them in the ongoing investigation of the on-call pay scandal. As readers may recall, their attorney bills $1,250.00 an hour. In eight weeks, including the most recent bill, the sum has grown to $60,992.65. The detailed bill is posted on the Council agenda on the city’s website.

If Moran and/or Connors were to be indicted as part of this scandal, the cost to this city for their representation would run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The hourly rate being charged by Moran’s lawyer is not only the highest rate ever billed to the city; it dwarfs the rates charged by other attorneys who have recently represented city officials. Former Mayor Meg Kelly’s attorney billed the city at $395.00 an hour to represent her during the Attorney General’s investigation. Moran’s lawyer is billing at literally three times that rate. Readers will remember that Moran complained bitterly about paying Kelly’s bills. Likewise Finance Commissioner Minita Sanghvi, who hasn’t had a problem bringing Moran’s bills to the Council for approval, complained about Kelly’s and former Commissioner Robin Dalton’s bills and just recently floated the idea that the Council might want to start putting a cap on what the Council would pay lawyers hired to represent city officials. She hasn’t mentioned this idea since Moran’s and Connors’ bills appeared.

Municipalities have the authority to scrutinize and challenge legal fees on the basis of reasonableness.

To date, the city has yet to determine whether Moran’s attorney’s rate is reasonable for the city to pay.

I am reminded of that famous quote from former Supreme Court Justice Stewart Potter, who said of pornography, “I know it when I see it.” While I don’t know what the legal definition of “reasonable” is I feel I do know an unreasonable lawyer bill when I see one and I would say that is what the Council will be asked to consider tomorrow night.

There is also the question of whether Moran has a conflict of interest if he chooses to participate in the vote on his bills tomorrow night. Approving the payment of the bills implies that they are reasonable. As the lawyer will be representing Moran, it would seem grossly inappropriate for him to vote on that issue.

If Moran cannot vote on the bill, it is unlikely to pass.

Whether or not Moran is determined to have a conflict of interest, the underlying issues will truly define the character of those who represent the citizens of this Saratoga Springs.

To adopt Sanghvi’s resolution would be an outrageous example of cronyism. The arrogance of Moran and Sanghvi, along with Public Works Commissioner Jason Golub, if he votes for this, will be simply stunning. They will be telling us that our tax money is in a piggy which they can dip into at their whim.

Attorney General Letitia James Would Like To Make Saratoga Springs the Demonstration Destination

New York State Attorney General Letitia James has issued the city an Assurance Of Discontinuance (AOD) proposal. It would be part of the settlement growing out of the AG’s investigation of the Saratoga Springs Police Department. If implemented, it would require that the city allow not just Black Lives Matter but any group, including the Proud Boys, to block city streets and disrupt City Council meetings. It is quite stunning. It basically precludes the city’s police department from enforcing key codes essential to the city’s functioning.

It provides wide immunity from arrest for any demonstrators who violate city codes.

Among other provisions to hamper the city from exerting its authority, Attorney General Letitia James’ proposed agreement would grant demonstrators the right to block streets and sidewalks at their discretion. According to James, any group that wants to demonstrate can now control the city’s streets. The document reads:

A Deep Dive Into The AOD Proposal

This is the cover letter for the AOD. As readers will observe, it asserts, “The AOD would restrict the city of Saratoga Springs, the SSPD, and those acting in concert with them [emphasis added], from seeking criminal charges for most non-violent violations of law.” It is hard to believe that lawyers drafted this. “Those acting in concert with them” could be the New York State Police, the Saratoga County Sheriff’s Department, the FBI, or Homeland Security, as we saw during the Belmont Stakes. How does the Attorney General expect to enforce this AOD on these organizations? Does the Attorney General plan to go after these other law enforcement groups to restrict their operations when they occur in Saratoga Springs?

General Prohibitions

The AOD lays out a series of general prohibitions. Keep in mind these prohibitions would apply to any demonstration whether it be BLM or the Proud Boys.

No horse-mounted police.

No officers on bicycles.

Any arrest related to a demonstration must be made during the demonstration.

The city is precluded from enforcing parade requirements or from enforcing the requirement to fill out a demonstration declaration.

The city cannot enforce its rules for decorum at its Council meetings or “other official city function” except in the case of violence, physical injury, or significant property damage.

There are sound reasons for delaying the arrest of persons involved in the protest until after the event. Arresting someone during a demonstration is an extremely provocative act that logically has the potential to produce a scrum. It is reasonable for the police to refrain from arrests during a demonstration where possible. In fact, the AG’s insistence that the police can only make arrests during a demonstration is at odds with their requirement that the police use all means possible to de-escalate.

There is also the real possibility that someone may have committed a crime that was not apparent at the time. The fact that the original crime was unobserved and not acted upon during the demonstration is no reason to place the perpetrator beyond culpability.

Police on horseback are a key element in dealing with crowds. The rider’s elevation allows them to see things that a person on the ground would not. Officers on horseback are also an effective tool for separating demonstrators and counter demonstrators in a crowd. The AG’s proposal offers no explanation as to why the use of officers on horseback is prohibited nor do they explain why they are prohibiting police on bicycles.

The AG Authorizes Demonstrators To Disrupt City Council Meetings

Item #55 prohibits the police “…from investigating, arresting, or seeking charges against any individual for expressive conduct at any city council meeting or other city function in the absence of particularized allegation of violence, physical injury, or significant property damage caused by such individual.” The AG appears shockingly unconcerned about the need to maintain order at Council meetings that have been repeatedly shut down by demonstrators.

The Proposed Tier System

The AOD lays out four “tiers” of response to demonstrations they want the police to follow. The first tier is for demonstrations that involve no violence or the “significant” destruction of property.

The second tier is appropriate if the police are “aware of a specific and credible threat that violence or significant property damage may occur at the demonstration.” However, there is no guidance on distinguishing “significant” from “not significant” property damage.

In this case, the police can only act if a person has committed a felony. They are precluded from acting on persons committing violations or misdemeanors. (In a subsequent section and in conflict with item c, they are allowed to arrest for misdemeanors as well.) This still precludes the police from acting on violations such as disorderly conduct.

AG Indulges In Catch 22 Logic

More problematic are the prohibitions in the AOD that significantly restrict investigations into the pre-activities of the group demonstrating.

The police are allowed to go to Tier 2 if they have overwhelming evidence that a crime will occur at the demonstration. This becomes meaningless if, as #56 details, they are virtually precluded from any type of surveillance prior to the demonstration.

They are also precluded from recording the demonstration, so no pictures or videos are taken, which further hinders the police from proving a crime.

The Third Tier

Given how poorly written and organized this document is, annotating it is a bit of a challenge. The third tier is triggered by actual acts of violence or property destruction. What constitutes significant versus insignificant property damage is never addressed. Similarly, what constitutes an “imminent” threat is never clarified. The document does tell us it is ok for demonstrators to throw water bottles in spite of the fact that Water bottles as projectiles are potentially dangerous.

This tier cautions that the police may only deploy “a limited number of officers sufficient to address the specific individuals engaged in the acts of violence or property damage (snark warning: for some reason, they left out the word significant, which qualifies every other reference to damage in the document).”

How many officers represent a “limited number” is anyone’s guess.

As the AOD proposal precludes the city from requiring a demonstration declaration that would provide the time of the event and the organizer’s estimate of the number of people involved, the police chief’s ability to prepare for the demonstration in terms of bringing in additional officers or other organizations such as the sheriff’s department is made all the more difficult.

This is real madness. Contrary to the AG’s approach to crowd control, if there is violence or property destruction, it is time to request that the “crowd” disperse. Dear reader, imagine for a moment that you are the city’s chief of police and members of a demonstration are acting violently or destroying property. Wouldn’t you consider it time to try to arrest the perpetrators and ask the crowd to disperse?

Tier 4

Here, the situation is that protesters “are seeking to gain unauthorized entry, or physically blocking others’ entry, into a sensitive location. A sensitive location includes, but is not limited to, a police precinct, courthouse, other government building, hospital, clinic, medical facility, or medical provider.”

For some reason, the authors felt the need to remind the city that the demonstrators may take over the street, block traffic and throw water bottles and still must be “accommodated.” This section appears to be a case of cut-and-paste.

The police must give the protesters three warnings to disperse, allowing five minutes for each warning. So the crowd can block access or remain in a “sensitive area” for fifteen minutes. Given the history of BLM demonstrations, it is reasonable to assume that they will occupy the area until just before the fifteen minutes are up and potentially move to another sensitive location and start the countdown again.

How Is This For Craziness?

Let’s assume the protesters simply block the “sensitive” location for fifteen minutes and decline to disperse. What can they be charged with? Typically, the charge would be for disorderly conduct, which is a violation. According to the AOD, the police are precluded from charging protesters for violations. So what are the police to do? The AOD conveniently doesn’t address this.

The AG’s Standards Proposed Here Would Apply to Any Group Including the Proud Boys Or the Ku Klux Klan

I am a strong civil libertarian and believe the government should enforce its laws uniformly. It should not consider ideology, race, religion, or nationality in its actions. I expect, though, that many of the creators and supporters of the hands-off standards being proposed by Attorney General Tish James would be outraged if these were applied to a Proud Boys demonstration blocking the intersection of Broadway and Lake Avenue and shouting racist slogans.

In effect, the proposed restrictions in Letitia James’s proposal would attract any group that wants to make a splash and get attention for whatever cause they are pursuing. As the proposal also restricts police intelligence operations regarding potential demonstrations, the city will operate in a black box regarding threats. A surprise action would leave the police department and community vulnerable in terms of having adequate staffing resources to protect demonstrators and the public.

James appears either indifferent or ineptly blind regarding the potential for explosive conditions that her proposal would cause. Consider the Belmont concert that drew crowds to Broadway. What if the Proud Boys decided to have a demonstration and waded into the crowd, yelling racist and homophobic slurs? What would the potential be for a riot, and how could the police address this, given Tish James’ prohibitions?

This AOD is clearly not the result of attorneys carefully considering the protection of First Amendment rights. Apparently, a group in the AG’s office sat around a table and carelessly tossed out ideas packaged as the AOD proposal, which she then authorized. While it is an opening proposal from James, it is an extreme position to start negotiations from and must be taken seriously by the city and replied to at a great cost of time and money. Interestingly, the original AG report listed only a half dozen reasonable demands, many of which the city was already practicing. This new proposal is quite bizarre, and unfortunately, the press is not covering this for whatever reason. One can only wonder how this fits into James’ political ambitions. Would she really support this kind of policing of a Proud Boys demonstration? The citizens of Saratoga Springs and New York deserve better.