New Castle Town Board Refuses to Deal With Police Pension Fraud
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
The New Castle Town Board has conducted its own evaluation of the allegations of Pension Fraud contained in the lawsuit Attorney General Elliot Spitzer filed in Supreme Court on July 27, 2006, against New Castle Police Lt. John Vize and his former colleague, Dennis Mahoney.
New Castle Town Board Refuses to Deal With Police Pension Fraud Incredibly, they have expressed their intention not to take any disciplinary action against either Lt. John Vize, Chief Robert Breen or Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella. The Board, while not issuing a public report, nevertheless, concluded that the charges are baseless, “old allegations.”
Faiella confirmed that no public reports or demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any member of the New Castle Town Board.
Furthermore, the Town is continuing to provide retirement health benefits to former officer Dennis Mahoney even though Spitzer’s suit, on behalf of the People of the State of New York, states on page 7, section 25, “Having completed only nineteen years of service Mahoney actually is not eligible to receive full retirement benefits until March 1, 2007, the month following his fifty-fifth birthday. All the pension benefits Mahoney has received from the State to date thus have obtained unlawfully.”
The eleven-page complaint was filed by Spitzer’s Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Unit following an investigation by the Office of State Comptroller Alan Hevesi (OSC) which manages and is the trustee of public employee pension funds. In the suit the defendants, Dennis Mahoney, a retired police officer and, John Vize, a New Castle Police Department lieutenant who is currently responsible for staff services and special events, were charged with misrepresenting that the retired officer Mahoney worked as a police officer for a full 20 years when, in fact, he worked only nineteen years by falsifying records to defraud the Pension System under section 63-c of the New York Executive or “Tweed” Law.
The Town of New Castle does not appear to be interested in recovering any money on its behalf even as the State of New York seeks to recover pension benefits paid by the State to Mahoney since August 2000 for a total of $181,629 or $2751.95 per month when it should have paid him nothing; and, salary and benefits paid to Lt. Vize by the Town of New Castle during the period of his breach of duty August 1999 to July 2000, in the amount of approximately $100,000.
Spitzer’s lawsuit also stated “In violation of his fiduciary duty, Vize failed to disclose Mahoney’s fraud to the Department or the Town. Instead, Vize actively participated in Mahoney’s fraud.” Vize, of Mohegan Lake, “was serving as the Department’s records officer and was responsible for, among other things, scheduling and recording police officers’ shifts, and maintaining the Department’s payroll records for the Town. With Lt. Vize’s knowledge, cooperation and approval, other police officers worked many of the shifts that had been assigned to Mahoney.”
Officers who worked these shifts, were referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days,” were paid in cash. Approximately 25% of the Department’s 40 officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme.
Supporters of Mahoney have stated that Mahoney was medically incapacitated due to gout or Lyme disease and had to ask others officers to do ‘switches’ and work some of his shifts.
Pages 6 through 7, Sections 20-24 of Spitzer’s suit addresses those charges as follows:
“During his no-show period, Mahoney falsely claimed to be working. For example, he applied to the OSC to retire early based on purported on-the –job injuries (he claimed that a fall in the Department’s lunchroom had given him arthritis and that a tick bite during firearms training had given him Lyme Disease). In the course of those applications’ reviews, Mahoney told the doctor who examined him in or about January 2000 that he had been working ‘light duty’ for the Department. This statement was false. While Mahoney may been performing light duty work prior to August 1999, from in or about August 1999 to in or about July 2000, he did not perform any work for the Department. Mahoney’s applications for early retirement were denied.
In or about January 2000, Mahoney again applied to the OSC to retire. In a letter dated February 11, 2000, the OSC informed Mahoney that he was not yet eligible for the increased retirement benefits provided by section 384-d because he had completed only 19.60 years of creditable service. In that same letter, the OSC advised Mahoney that he could pay $9,804 for .40 years of Veteran’s service so as to render him eligible to retire with bene ts as if he had completed twenty years of service, Rather than make this payment, Mahoney withdrew his application for retirement and purportedly continued to work for the Department.
Mahoney reapplied to the OSC to retire in or about July 2000, falsely representing that he had completed twenty years of service with the Department. As was Vize’s regular practice when a police officer applied to retire, Vize printed out a spreadsheet reflecting Mahoney’s work record and forwarded it to the Town. Vize has admitted that he knows that the State calculates a police officer’s pension benefits based on the work records that Vize submits on behalf of the Department to the Town after a police officer retires. On or about July 31, 200, Mahoney officially retired from the Department.”
Certified copies of THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL vs.
DENNIS MAHONEY and JOHN VIZE, Index N. 06-13794, are available from the office of Westchester
County Clerk Tim Idoni, on the third floor of the Westchester County Courthouse located at 110 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.Blvd. in White Plains, New York, Phone: (914) 995-3080 Fax: (914) 995-4030.
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2006/jul/jul27a_06.html is the link to the July 27, 2006 Press Release announcing Spitzer’s suit entitled “Two Westchester Town Police Officers Sued For Cheating Pension
Fund—Police Supervisor Creates False Employment Records”.
Editor’s Note - The Westchester Guardian goes on record to state that we firrly believe the overwhelming
majority of police officers in all 42 Departments throughout Westchester County are dedicated, hard-working, fundamentally honest public servants.
It is for that reason, above all others, that we work to expose and help weed out those who, by their unlawful
activity, would destroy the reputation and the integrity of their departments.
In the interest of balanced presentation, we have reprinted the following letter received by reporter Maureen Keating Tsuchiya from an anonymous source claiming to be an active New Castle police officer. Readers may draw their own conclusions.
Showing posts with label Town of New Castle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Town of New Castle. Show all posts
Thursday, October 5, 2006
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Police Implicated in Scandal Still On The Job in Chappaqua
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
Everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua, without being subjected to any disciplinary actions, including Lt. John Vize and Chief Robert Breen, still on duty at the New Castle Police Department more than two months after the New York State Office of the Attorney General sued Police. John Vize and his former colleague, Dennis Mahoney, on July 27, 2006 for pension fraud. Chief Robert Breen was the Department’s chief at the time the alleged illegal acts took place.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter. Faiella confirmed that no public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. He went on to say, “The Town of New Castle is represented in this matter by their labor counsel Craig Benson.”
When asked if Chief Breen or Lt. Vize have been subjected to any disciplinary actions, Faiella advised this reporter that “Disciplinary actions are considered personnel matters that the Town Board is currently reviewing.”
Faiella indicated that Dennis Mahoney is currently receiving “contractually-mandated retirement medical benefits” from the Town of New Castle. According to the lawsuit filed by Spitzer’s Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Unit, following an investigation by Comptroller Alan Hevesi’s Of- fice, which manages public employee pension funds, defendants, Dennis Mahoney, a retired police officer and, John Vize, a current New Castle Police Department lieutenant, who is currently responsible for staff services and special events, were charged with misrepresenting that the retired of- ficer worked as a police officer for a full twenty years when, in fact, he
worked only 19 years. Under section 63-c of the New York State Executive Law, the suits to recover pension benefits paid by the State to Mahoney from about August 2000, for a total of $181,629 or $2751.95 per month;
and, salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town of New Castle during the period of his breach of duty from about August 1999 to July 2000, approximately $100,00 in salary and benefits.
Spitzer’s lawsuit also states that Lt. Vize, of Mohegan Lake, “was serving as the Department’s records officer and was responsible for, among other things, scheduling and recording police officers’ shifts, and maintaining the
Department’s payroll records for the Town. With Lt. Vize’s knowledge, cooperation and approval, other police officers worked many of the shifts that had been assigned to Mahoney.” These shifts were referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s 40 officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme.
According to a spokeswoman for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, that accredited this Police Department in 2005, New Castle’s accreditation, which Lt. Vize reportedly worked at obtaining for
several years, would be reviewed if the Attorney General’s suit proves that there were pervasive violations of the Police Department’s policies under the scope of accreditation criteria.
A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for 9:30 AM on October 4th before Judge Emmet Murphy in the matter of Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178., which was filed on June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County.
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the Town of New Castle from 1983 until approximately 2004. Kaufman charges that he was subjected to anti-Semitic discrimination by the management of the Police Department.
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
Everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua, without being subjected to any disciplinary actions, including Lt. John Vize and Chief Robert Breen, still on duty at the New Castle Police Department more than two months after the New York State Office of the Attorney General sued Police. John Vize and his former colleague, Dennis Mahoney, on July 27, 2006 for pension fraud. Chief Robert Breen was the Department’s chief at the time the alleged illegal acts took place.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter. Faiella confirmed that no public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. He went on to say, “The Town of New Castle is represented in this matter by their labor counsel Craig Benson.”
When asked if Chief Breen or Lt. Vize have been subjected to any disciplinary actions, Faiella advised this reporter that “Disciplinary actions are considered personnel matters that the Town Board is currently reviewing.”
Faiella indicated that Dennis Mahoney is currently receiving “contractually-mandated retirement medical benefits” from the Town of New Castle. According to the lawsuit filed by Spitzer’s Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Unit, following an investigation by Comptroller Alan Hevesi’s Of- fice, which manages public employee pension funds, defendants, Dennis Mahoney, a retired police officer and, John Vize, a current New Castle Police Department lieutenant, who is currently responsible for staff services and special events, were charged with misrepresenting that the retired of- ficer worked as a police officer for a full twenty years when, in fact, he
worked only 19 years. Under section 63-c of the New York State Executive Law, the suits to recover pension benefits paid by the State to Mahoney from about August 2000, for a total of $181,629 or $2751.95 per month;
and, salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town of New Castle during the period of his breach of duty from about August 1999 to July 2000, approximately $100,00 in salary and benefits.
Spitzer’s lawsuit also states that Lt. Vize, of Mohegan Lake, “was serving as the Department’s records officer and was responsible for, among other things, scheduling and recording police officers’ shifts, and maintaining the
Department’s payroll records for the Town. With Lt. Vize’s knowledge, cooperation and approval, other police officers worked many of the shifts that had been assigned to Mahoney.” These shifts were referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s 40 officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme.
According to a spokeswoman for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, that accredited this Police Department in 2005, New Castle’s accreditation, which Lt. Vize reportedly worked at obtaining for
several years, would be reviewed if the Attorney General’s suit proves that there were pervasive violations of the Police Department’s policies under the scope of accreditation criteria.
A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for 9:30 AM on October 4th before Judge Emmet Murphy in the matter of Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178., which was filed on June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County.
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the Town of New Castle from 1983 until approximately 2004. Kaufman charges that he was subjected to anti-Semitic discrimination by the management of the Police Department.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
U.S. Supreme Court’s Giglio Decision Threatens New Castle Police Authority
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
A recent teenage drinking party on September 9th, 2006, has landed some Chappaqua teenagers in hot water with their parents, school and local police. But will the charges stand after defense lawyers find out that members of the police involved with the investigation and subsequent arrest may have liabilities of their own because they may have been involved with lying in official matters, falsifying reports, or expressing bias which will render them unable to testify credibly and consequently as law enforcement officers?
The relevant cases are The State of New York, by Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General vs. Dennis Mahoney and John Vize, filed with the Westchester County Clerk’s office on July 27, 2006, by the Attorney General’s of-
fice, has focused tremendous attention on the Town of New Castle’s 40 member Police Department, a matter that has churned since 1999, involving a top law enforcement officer who is still on duty—in this case New
Castle police Lieutenant John Vize, who is accused of keeping fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to help a fellow officer—Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the officer had in fact
only worked 19 years. According to twenty years worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by the Public Integrity Section of the office of Westchester District Attorney Jeannine Pirro,
Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme
The second case is Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178. Kaufman was the only Jewish police of-ficer employed by the town until approximately 2004.
His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman
filed worker compensation claims.
In the U.S. Supreme Court case of Giglio v United States, the Supreme Court extended the obligation to share exculpatory information with the defendant to include information concerning the credibility of government
witnesses.
According to a recent article entitled “Disclosing Officer Untruthfulness to the Defense: Is a Liars Squad Coming to Your Town?” by Lisa A. Judge in Police Chief Magazine, “The reality is that prosecutors must rely on law
enforcement agencies to inform them of a hidden witness credibility problem including, for example, evidence of an officer’s prior untruthfulness in official matters.”
Ten years ago, in 1996, Attorney General Janet Reno established the Giglio Policy to require federal law enforcement agencies to inform federal prosecutors about potential impeachment information, including prior
misconduct information.
Judge also stated “Many state and local agencies have begun to disclose to prosecutors any conclusive information regarding untruthfulness, bias and crimes committed by an officer who is to be a material witness
in a criminal prosecution.”
“As this trend grows, agencies will be required to deal more forcefully with officers who lie. Departments may choose to adopt strict policies regarding truthfulness and rigorously adhere to those policies. Without taking such steps, agencies set themselves up to employee a portion of their commissioned workforce as administrative employees, unable to investigate crimes and testify regarding their investigations.”
OUR MISSION: The Westchester Guardian is a weekly newspaper devoted to the unbiased reporting of events and developments that are newsworthy and significant to readers living in, and/or employed in, Westchester
County. The Guardian will strive to report fairly, and objectively, reliable information without favor or compromise.
Our first duty will be to the PeoPle’S Right to KNow, by the exposure of truth, without fear or hesitation,
no matter where the pursuit may lead, in the finest tradition of FReeDom oF the PReSS.
The Guardian will cover news and events relevant to residents and businesses all over Westchester County.
As a weekly, rather than focusing on the immediacy of delivery more associated with daily journals, we will
instead seek to provide the broader, more comprehensive, chronological step-by-step accounting of events,
enlightened with analysis, where appropriate.
From amongst journalism’s classic key-words: who, what, when, where, why, and how, the why and how will
drive our pursuit. We will use our more abundant time, and our resources, to get past the initial ‘spin’ and ‘damage control’ often characteristic of immediate news releases, to reach the very heart of the matter: the truth.
We will take our readers to a point of understanding and insight which cannot be obtained elsewhere. To succeed, we must recognize from the outset that bigger is not necessarily better. And, furthermore, we will
acknowledge that we cannot be all things to all readers.
We must carefully balance the presentation of relevant, hard-hitting, Westchester news and commentary, with
features and columns useful in daily living and employment in, and around, the county. We must stay trim and
flexible if we are to succeed.
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
A recent teenage drinking party on September 9th, 2006, has landed some Chappaqua teenagers in hot water with their parents, school and local police. But will the charges stand after defense lawyers find out that members of the police involved with the investigation and subsequent arrest may have liabilities of their own because they may have been involved with lying in official matters, falsifying reports, or expressing bias which will render them unable to testify credibly and consequently as law enforcement officers?
The relevant cases are The State of New York, by Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General vs. Dennis Mahoney and John Vize, filed with the Westchester County Clerk’s office on July 27, 2006, by the Attorney General’s of-
fice, has focused tremendous attention on the Town of New Castle’s 40 member Police Department, a matter that has churned since 1999, involving a top law enforcement officer who is still on duty—in this case New
Castle police Lieutenant John Vize, who is accused of keeping fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to help a fellow officer—Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the officer had in fact
only worked 19 years. According to twenty years worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by the Public Integrity Section of the office of Westchester District Attorney Jeannine Pirro,
Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme
The second case is Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178. Kaufman was the only Jewish police of-ficer employed by the town until approximately 2004.
His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman
filed worker compensation claims.
In the U.S. Supreme Court case of Giglio v United States, the Supreme Court extended the obligation to share exculpatory information with the defendant to include information concerning the credibility of government
witnesses.
According to a recent article entitled “Disclosing Officer Untruthfulness to the Defense: Is a Liars Squad Coming to Your Town?” by Lisa A. Judge in Police Chief Magazine, “The reality is that prosecutors must rely on law
enforcement agencies to inform them of a hidden witness credibility problem including, for example, evidence of an officer’s prior untruthfulness in official matters.”
Ten years ago, in 1996, Attorney General Janet Reno established the Giglio Policy to require federal law enforcement agencies to inform federal prosecutors about potential impeachment information, including prior
misconduct information.
Judge also stated “Many state and local agencies have begun to disclose to prosecutors any conclusive information regarding untruthfulness, bias and crimes committed by an officer who is to be a material witness
in a criminal prosecution.”
“As this trend grows, agencies will be required to deal more forcefully with officers who lie. Departments may choose to adopt strict policies regarding truthfulness and rigorously adhere to those policies. Without taking such steps, agencies set themselves up to employee a portion of their commissioned workforce as administrative employees, unable to investigate crimes and testify regarding their investigations.”
OUR MISSION: The Westchester Guardian is a weekly newspaper devoted to the unbiased reporting of events and developments that are newsworthy and significant to readers living in, and/or employed in, Westchester
County. The Guardian will strive to report fairly, and objectively, reliable information without favor or compromise.
Our first duty will be to the PeoPle’S Right to KNow, by the exposure of truth, without fear or hesitation,
no matter where the pursuit may lead, in the finest tradition of FReeDom oF the PReSS.
The Guardian will cover news and events relevant to residents and businesses all over Westchester County.
As a weekly, rather than focusing on the immediacy of delivery more associated with daily journals, we will
instead seek to provide the broader, more comprehensive, chronological step-by-step accounting of events,
enlightened with analysis, where appropriate.
From amongst journalism’s classic key-words: who, what, when, where, why, and how, the why and how will
drive our pursuit. We will use our more abundant time, and our resources, to get past the initial ‘spin’ and ‘damage control’ often characteristic of immediate news releases, to reach the very heart of the matter: the truth.
We will take our readers to a point of understanding and insight which cannot be obtained elsewhere. To succeed, we must recognize from the outset that bigger is not necessarily better. And, furthermore, we will
acknowledge that we cannot be all things to all readers.
We must carefully balance the presentation of relevant, hard-hitting, Westchester news and commentary, with
features and columns useful in daily living and employment in, and around, the county. We must stay trim and
flexible if we are to succeed.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
New Castle Police Coverup Continues
Some states prosecute public employees for illegal practices to the full extent allowed by their laws. The ex- Governor of Illinois was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison for racketeering and fraud on September 6th. Some states will promptly investigate allegations of serious ethical lapses by law enforcement officials. For example, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey resigned on August 15th due to a serious ethical violation occurring on May 26, 2006.
But everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua - without ever being subjected to any disciplinary actions, in a matter that has churning since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case he is New Castle police Lieutenant John Vize,who is accused of keepingt fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to help a fellow officer, Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the officer had in fact only worked 19 years.
According to twenty years’ worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by the Public Integrity Section of the office of Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme which was clearly reflected in the Department’s three month work schedules, constantly monitored by the entire staff, that were clearly posted in a glass encased bulletin board prominently displayed behind the Police Department’s front desk.
The State Comptrollers Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also investigated these allegations. And the office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit on July 27th , 2006, under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law (the “Tweed L a w ” ) against the two New Castle police officers, seeking to recover damages of $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 and more than $ 1 8 0 , 0 0 0 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000, and salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town during the period of breach of fiduciary duty from on or about August 1999 to on or about July 2000, as a result of a “paper trail more than a mile wide” according persons involved with the investigation.
Prosecuting matters of public corruption are increasingly rare in today’s environment. Two Westchester District Attorneys, Jeanine Pirro and Janet DiFiore, have thus far failed to prosecute anyone involved in this public integrity case despite having seized nearly 20 years of records three years ago. DiFiore spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, told this reporter on September 6th, “this is an open case that is active and I’m not able to comment further.”
A spokesman for the office of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer who asked to remain unnamed, when asked why the public integrity unit of Spitzer’s Criminal Division only filed a civil case and did not pursue any criminal charges in this fraud litigation, said, “ Two avenues were open, and while criminal charges could be brought, the office of the Attorney General determined that only a civil case would be prosecuted at this time.”
The police lieutenant accused in this matter, John Vize, reportedly has not been fired nor disciplined in this matter. In fact, he was the top ranking officer on duty at the end of August when Chief Robert Breen, who is still on the job, was away on vacation. Breen governs a department that has 40 fulltime members and eight other staff althoughthe community which encompasses Chappaqua and Millwood, is noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter. No public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. As a result, the Town of New Castle has not filed any charges against the officers with the Offices of the Westchester District Attorney nor the New York State Attorney General.
Tension permeates the New Castle Town Hall as a result of this lawsuit and others that have been brought against the town. Their police officers have been working without a contract for 19 months. The New Castle police have conducted informational picketing in Chappaqua’s downtown business district as recently as Wednesday, September 6th in order to draw attention to what the say is the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith. Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle et al On June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County, entitled Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178.
Plaintiff Kaufman, who is Jewish, had been employed by New Castle as a Police Officer since August, 1983, receiving good reviews throughout his career. According to the lawsuit, the top five positions in the New Castle Police Department have been held by individuals of Irish national origin including Chief Breen, Lt. James Baynes, Lt. John Vize, Lt. Charles Ferry, Detective Sergeant James Carroll (Ret.), and Detective Sergeant Marc Simmons
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the town until approximately 2004. His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman filed.worker compensation claims.
Kaufman’s suit states that “during the recent past and continuing to the present, plaintiff has been the subject of anti-Semitic remarks on numerous occasions. These anti-Semitic remarks have been made by other Irish police officers in the presence of individual defendants and have been made by the individual defendants. These remarks continued with the acquiescence of the defendant Department’s Administration, who did nothing to prevent them, but, instead, reward those who utter the anti-Semitic remarks.
Defendant Tully, on several occasions, usually at the police muster, made malicious anti-Semitic statements. Defendant Breen and the Administration, instead of disciplining defendant Tully, rewarded him with the title of Administrative Sergeant. Defendant Tully was then given other choice assignments by defendant Breen. Plaintiff was present on many of the occasions.
Police Officer Gary Beaumont, on numerous occasions, made comments about hating Jews. Again, although having knowledge of these comments, defendant Breen and the Department’s Administration rewarded Officer Beaumont by making him Traffic Enforcement Officer, where he would have further opportunity to target and profile Jews and other people he hates. The Department’s Administration also rewarded Officer Beaumont by appointing him as Field Training Officer.
There are two police officers named James Carroll. One was a Detective Sargeant, the other is now a Sergeant. One recent year, both were at the front desk of defendant Department. They had just returned from working at a Jewish Holiday service at Temple Beth El in Chappaqua. In plaintiff ’s presence, they uttered anti-Semite comments such as “Jew bastards” and “fucking Jews.” The also stated that “Jews have too much money.” Plaintiff had to tell both Officers Carroll that he, as a Jewish officer, was offended by their bigoted comments.
The two officers scoffed at plaintiff and laughed at him.
On a prior occasion, a similar incident took place in plaintiff’s presence. On that occasion, then Police Officer Carroll also made malicious, anti-Semitic statements.
The anti-Semitism displayed by both Officers Carroll are well-known to defendant Breen and Department’s Administration. However, defendant Breen, instead of disciplining these individuals, has promoted them and/or given them choice assignments at the expense of more qualified, non-Irish police officers. This favoritism promotes the complained of hostile work environment.
Plaintiff has also learned that, on another occasion, defendant Baynes referred to a civil rights organization named the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a bad organization run by a bunch of “fucking Jews.” Plaintiff has also been informed that defendant Vize has referred to him as “one stupid Jew.”
These types of anti-Semitic remarks have caused plaintiff a great deal of stress and mental anguish. It is not very pleasant going to work every day knowing how your supervisors feel about you because of your religion.”
New Castle’s Insurance Carrier Denies Coverage for Kaufman’s Lawsuit On July 14, 2005, the Town of New Castle’s insurance carrier for matters such as this litigation, informed the Town that they would not cover any expenses associated with matter as they are not covered under the terms of the policy.
New Castle would be well served to look nearby for methods of dealing with serious issues regarding police department management. The Knapp and Mollen Commissions were established to deal with police corruption in New York City. The Knapp Commission issued a report in 1972 and the Mollen Commission report in 1995 raised questions about the New York Police Department’s ability to police itself and recommended an independent panel with subpoena power in order to deal with a culture of corruption.
The latter commission has a $500,000 budget and a permanent staff of four lawyers. It audits and studies the department’s anticorruption strategies. It has been criticized as ineffectual because it has no power to compel the department to provide information. The six commissioners, all lawyers, are appointed by the mayor and serve without pay. The staff is paid by the city and serves at the pleasure of the mayor of New York City.
Prompt resolution of issues regarding police department governance will impact any attempts by New Castle to retain and/or renew its accreditation from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services according to a source familiar with the process.
Loss of this accreditation could impact the town’s insurance rates.
New Castle attempts to restrict access by residents to the Westchester Guardian newspaper
While the Town of New Castle hasn’t yet disciplined or fired any personnel as a result of the charges laid out in Attorney General Spitzer’s suit, they have nevertheless, been quite busy confiscating The Westchester Guardian’s newspaper’s distribution box that was positioned in downtown Chappaqua next to that of 4 other newspapersoutside of Starbuck’s. The box was released only after payment of a $74.95 ransom. Days later the boxes at the Chappaqua Train Station and near Rite Aid were ordered removed by a representative of New Castle town government.
Some states prosecute public employees for illegal practices to the full extent allowed by their laws. The ex- Governor of Illinois was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison for racketeering and fraud on September 6th. Some states will promptly investigate allegations of serious ethical lapses by law enforcement officials. For example, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey resigned on August 15th due to a serious ethical violation occurring on May 26, 2006.
But everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua - without ever being subjected to any disciplinary actions, in a matter that has churning since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case he is New Castle police Lieutenant John Vize,who is accused of keepingt fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to help a fellow officer, Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the officer had in fact only worked 19 years.
According to twenty years’ worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by the Public Integrity Section of the office of Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme which was clearly reflected in the Department’s three month work schedules, constantly monitored by the entire staff, that were clearly posted in a glass encased bulletin board prominently displayed behind the Police Department’s front desk.
The State Comptrollers Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also investigated these allegations. And the office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit on July 27th , 2006, under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law (the “Tweed L a w ” ) against the two New Castle police officers, seeking to recover damages of $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 and more than $ 1 8 0 , 0 0 0 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000, and salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town during the period of breach of fiduciary duty from on or about August 1999 to on or about July 2000, as a result of a “paper trail more than a mile wide” according persons involved with the investigation.
Prosecuting matters of public corruption are increasingly rare in today’s environment. Two Westchester District Attorneys, Jeanine Pirro and Janet DiFiore, have thus far failed to prosecute anyone involved in this public integrity case despite having seized nearly 20 years of records three years ago. DiFiore spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, told this reporter on September 6th, “this is an open case that is active and I’m not able to comment further.”
A spokesman for the office of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer who asked to remain unnamed, when asked why the public integrity unit of Spitzer’s Criminal Division only filed a civil case and did not pursue any criminal charges in this fraud litigation, said, “ Two avenues were open, and while criminal charges could be brought, the office of the Attorney General determined that only a civil case would be prosecuted at this time.”
The police lieutenant accused in this matter, John Vize, reportedly has not been fired nor disciplined in this matter. In fact, he was the top ranking officer on duty at the end of August when Chief Robert Breen, who is still on the job, was away on vacation. Breen governs a department that has 40 fulltime members and eight other staff althoughthe community which encompasses Chappaqua and Millwood, is noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter. No public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. As a result, the Town of New Castle has not filed any charges against the officers with the Offices of the Westchester District Attorney nor the New York State Attorney General.
Tension permeates the New Castle Town Hall as a result of this lawsuit and others that have been brought against the town. Their police officers have been working without a contract for 19 months. The New Castle police have conducted informational picketing in Chappaqua’s downtown business district as recently as Wednesday, September 6th in order to draw attention to what the say is the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith. Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle et al On June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County, entitled Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178.
Plaintiff Kaufman, who is Jewish, had been employed by New Castle as a Police Officer since August, 1983, receiving good reviews throughout his career. According to the lawsuit, the top five positions in the New Castle Police Department have been held by individuals of Irish national origin including Chief Breen, Lt. James Baynes, Lt. John Vize, Lt. Charles Ferry, Detective Sergeant James Carroll (Ret.), and Detective Sergeant Marc Simmons
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the town until approximately 2004. His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman filed.worker compensation claims.
Kaufman’s suit states that “during the recent past and continuing to the present, plaintiff has been the subject of anti-Semitic remarks on numerous occasions. These anti-Semitic remarks have been made by other Irish police officers in the presence of individual defendants and have been made by the individual defendants. These remarks continued with the acquiescence of the defendant Department’s Administration, who did nothing to prevent them, but, instead, reward those who utter the anti-Semitic remarks.
Defendant Tully, on several occasions, usually at the police muster, made malicious anti-Semitic statements. Defendant Breen and the Administration, instead of disciplining defendant Tully, rewarded him with the title of Administrative Sergeant. Defendant Tully was then given other choice assignments by defendant Breen. Plaintiff was present on many of the occasions.
Police Officer Gary Beaumont, on numerous occasions, made comments about hating Jews. Again, although having knowledge of these comments, defendant Breen and the Department’s Administration rewarded Officer Beaumont by making him Traffic Enforcement Officer, where he would have further opportunity to target and profile Jews and other people he hates. The Department’s Administration also rewarded Officer Beaumont by appointing him as Field Training Officer.
There are two police officers named James Carroll. One was a Detective Sargeant, the other is now a Sergeant. One recent year, both were at the front desk of defendant Department. They had just returned from working at a Jewish Holiday service at Temple Beth El in Chappaqua. In plaintiff ’s presence, they uttered anti-Semite comments such as “Jew bastards” and “fucking Jews.” The also stated that “Jews have too much money.” Plaintiff had to tell both Officers Carroll that he, as a Jewish officer, was offended by their bigoted comments.
The two officers scoffed at plaintiff and laughed at him.
On a prior occasion, a similar incident took place in plaintiff’s presence. On that occasion, then Police Officer Carroll also made malicious, anti-Semitic statements.
The anti-Semitism displayed by both Officers Carroll are well-known to defendant Breen and Department’s Administration. However, defendant Breen, instead of disciplining these individuals, has promoted them and/or given them choice assignments at the expense of more qualified, non-Irish police officers. This favoritism promotes the complained of hostile work environment.
Plaintiff has also learned that, on another occasion, defendant Baynes referred to a civil rights organization named the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a bad organization run by a bunch of “fucking Jews.” Plaintiff has also been informed that defendant Vize has referred to him as “one stupid Jew.”
These types of anti-Semitic remarks have caused plaintiff a great deal of stress and mental anguish. It is not very pleasant going to work every day knowing how your supervisors feel about you because of your religion.”
New Castle’s Insurance Carrier Denies Coverage for Kaufman’s Lawsuit On July 14, 2005, the Town of New Castle’s insurance carrier for matters such as this litigation, informed the Town that they would not cover any expenses associated with matter as they are not covered under the terms of the policy.
New Castle would be well served to look nearby for methods of dealing with serious issues regarding police department management. The Knapp and Mollen Commissions were established to deal with police corruption in New York City. The Knapp Commission issued a report in 1972 and the Mollen Commission report in 1995 raised questions about the New York Police Department’s ability to police itself and recommended an independent panel with subpoena power in order to deal with a culture of corruption.
The latter commission has a $500,000 budget and a permanent staff of four lawyers. It audits and studies the department’s anticorruption strategies. It has been criticized as ineffectual because it has no power to compel the department to provide information. The six commissioners, all lawyers, are appointed by the mayor and serve without pay. The staff is paid by the city and serves at the pleasure of the mayor of New York City.
Prompt resolution of issues regarding police department governance will impact any attempts by New Castle to retain and/or renew its accreditation from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services according to a source familiar with the process.
Loss of this accreditation could impact the town’s insurance rates.
New Castle attempts to restrict access by residents to the Westchester Guardian newspaper
While the Town of New Castle hasn’t yet disciplined or fired any personnel as a result of the charges laid out in Attorney General Spitzer’s suit, they have nevertheless, been quite busy confiscating The Westchester Guardian’s newspaper’s distribution box that was positioned in downtown Chappaqua next to that of 4 other newspapersoutside of Starbuck’s. The box was released only after payment of a $74.95 ransom. Days later the boxes at the Chappaqua Train Station and near Rite Aid were ordered removed by a representative of New Castle town government.
New Castle Police Coverup Continues
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
Some states prosecute public employees for illegal practices to the full extent allowed by their laws. The ex-
Governor of Illinois was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison for racketeering and fraud on September 6th. Some states will promptly investigate allegations of serious ethical lapses by law enforcement officials. For example, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey resigned on August 15th due to a serious ethical violation occurring on May 26, 2006.
But everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua - without ever being subjected to any disciplinary actions, in a
matter that has churning since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case he is New Castle
police Lieutenant John Vize,who is accused of keepingt fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to
help a fellow officer, Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the of-ficer had in fact only worked 19 years.
According to twenty years’ worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by
the Public Integrity Section of the of-fice of Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme which was clearly reflected in the Department’s three month work schedules, constantly monitored by the entire staff, that were clearly posted in a glass encased bulletin board prominently displayed behind the
Police Department’s front desk.
The State Comptrollers Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also investigated these
allegations. And the office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit on July 27th , 2006, under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law (the “Tweed L a w ” ) against the two New Castle police officers,
s e e k i n g to recover damages of $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 and more t h a n $ 1 8 0 , 0 0 0 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000, and salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town during the period of breach
of fiduciary duty from on or about August 1999 to on or about July 2000, as a result of a “paper trail more than a mile wide” according persons involved with the investigation.
Prosecuting matters of public corruption are increasingly rare in today’s environment. Two Westchester
District Attorneys, Jeanine Pirro and Janet DiFiore, have thus far failed to prosecute anyone involved in this
public integrity case despite having seized nearly 20 years of records three years ago. DiFiore spokesman,
Lucien Chalfen, told this reporter on September 6th, “this is an open case that is active and I’m not able to comment further.”
A spokesman for the office of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer who asked to remain unnamed, when
asked why the public integrity unit of Spitzer’s Criminal Division only filed a civil case and did not pursue any criminal charges in this fraud litigation, said, “Two avenues were open, and while criminal charges could be brought, the office of the Attorney General determined that only a civil case would be prosecuted at this time.”
The police lieutenant accused in this matter, John Vize, reportedly has not been fired nor disciplined in this
matter. In fact, he was the top ranking officer on duty at the end of August when Chief Robert Breen, who is still
on the job, was away on vacation. Breen governs a department that has 40 fulltime members and eight other staff although the community which encompasses Chappaqua and Millwood, is noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter.
No public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. As a result, the Town of New Castle has not filed any charges against the officers with the Offices of the Westchester District Attorney nor the New York State Attorney General.
Tension permeates the New Castle the New Castle Town Hall as a result of this lawsuit and others that have been brought against the town. Their police officers have been working without a contract for 19 months. The New Castle police have conducted informational picketing in Chappaqua’s downtown business district as recently as Wednesday, September 6th in order to draw attention to what they say is the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith. Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle et al
On June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County, entitled Steve Kaufman vs.
Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178.
Plaintiff Kaufman, who is Jewish, had been employed by New Castle as a Police Officer since August, 1983, receiving good reviews throughout his career. According to the lawsuit, the top five positions in the New Castle Police Department have been held by individuals of Irish national origin including Chief Breen, Lt. James Baynes,
Lt. John Vize, Lt. Charles Ferry, Detective Sergeant James Carroll (Ret.), and Detective Sergeant Marc Simmons.
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the town until approximately 2004. His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman filed.worker compensation claims.
Kaufman’s suit states that “during the recent past and continuing to the present, plaintiff has been the subject of anti-Semitic remarks on numerous occasions. These anti-Semitic remarks have been made by other Irish police officers in the presence of individual defendants and have been made by the individual defendants.
These remarks continued with the acquiescence of the defendant Department’s Administration, who did nothing to prevent them, but, instead, reward those who utter the anti-Semitic remarks. Defendant Tully, on several occasions, usually at the police muster, made malicious anti-Semitic statements. Defendant Breen and the Administration, instead of disciplining defendant Tully, rewarded him with the title of Administrative Sergeant.
Defendant Tully was then given other choice assignments by defendant Breen. Plaintiff was present on many of the occasions. Police Officer Gary Beaumont, on numerous occasions, made comments about hating Jews. Again, although having knowledge of these comments, defendant Breen and the Department’s Administration rewarded Officer Beaumont by making him Traffic Enforcement Officer, where he would have further opportunity to target and profile Jews and other people he hates. The Department’s Administration also rewarded Officer Beaumont by appointing him as Field Training Officer.
There are two police officers named James Carroll. One was a Detective Sargeant, the other is now a Sergeant. One recent year, both were at the front desk of defendant Department. They had just returned from working at a Jewish Holiday service at Temple Beth El in Chappaqua. In plaintiff ’s presence, they uttered anti-Semite comments such as “Jew bastards” and “fucking Jews.” The also stated that “Jews have too much money.”
Plaintiff had to tell both Officers Carroll that he, as a Jewish officer, was offended by their bigoted comments. The two officers scoffed at plaintiff and laughed at him. On a prior occasion, a similar incident took place in plaintiff’s presence. On that occasion, then Police Officer Carroll also made malicious, anti-Semitic statements.
The anti-Semitism displayed by both Officers Carroll are well-known to defendant Breen and Department’s Administration. However, defendant Breen, instead of disciplining these individuals, has promoted them and/or given them choice assignments at the expense of more qualified, non-Irish police officers.
This favoritism promotes the complained of hostile work environment. Plaintiff has also learned that, on another occasion, defendant Baynes referred to a civil rights organization named the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a bad organization run by a bunch of “fucking Jews.” Plaintiff has also been informed that defendant Vize has referred to him as “one stupid Jew.”
These types of anti-Semitic remarks have caused plaintiff a great deal of stress and mental anguish. It is not very pleasant going to work every day knowing how your supervisors feel about you because of your religion.”
New Castle’s Insurance Carrier Denies Coverage for Kaufman’s Lawsuit On July 14, 2005, the Town of New Castle’s insurance carrier for matters such as this litigation, informed the Town that they would not cover any expenses associated with matter as they are not covered under the terms of the policy.
New Castle would be well served to look nearby for methods of dealing with serious issues regarding police department management. The Knapp and Mollen Commissions were established to deal with police corruption in New York City. The Knapp Commission issued a report in 1972 and the Mollen Commission report in 1995 raised questions about the New York Police Department’s ability to police itself and recommended an independent panel with subpoena power in order to deal with a culture of corruption.
The latter commission has a $500,000 budget and a permanent staff of four lawyers. It audits and studies the department’s anticorruption strategies. It has been criticized as ineffectual because it has no power to compel the department to provide information. The six commissioners, all lawyers, are appointed by the mayor and serve without pay. The staff is paid by the city and serves at the pleasure of the mayor of New York City.
Prompt resolution of issues regarding police department governance will impact any attempts by New Castle to retain and/or renew its accreditation from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services according to a source familiar with the process.
Loss of this accreditation could impact the town’s insurance rates. New Castle attempts to restrict access by residents to the Westchester Guardian newspaper While the Town of New Castle hasn’t yet disciplined or fired any personnel as a result of the charges laid out in Attorney General Spitzer’s suit, they have nevertheless,
been quite busy confiscating The Westchester Guardian’s newspaper’s distribution box that was positioned in downtown Chappaqua next to that of 4 other newspapers outside of Starbuck’s. The box was released only after payment of a $74.95 ransom. Days later the boxes at the Chappaqua Train Station and near Rite Aid were
ordered removed by a representative of New Castle town government.
Editor’s Note: Readers can still find The Westchester Guardian in New Castle at the following establishments who still feel comfortable in supporting our Country’s basic tenet of Freedom Of The Press: Lange’s Deli, Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts, Station Pizza, Rocky’s Deli and Hero Pizzeria.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
Some states prosecute public employees for illegal practices to the full extent allowed by their laws. The ex-
Governor of Illinois was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison for racketeering and fraud on September 6th. Some states will promptly investigate allegations of serious ethical lapses by law enforcement officials. For example, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey resigned on August 15th due to a serious ethical violation occurring on May 26, 2006.
But everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua - without ever being subjected to any disciplinary actions, in a
matter that has churning since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case he is New Castle
police Lieutenant John Vize,who is accused of keepingt fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to
help a fellow officer, Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the of-ficer had in fact only worked 19 years.
According to twenty years’ worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by
the Public Integrity Section of the of-fice of Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme which was clearly reflected in the Department’s three month work schedules, constantly monitored by the entire staff, that were clearly posted in a glass encased bulletin board prominently displayed behind the
Police Department’s front desk.
The State Comptrollers Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also investigated these
allegations. And the office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit on July 27th , 2006, under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law (the “Tweed L a w ” ) against the two New Castle police officers,
s e e k i n g to recover damages of $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 and more t h a n $ 1 8 0 , 0 0 0 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000, and salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town during the period of breach
of fiduciary duty from on or about August 1999 to on or about July 2000, as a result of a “paper trail more than a mile wide” according persons involved with the investigation.
Prosecuting matters of public corruption are increasingly rare in today’s environment. Two Westchester
District Attorneys, Jeanine Pirro and Janet DiFiore, have thus far failed to prosecute anyone involved in this
public integrity case despite having seized nearly 20 years of records three years ago. DiFiore spokesman,
Lucien Chalfen, told this reporter on September 6th, “this is an open case that is active and I’m not able to comment further.”
A spokesman for the office of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer who asked to remain unnamed, when
asked why the public integrity unit of Spitzer’s Criminal Division only filed a civil case and did not pursue any criminal charges in this fraud litigation, said, “Two avenues were open, and while criminal charges could be brought, the office of the Attorney General determined that only a civil case would be prosecuted at this time.”
The police lieutenant accused in this matter, John Vize, reportedly has not been fired nor disciplined in this
matter. In fact, he was the top ranking officer on duty at the end of August when Chief Robert Breen, who is still
on the job, was away on vacation. Breen governs a department that has 40 fulltime members and eight other staff although the community which encompasses Chappaqua and Millwood, is noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter.
No public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. As a result, the Town of New Castle has not filed any charges against the officers with the Offices of the Westchester District Attorney nor the New York State Attorney General.
Tension permeates the New Castle the New Castle Town Hall as a result of this lawsuit and others that have been brought against the town. Their police officers have been working without a contract for 19 months. The New Castle police have conducted informational picketing in Chappaqua’s downtown business district as recently as Wednesday, September 6th in order to draw attention to what they say is the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith. Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle et al
On June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County, entitled Steve Kaufman vs.
Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178.
Plaintiff Kaufman, who is Jewish, had been employed by New Castle as a Police Officer since August, 1983, receiving good reviews throughout his career. According to the lawsuit, the top five positions in the New Castle Police Department have been held by individuals of Irish national origin including Chief Breen, Lt. James Baynes,
Lt. John Vize, Lt. Charles Ferry, Detective Sergeant James Carroll (Ret.), and Detective Sergeant Marc Simmons.
Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the town until approximately 2004. His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman filed.worker compensation claims.
Kaufman’s suit states that “during the recent past and continuing to the present, plaintiff has been the subject of anti-Semitic remarks on numerous occasions. These anti-Semitic remarks have been made by other Irish police officers in the presence of individual defendants and have been made by the individual defendants.
These remarks continued with the acquiescence of the defendant Department’s Administration, who did nothing to prevent them, but, instead, reward those who utter the anti-Semitic remarks. Defendant Tully, on several occasions, usually at the police muster, made malicious anti-Semitic statements. Defendant Breen and the Administration, instead of disciplining defendant Tully, rewarded him with the title of Administrative Sergeant.
Defendant Tully was then given other choice assignments by defendant Breen. Plaintiff was present on many of the occasions. Police Officer Gary Beaumont, on numerous occasions, made comments about hating Jews. Again, although having knowledge of these comments, defendant Breen and the Department’s Administration rewarded Officer Beaumont by making him Traffic Enforcement Officer, where he would have further opportunity to target and profile Jews and other people he hates. The Department’s Administration also rewarded Officer Beaumont by appointing him as Field Training Officer.
There are two police officers named James Carroll. One was a Detective Sargeant, the other is now a Sergeant. One recent year, both were at the front desk of defendant Department. They had just returned from working at a Jewish Holiday service at Temple Beth El in Chappaqua. In plaintiff ’s presence, they uttered anti-Semite comments such as “Jew bastards” and “fucking Jews.” The also stated that “Jews have too much money.”
Plaintiff had to tell both Officers Carroll that he, as a Jewish officer, was offended by their bigoted comments. The two officers scoffed at plaintiff and laughed at him. On a prior occasion, a similar incident took place in plaintiff’s presence. On that occasion, then Police Officer Carroll also made malicious, anti-Semitic statements.
The anti-Semitism displayed by both Officers Carroll are well-known to defendant Breen and Department’s Administration. However, defendant Breen, instead of disciplining these individuals, has promoted them and/or given them choice assignments at the expense of more qualified, non-Irish police officers.
This favoritism promotes the complained of hostile work environment. Plaintiff has also learned that, on another occasion, defendant Baynes referred to a civil rights organization named the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a bad organization run by a bunch of “fucking Jews.” Plaintiff has also been informed that defendant Vize has referred to him as “one stupid Jew.”
These types of anti-Semitic remarks have caused plaintiff a great deal of stress and mental anguish. It is not very pleasant going to work every day knowing how your supervisors feel about you because of your religion.”
New Castle’s Insurance Carrier Denies Coverage for Kaufman’s Lawsuit On July 14, 2005, the Town of New Castle’s insurance carrier for matters such as this litigation, informed the Town that they would not cover any expenses associated with matter as they are not covered under the terms of the policy.
New Castle would be well served to look nearby for methods of dealing with serious issues regarding police department management. The Knapp and Mollen Commissions were established to deal with police corruption in New York City. The Knapp Commission issued a report in 1972 and the Mollen Commission report in 1995 raised questions about the New York Police Department’s ability to police itself and recommended an independent panel with subpoena power in order to deal with a culture of corruption.
The latter commission has a $500,000 budget and a permanent staff of four lawyers. It audits and studies the department’s anticorruption strategies. It has been criticized as ineffectual because it has no power to compel the department to provide information. The six commissioners, all lawyers, are appointed by the mayor and serve without pay. The staff is paid by the city and serves at the pleasure of the mayor of New York City.
Prompt resolution of issues regarding police department governance will impact any attempts by New Castle to retain and/or renew its accreditation from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services according to a source familiar with the process.
Loss of this accreditation could impact the town’s insurance rates. New Castle attempts to restrict access by residents to the Westchester Guardian newspaper While the Town of New Castle hasn’t yet disciplined or fired any personnel as a result of the charges laid out in Attorney General Spitzer’s suit, they have nevertheless,
been quite busy confiscating The Westchester Guardian’s newspaper’s distribution box that was positioned in downtown Chappaqua next to that of 4 other newspapers outside of Starbuck’s. The box was released only after payment of a $74.95 ransom. Days later the boxes at the Chappaqua Train Station and near Rite Aid were
ordered removed by a representative of New Castle town government.
Editor’s Note: Readers can still find The Westchester Guardian in New Castle at the following establishments who still feel comfortable in supporting our Country’s basic tenet of Freedom Of The Press: Lange’s Deli, Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts, Station Pizza, Rocky’s Deli and Hero Pizzeria.
Thursday, September 7, 2006
New Castle Silence Deafening
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
The defendants, Dennis Mahoney, a retired police officer and, John Vize, a New Castle Police Department lieutenant, who is currently responsible for staff services and special events, are charged with misrepresenting
that the retired officer worked as a police officer for a full twenty years when, in fact, he worked only nineteen years under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law, to recover pension benefits paid by the State to Mahoney since on or about August 2000 for a total of $181,629 or $2751.95 per month; and, salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town of New Castle during the period of his breach of duty on or about August 1999, to on or about July 2000, approximately $100,00 in salary and benefits.
Defendant Lt. John Vize serves as the Police Department’s records offi-cer—which the complaint described as “a position of confidence and trust. Vize owes the Department, the Town, and the Town’s citizens a fiduciary
duty. His fiduciary duty includes, “a duty to perform his services in good faith, a duty of undivided and undiluted loyalty, and a duty to disclose to the Department, and the Town, any information material to transactions in
which he engaged on behalf of the Department.”
According to state rules, “to earn a year of creditable service, an employee must perform paid service for no less than six hours a day and thirty hours a week.” Furthermore, the law provides for increased retirement benefits
for police officers who work for a police department that has elected to participate in, and contribute to, this retirement plan, and who retire, “after the completion of twenty years of total creditable services.” The Town
of New Castle elected to participate in this plan, which entitles police of-ficers to receive a pension, together with an annuity, sufficient to provide the officer with a retirement allowance equal to one-half his or final average
salary.
According to the complaint, Mahoney, who now resides in Carey, North Carolina, did not perform any work for the Department, but continued to receive regular paychecks from the Town of New Castle during the time in
question. Lt. Vize, of Mohegan Lake, as the Department’s records officer was responsible for, among other things, scheduling and recording police officers’ shifts, and maintaining the Department’s payroll records for the
Town. With Lt. Vize’s knowledge, cooperation, and approval, other police officers worked many of the shifts that had been assigned to Mahoney.
Yet when Mahoney filed for retirement in 2000, he represented that he had completed 20 years of service, causing the state to pay Mahoney full pension benefits six years earlier than it would have done. According to a source at New Castle Town Hall, no one has yet resigned, been disciplined, or placed on leave, at anytime, as a result of this matter, including, but not limited to, Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella, or Police Chief Robert Breen. The Town has reportedly adopted a code of ethics for all town employees since this pattern of behavior came to light.
There is a lot of tension within the 40-member New Castle Police Department, which has worked without a contract for more than 19 months. During that time officers have repeatedly conducted informational picketing in downtown Chappaqua and at Town Board meetings, to draw attention to what has been referred to as “the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith.” Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating, “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
The Police Department was accredited in 2005 by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Accredited agencies must implement about 130 standards and procedures that contain a clear statement of their professional obligations and objectives. What is not clear is whether the Police Department will retain this state accreditation as a result of this litigation. Currently, no member of the New Castle Town Board has publicly called for any disciplinary actions, or resignations of members of the Department and their chain of command as result of this litigation, and other serious, unsolved, felonies.
Why hasn’t the Town of New Castle looked to other organizations for models of procedures to follow during investigations and prosecutions of ethics violations. For example, most large corporations have compliance groups that govern behavior in the conduct of business. Staff under scrutiny are often placed on leave, paid or unpaid, when circumstances warrant such removal, while independent third-party investigations are conducted.
Reports should have been issued publicly, and promptly, in order to assure taxpaying citizens that laws were being enforced, fairly and evenly, and that appropriate actions were being taken. Why has Town government failed to ful-fill its obligation to the residents of New Castle? What other skeletons does the Town have in its
closet?
by Maureen Keating Tsuchiya
The defendants, Dennis Mahoney, a retired police officer and, John Vize, a New Castle Police Department lieutenant, who is currently responsible for staff services and special events, are charged with misrepresenting
that the retired officer worked as a police officer for a full twenty years when, in fact, he worked only nineteen years under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law, to recover pension benefits paid by the State to Mahoney since on or about August 2000 for a total of $181,629 or $2751.95 per month; and, salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town of New Castle during the period of his breach of duty on or about August 1999, to on or about July 2000, approximately $100,00 in salary and benefits.
Defendant Lt. John Vize serves as the Police Department’s records offi-cer—which the complaint described as “a position of confidence and trust. Vize owes the Department, the Town, and the Town’s citizens a fiduciary
duty. His fiduciary duty includes, “a duty to perform his services in good faith, a duty of undivided and undiluted loyalty, and a duty to disclose to the Department, and the Town, any information material to transactions in
which he engaged on behalf of the Department.”
According to state rules, “to earn a year of creditable service, an employee must perform paid service for no less than six hours a day and thirty hours a week.” Furthermore, the law provides for increased retirement benefits
for police officers who work for a police department that has elected to participate in, and contribute to, this retirement plan, and who retire, “after the completion of twenty years of total creditable services.” The Town
of New Castle elected to participate in this plan, which entitles police of-ficers to receive a pension, together with an annuity, sufficient to provide the officer with a retirement allowance equal to one-half his or final average
salary.
According to the complaint, Mahoney, who now resides in Carey, North Carolina, did not perform any work for the Department, but continued to receive regular paychecks from the Town of New Castle during the time in
question. Lt. Vize, of Mohegan Lake, as the Department’s records officer was responsible for, among other things, scheduling and recording police officers’ shifts, and maintaining the Department’s payroll records for the
Town. With Lt. Vize’s knowledge, cooperation, and approval, other police officers worked many of the shifts that had been assigned to Mahoney.
Yet when Mahoney filed for retirement in 2000, he represented that he had completed 20 years of service, causing the state to pay Mahoney full pension benefits six years earlier than it would have done. According to a source at New Castle Town Hall, no one has yet resigned, been disciplined, or placed on leave, at anytime, as a result of this matter, including, but not limited to, Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella, or Police Chief Robert Breen. The Town has reportedly adopted a code of ethics for all town employees since this pattern of behavior came to light.
There is a lot of tension within the 40-member New Castle Police Department, which has worked without a contract for more than 19 months. During that time officers have repeatedly conducted informational picketing in downtown Chappaqua and at Town Board meetings, to draw attention to what has been referred to as “the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith.” Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating, “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
The Police Department was accredited in 2005 by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Accredited agencies must implement about 130 standards and procedures that contain a clear statement of their professional obligations and objectives. What is not clear is whether the Police Department will retain this state accreditation as a result of this litigation. Currently, no member of the New Castle Town Board has publicly called for any disciplinary actions, or resignations of members of the Department and their chain of command as result of this litigation, and other serious, unsolved, felonies.
Why hasn’t the Town of New Castle looked to other organizations for models of procedures to follow during investigations and prosecutions of ethics violations. For example, most large corporations have compliance groups that govern behavior in the conduct of business. Staff under scrutiny are often placed on leave, paid or unpaid, when circumstances warrant such removal, while independent third-party investigations are conducted.
Reports should have been issued publicly, and promptly, in order to assure taxpaying citizens that laws were being enforced, fairly and evenly, and that appropriate actions were being taken. Why has Town government failed to ful-fill its obligation to the residents of New Castle? What other skeletons does the Town have in its
closet?
Thursday, August 24, 2006
When Will New Castle Come Clean?
The Town of New Castle needs to take a clue from New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine on how to handle a delicate situation when an employee’s behavior raises serious ethical questions that could damage public confidence in law enforcement. Just such a recent case involved the former chief law enforcement officer of New Jersey, Attorney General Zulima Farber, regarding an event which took place on May 26, 2006.
As a result of prompt independent investigation, and a 43-page report issued by a former State Appeals Court judge, Ms. Farber resigned Tuesday, August 15th, the date the report was released to the public.
But east of the Hudson, nearly everybody has stayed on the job without any disciplinary actions in a matter that has churned in Chappaqua since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case it is a New Castle police lieutenant who kept fraudulent payroll records in order to help a fellow officer obtain a 20-year pension when the officer had actually only worked 19 years. New Castle is not New York City. Many are questioning how a year’s absence by a 19-year member of such a small police force could possibly go unnoticed by everyone else at work, in a police department which happens to be located in the community’s petite town hall? The officer in question was, in fact, busy relocating to a town in North Carolina where he owns a bar.
Where does the buck stop in the New Castle government’s chain of command? The police lieutenant accused in this matter reportedly has not been fired yet, nor disciplined. The top law enforcement officer in the community, Chief Robert Breen, is still on the job. Breen governs a department that has 40 full-time members and eight other staff in a community noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella, after learning of the matter, reportedly told Breen to “never let it happen again.” Faiella oversees personnel policies in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, in addition to supervising the town’s collective bargaining negotiations. Town police officers have been without a contract for 19 the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith.
Town Attorney, and former Town Supervisor, Clinton Smith still holds his position. The chief elected official, Supervisor Jan Wells and the four Town Board members, all lawyers, have not issued any report on this matter even though the Westchester District Attorney’s office had informed Faiella of its investigation of this matter as early as 2003. No public demand for any resignation has been made by the town board to date.
The State Comptroller’s Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also been very involved in this case. The office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit in late July against the two New Castle police officers, seeking to recover damages of $100,000 and more than $180,000 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000. Faiella has stated, “The town (of New Castle) was not named in the suit and we’re not in a position to comment about the allegations.”
Contrast that response with the case of the recent resignation of the New Jersey Attorney General. New Jersey requires each agency to establish “a code of ethics to govern and guide the conduct of the State officers and employees...” Among the purposes of the Code is, “the preservation of public confidence in the administration of justice and enforcement of laws.”
The judge investigating that matter said that the Attorney General’s conduct constituted a violation “of the Code of Ethics of the Department of Law and Public.
Section II C provides: Officers of employees shall not perform their official duties in any manner from which it might be reasonably inferred that the influence… of a personal relationship… caused them to act in a biased or partial manner. The Attorney General is that state’s chief law enforcement officer. She is charged with responsibility for ensuring that the laws are faithfully and fairly enforced.”
Ordinary citizens rely upon their local governments to administer laws in a fair and evenhanded process. This duty is a continuing one and especially timely as school will be starting in Chappaqua right after Labor Day. For parents of high school students, it can be a time of much angst as they send their teenagers on their way, often in the family automobile. They hope their children are listening as they receive explicit instructions regarding driving laws and regulations, and the possible consequences of any violations.
Taking no public action nor issuing a public report when police officers are accused of pension fraud does not instill confidence in taxpaying parents whose children may be arrested or ticketed by the same police department. Teenagers are often the first members of the community to learn that teachers or police officers have given anyone favorable treatment, news that spreads like a fire across a drought stricken praire. These kids know that they will be grounded, driving privileges withdrawn, and even suspended from school if they violate parental and school district rules.
The lessons taught in such circumstances can have far-reaching implications. The first one is the importance of having a code of ethics to help guide behavior. Children look to adults the same way citizens look to their governments for leadership, especially under difficult circumstances.
The town of New Castle could look to other organizations for ethics code models. For example, most large corporations have compliance groups that govern behavior in the conduct of business. Staff under scrutiny are often placed on leave, paid or unpaid, when circumstances warrant such removal, while independent third party investigations are conducted.
The Town Board hasn’t publicly disciplined anyone yet but instead hired a consultant in the last year to conduct a feasibility study that has yet to be made available to the public regarding expansion of the Police Departments space needs at town hall or to relocate the 48 member department and the town’s justice court to another location. To some members of the public, this constitutes a reward for bad behavior.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
