It's Time For Supervisor Gromack To Resign

"You have enemies? Good! That means you have stood up for something in your life" - Winston Churchill
 

At the April 09, 2013 Town Board meeting the ‘Clarkstown Residents Opposing Patronage’ (CROP) asked the Town Board to vote to approve an audit of the Town Attorney’s office given past concerns about the process by which Jay Savino was hired to conduct the Town’s tax certiorari matters.

During the meeting Tom Nimick and Ralph Sabatini (CROP directors along with myself) made the following statements.

Tom Nimick – New City

Members of the Town Board: With regard to the first agenda item I have the following comments and questions. I notice that you are approving the minutes of your special meeting on April 02, 2013 in which you voted unanimously to terminate your relationship with Mr. Savino, who was recently indicted in Federal Court for accepting a bribe, among other things.

As you will recall, I and other members of the public have questioned you on numerous occasions since January 2012 about how Mr. Savino’s name came to your attention and the process by which Mr. Savino was vetted by the Office of the Town Attorney. Members of the public also brought to your attention several items that pertained to Mr. Savino's past behavior that raised serious questions about his ethical suitability for a post in the Town of Clarkstown.  Among these were his comments on an FBI wire tap that his colleagues should offer less than full assistance to a Federal judge.

As late as December 2012 we again brought Mr. Savino's background to the attention of the Town Board only to have you, Mr. Gromack, say that everything had been answered before. Mr. Hoehmann and Mr. Borelli indicated that Town Attorney Amy Mele had assured them he was properly vetted and was ethically suitable for the position.

Now our concerns have been fully vindicated. What I am wondering is why, when you were voting to terminate your relationship with Mr. Savino, you did not, at the same time, consider the actions of the Office of the Town Attorney. Why have you not questioned Ms. Mele about the flawed vetting process and her repeated assertions that Mr. Savino was an appropriate choice?

A number of the Town's citizens believe that these events show that the Office of Town Attorney has serious deficiencies that need to be investigated.  Therefore, I am now letting you know that the 'Clarkstown Residents Opposing Patronage' of which I, Ralph Sabatini, and Michael Hull are Directors are calling on the Town Board to take action this evening to authorize a full, and independent, audit of the operations of the Office of the Town Attorney and all of its personnel. 

Should you decline to act on this request this evening, I am informing you that we are prepared at the end of your proceedings tonight to serve you with a 'Notice of Claim’ as a first step in legal action against the Town to force an audit of the Town Attorney's office.

I now turn the matter over to Mr. Sabatini who will provide you with more details as it pertains to this agenda item.

Ralph Sabatini - New City

I’m here tonight to support the call for an independent audit occasioned by the firing of Mr. Savino. As the President of Clarkstown Residents Opposing Patronage, I’m calling for a truly independent and thorough audit of the Clarkstown legal office.

I am formally requesting that the Board tonight place and pass a motion for that audit. The audit would encompass all of the attorneys in the Town Attorney's office and all of their billings. If that action is not taken by the close of this meeting, I am prepared to serve the Board and each of its members with a Notice of Claim, which will be followed with a lawsuit compelling that audit.

Should the Board agree to conduct the audit by affirmative vote this evening, we will hold service of the 'Notice' in abeyance.

Each member of the Board has been duly elected as independent servants of the people. Each of you independently has the power to introduce a motion to conduct this audit. By authorizing funding for the audit tonight the Town will avoid using taxpayer money for outside counsel to fight this legal action and then be compelled to carry out the audit that is requested.

I shall be happy to respond to any questions you may have at this time.

In response to this request Supervisor Gromack stated:

“I think that is the most ludicrous statement I have ever heard. This town attorney, I think, is one of the finest town attorney’s Clarkstown has ever had. The town attorney and other attorneys in that office have served in a very professional way. To suggest that they have the ability to 'vet' an individual is again a ludicrous statement.”

As the Rockland County Times reported Sabatini added:

“We, you, and I have been burned by what appears to be a bad apple. We are simply looking for assurance that that’s the end of the story and we think the audit will give us the taxpayers and you, the Board, that assurance. All we are asking for is an independent audit of the legal office. We’d like you to do the right thing. All we are requesting tonight is the Board to place and pass a motion of that audit to encompass all the attorneys in the town’s attorney office.

New City Patch reported: “Feel free to serve me with the papers,” Councilman Hoehmann said. 

Before the close of the meeting I addressed Councilmen Hoehmann and Borelli with a final appeal saying that on numerous occasions I had addressed them at Town Board meetings concerning what was known about Savino’s background and that I had written many detailed articles about this matter. Despite this they had always pointed to the Town Attorney as the person who had assured them that everything about Savino and his hiring was in order and that he had been properly "vetted".   I also indicated that no one wished to proceed with a lawsuit against the Town to compel an audit of the Town Attorney’s office.   I appealed to both councilmen to make a motion for the audit which would begin the process of placing this distasteful event behind us.  Both refused.

Yet, during the Board meeting Councilwoman Hausner declared:

"Two years ago I was the sole 'no' vote on the hiring of the firm of Jay Savino. At the time I had concerns with the process, and the lack of Rockland firms considered .... Initially I had some concerns of his character ...... Moving forward we need to firm up our RFP process .... I believe we need to have a more formalized process."

This stated the case succinctly for the audit that was being requested of the Town Attorney's office i.e. there were 'concerns with the process' - 'concerns about Savino's character' - the Town still needs to 'firm up its Request for Proposal process' - the Town still needs 'to have a more formalized process'.

A qualified outside auditor would assist the Town in making these much needed changes in order that the Town Board and the citizens of Clarkstown willl not have to go through a similar event in the future. That would be a course of action that would be in everyone's interest and perhaps most importantly it would be in the best interest of the Town Attorney herself, the Town Board that she serves, and the citizens of Clarkstown.

Only a few days have elapsed since my colleagues and I requested this simple audit. The response of Supervisor Gromack has been swift and regrettable. His actions require his resignation as the Supervisor of Clarkstown.  

Let me explain ......

The law firm (Feerick, Lynch, MacCartney) that is representing Clarkstown Residents Opposing Patronage informed me that Supervisor Gromack had called one of its clients and had stated that the “gloves were now coming off". This implies that a message was being sent to our law firm for representing us since Supervisor Gromack accompanied his remark using the words “those taxpayers” to our law firm's client. The client to whom Supervisor Gromack spoke is prepared to back up what I have reported about the Supervisor's comments.

This conduct by Supervisor Gromack in speaking to a client of our law firm in this manner about its representation of our group causes me to state that Mr. Gromack has chosen a path, and exhibited behavior, that can not be tolerated from an elected official. 

Mr. Gromack has escalated a simple audit request by three citizens into what could now become a very expensive outcome for the taxpayers of Clarkstown.  In 1996, in the case of The Town of Orangetown vs. Magee, the taxpayers of Orangetown ended up paying eight million dollars to Feerick, Lynch, MacCartney to settle that case.

Supervisor Gromack apparently regards what he refers to as "those taxpayers" as his 'enemies' instead of 'citizens' who are exercising their rights to petition their government for transparency in its actions.  

I call upon Mr. Gromack to resign immediately as the Supervisor of the Town of Clarkstown.

He is no longer fit to hold public office.

Michael N. Hull is a retired senior citizen who writes opinion pieces on theology, philosophy and local political issues. He is also a director of 'Citizen Residents Opposing Patronage' along with Thomas Nimick and Ralph Sabatini.