Following the recall from afar.

[dgriffin]

Larry, thanks for being forthright, although I can't see why you wouldn't think the other candidates to be more qualified, and therefore more deserving of the position. I'm not a resident of the county or the city, so the Recall doesn't directly affect me. But I'm interested in why you think a recall is unconstitutional. I realize you're not an attorney, but I would be interested in hearing your thinking on the subject.

[rodwilson]

Thank you Dave.

[tanouryjr]

I never said I didn't think the other two weren't more qualified. I simply said Dan did a great job as PSC and the Mayor has made the choice. He is there now and I have to have a relationship with the Chief. My district has a lot of public safety issues and I must put that above politics.

Unlike California, the NYS Constitution doesn't have a provision for a recall. I believe that the state would have to pass this in order for municipalities to impliment it. I could be wrong, but that was my opinion at the time they were pushing for it.

[boomer]

I also seemed to feel Lionel was a little edgy on this one. Why is that? I had to read his posts a couple of times and they didn't seem... what's the word?

[rodwilson]

So Larry is your lack of belief regarding constitutionality procedural or philosophical or both?

[Swimmy]

I've read that because the right isn't included in the constitution, recall procedures are unconstitutional.
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5QWD/is_7_4/ai_n25001389/

[lefty]

Larry, I agree with you I think he did a great job of PSC, and I think that he will be a Good Chief Too!

Give the guy a chance!! I cant get any worse than what was there before when the hollier than thou Super Trooper destroyed not only the morale of the place but a lot of working relationships with other law enforcement the area.

[tanouryjr]

Thanks Lefty.

Swimmy, GREAT post. I think that article shows what I'm talking about and, correct me if I'm wrong, also shows that it is likely that the Recall in Utica wouldn't stand against a Constitutional challenge.

Rod, I would say procedural. As that article points out, NYS doesn't have a recall provision. We made these arguements when they proposed it, but they put it on the ballot anyway.

[gearofzanzibar]

Jun 25, 2009 23:53:38 GMT -5 @tanouryjr said:

Swimmy, GREAT post. I think that article shows what I'm talking about and, correct me if I'm wrong, also shows that it is likely that the Recall in Utica wouldn't stand against a Constitutional challenge.

So Mr. Roefaro will argue that the law he supported is now, when applied to him, illegal?

Pure. Comedy. Gold.

[Ralph]

Larry, stay the course.

I think at some point, no matter where all the bull trickles down to or from, that we have to remember that this was the Mayors appointment. It is on his desk that the buck for this fiasco stops, not on anyone else's, regardless what may be going on in the background.

This is one of those times when I agree with Larry 100%. Not his kitchen to cook in so why go in and stir the soup.

MY question is where are all the Councilpeople? You can't tell me they are all 100% behind the Mayor. Why haven't they spoken out, voiced an opinion, posted a bill on a phone pole somewhere???

Ahhhhhh........Let me guess, they are seeing which way the weather vane points when this terrible wind stops blowing!

Nuts!!!

Damn, I am sorry I decided not to run this time.

[Swimmy]

Jun 25, 2009 23:53:38 GMT -5 @tanouryjr said:

Thanks Lefty.

Swimmy, GREAT post. I think that article shows what I'm talking about and, correct me if I'm wrong, also shows that it is likely that the Recall in Utica wouldn't stand against a Constitutional challenge.

Rod, I would say procedural. As that article points out, NYS doesn't have a recall provision. We made these arguements when they proposed it, but they put it on the ballot anyway.

I cannot say that the recall will most likely fail a constitutional challenge. I have not done any legal research on the subject other than the google search that resulted in the link I shared.

I support the recall effort. So my argument of why the recall should be enforced is as follows:

• These arguments were made during the drafting of the recall provisions. The mayor and any other opponent to the recall provisions knew about the problems then and did nothing to change them. The provisions were put to a public vote and ratified, despite these arguments of unconstitutionality.
  
• The current mayor attempted to use the recall provisions to recall his opponent and then Mayor Julian. I also heard that the current mayor supported the procedures during the drafting phase. He should not be allowed to attempt to avoid this recall simply because he is the target now.
  
• The city charter is an agreement of how the city will be organized and maintained. Under this light, the charter should be viewed more as a contract between the government workers and the city citizens. Therefore, the contracting party should not be allowed to back out of a deal they now think is bad.
  
• The courts should view the recall provisions as it views other issues of similar nature: if the city of utica wanted a recall provision, far be it for us to strike it because an elected official who supported it since its inception now is the target of one and suddenly opposes the recall provisions.

I imagine that if those arguments are made, the opponents to the recall would argue that by the court deciding to enforce the provision, a state actor is created and the recall provision would become unconstitutional once the court opined to uphold the provision.

It's a tough issue, and I would not be as confident as the mayor that there would be no recall. And I don't think he's that confident either, else, why all the mud slinging? Why is labella changing his story? Why are most all other political figures completely silent? Why hasn't destito come to his aid? Why hasn't arcuri made some statement? Why haven't the democrats on the common council made a single statement? Where is everyone?

It is inevitable that the recall will be challenged. How a court will decide is another issue that I cannot competently comment on because i have not researched it. I'll leave it to the parties seeking such any court decision on the issue.

I disagree about dan being given a chance. He's lied to the public, along with roefaro, since roefaro took office. I knew then that roefie would do everything in his power to make labella police chief regardless the actually-qualified candidates. roefie even went as far to petition the state to make the Utica Police Chief exempt from the civil service law. It is an insult to my intelligence that labella thinks he can fool me or others like me into believing he never wanted the position until the march 7th exam and after he was "sick" took a county exam for NYM police chief and suddenly the two front runners are no longer eligible or interested and labella says he wants it. You think? The writing is on the wall.

While psc:

• labella has failed to stop the arsons;
  
• gang presence is ever increasing;
  
• the infrastructure continues to erode with NO effort to improve them;
  
• anything labella "did" cannot go unattributed to the successful efforts of Pylman; and
  
• the police department lost its accreditation.
  

roefie should be recalled from office. He's failed to do anything to improve the city. Maybe raised taxes to cover the raises to his friends. But hotel utica is still a major problem. He's failed to enforce the codes violations on Belle Ave. He's chosen to promote friends and family unqualified to be in those positions, including one man who can't pay his taxes, even with a 20% raise to his salary. And now we have angie calling people who oppose his uncle crackpots and deranged. If ever there was a time for a recall and to put something to good use, the time is NOW!

[dgriffin]

Excellent presentation, Swimmy!

[lioneljoe]

Hi Larry, I am puzzled by a few things. People have referenced that you posted an earlier statement here. Can you explain what it said and what happened to it? You say the Dan did a good job as PSC: Can you elaborate? I'm not aware of anything he did good or bad while he was the PSC.
I think the energy behind the recall goes beyond the Mayors appointment of Dan to chief. Its about reform, open and transparent government and accountability. The Mayors and friends (Mitch Ford, nephew et al) continue to add fuel to the fire with their ham handed, arrogant responses.
Yes, you’re not the only politician in Utica and I have been critical of them also. However, you sought out the bullhorn and have publicly advocated reform (in the past). The recall movement could use the help and you have positioned yourself that you could have been a great assistance if you have chosen to do so.
To be honest, its not really clear where what you are saying or where you stand from your last post and lately it appears that your goals, method and expectations for real reform are moving target.

[corner]

whether the recall is successful or not it does have to send a message to the mayor now if he understands that message or not is questionable ... I havent seen anyone that dumb sit in that chair since sal Caruso ...This mayor makes a box o rocks look dumb...On LaBellas behalf i had a conversation with him less than 2 months ago where he reiterated at the time that he didnt want to be chief and was waiting for the test to see how bailey and williams made out but he also indicated at the time that though either one would be good he was leaning to appointing williams. bottom line he is the chief and ifprobation periods are waived by civil service he will be chief long after Mr Arrogant is back to stuffing corpses.

[Swimmy]

corner, don't you find it slightly odd that:
1. they created the psc position while Pylman was Police Chief;
2. after Pylman's contract was bought out, roefie petitioned the state to make the Police Chief position civil service exam exempt?
3. now that labella is Police Chief, they eliminated the psc position?