I have a few questions about this mailer/flier or whatever....
What is a 'sponsor'? Is GP registered with the board of elections under 'friends of gerard parisi'? Who paid for this mailer/flier.....GP or the rep party? Is this an actual 'fundraiser' for a political campaign?
I'm guessing that the money raised will go toward a 'campaign' of sorts. But a campaign for 'what seat'?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
bumble, it looks to me like a sponsor is a higher level of giving (Like Bronze, Silver or Gold Donors.)
As a practicing attorney and CPA, and a pretty smart guy, I would venture to say he is registered - however, we wouldn't know until July, when the first filing is due. Also, depending on what he's running for, it may not be registered with the State, but rather the county - at which point, it wouldn't be searchable online.
Considering his committee is the only one listed on the flyer, I would venture to say he did...perhaps you can ask him at the fundraiser.
Perhaps you can ask him that at the fundraiser also.
I was out with some friends the other day and i was told about some very suspicious actions of GP in regards to his representation of REMS while at the same time representing the taxpayers of Rotterdam as town attorney. Something to the effect of representing REMS in December for a IRS situation while representing the town and town board (town attorney) all while REMS was given a boat load of taxpayer bailout money to help it pay for years of fiscal mismanagement and wrongly filed tax forms. Do any of you know more about this? Is it legal for an attorney to represent REMS and at the same time be part of a group (town board/town attorney) who then steers well over a hundred thousand dollars of taxpayer dollars to that same organization who he is getting paid to represent????? Isn't that a total conflict of interest to do so and would it leave residents wondering if those tax dollars got steered to REMS because of the money being paid to GP by REMS? I'm curious to know more details on this if anyone of you know.
doesnt he have to recuse himself from any golub votes?
from feb.
ROTTERDAM Ambulance corps cuts deal with IRS Agreement includes unfreezing accounts BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter
Negotiators with the Internal Revenue Service agreed to a payment plan that will allow the financially embattled Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services Inc. to repay long-standing debts owed to the federal government. Under the terms of the deal, the ambulance company agreed to pay the IRS $6,500 per month until 2011 and then $8,000 per month until the full balance of the debt is paid off. In return, the IRS agreed to waive roughly $100,000 in penalties and unfreeze all of the ambulance company’s accounts, including its contract with Rotterdam. Joe Vanderwerker, the presi- dent of REMS’ board of directors, characterized the deal with the IRS as one of the final steps the ambulance company needed to take to achieve fiscal solvency. He said the deal will allow REMS to sign a contract with Princetown and continue building upon the successes the company has realized over the past year. “This is the last big hurdle,” he said Thursday. “Really, it’s full speed ahead from here.” Gerard Parisi, the attorney who helped negotiate the deal for REMS, said the ambulance company should have no problem adhering to the terms of the agreement. He said the willingness of the IRS to reduce the debt should ensure that the remaining balance is paid in full. “It’s finally feasible,” he said. “They shouldn’t have any trouble keeping up now.” The deal is in stark contrast to the IRS actions last week, when the agency moved to freeze a number of the ambulance company’s accounts and place liens on its property. The move meant most of Rotterdam’s $10,000-per-month contract with REMS would go directly to the federal government to pay off the company’s outstanding debt of roughly $315,000. .................>>>>......................>>>>.............. http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00904&AppName=1
Here's the question....since REMS is being 'sustained on life support' with our 'tax dollars'....is it considered a town entity that a town attorney can represent? Or is REMS considered a separate entity that must employ it's own attorney?
Was GP paid by REMS to negotiate their IRS issue and if so is that illegal?
For example, if someone sued REMS for some malpractice issue....who would defend them? Rotterdam's town attorney or an attorney retained by REMS?
I'm no attorney so I don't know the legalities. However, I would suggest FOILING for this information AND check the town's budget to see if GP's legal group received taxpayer dollars in excess of what they were budgeted for. Actually, I would suggest checking the town budget for ALL legal expenses and get a break down.
It may be like finding that needle in a haystack,(it may be buried), but if people have concerns, ya gotta start some place.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
He did the negotiation with the IRS for free (pro bono) because it is a non profit organization that services the community. He is a CPA as well as an lawyer. To Sal's Q- he recuses himself on the Golub vote because he has represented them.
Yes, very suspicious.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
You mean to tell me that here we have an ambulance service with NO ATTORNEY on their payroll? Are they that poor that they need an attorney to represent them for FREE?
So again....if someone sues REMS for some malpractice suit....who represents them? GP?
And some suggest that the taxpayers provide a taxing district for them? They must be kidding, right?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
An attorney on their "payroll?" I don't know of companies like that that keep an attorney on their "payroll." As for having an attorney on "retainer," that is very possible.
However, such an attorney would handle expected things - not IRS disputes. They were offered pro bono assistance, and are a non profit. Only you could take issue with this, Bumble...
You bet I take issue with it. It's my money that supports REMS. Possibly forever. That's just one reason why rotterdam should have an ambulance service that is not a non-profit, but one that is a private business. Then these issues wouldn't be questioned or discussed. Basically it wouldn't be any of our businesses.
But as long as the taxpayer is paying.....all taxpayers should take issue with it.IMHO
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I stand corrected, he was paid and it was last December before he was on the town board. I asked him today since I wanted to be sure. Apparently he said it was also a continuation of the previous contract with REMS that was done earlier, and he did not originally write that contract. He said there was no conflict of interest to represent them.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
Quoted from GrahamBonnet: He said there was no conflict of interest to represent them.
And, GB, you expected him to say that there was a conflict of interest?
It may not constitute a legal conflict, but the Town Attorney representing an independent organization that was lobbying to receive town tax revenues certainly gives the appearance of impropriety. Was the "playing field" deliberately altered by the last town board so as to not give Mohawk Ambulance an equal chance at competing for the business?
Logged
