Taxpayers oppose paying consultant
for human rights work

By TOM RUE

MONTICELLO - A lawsuit seeking to bar Village of Monticello officials from paying a private consultant from Queens $7,500 to do what local volunteers and the NYS Division of Human Rights are already charged with, filed by three Monticello taxpayers was heard and partially ruled upon by NYS Supreme Court justice Robert Williams in a May 5 hearing.

Williams said he agreed to hear the case after business hours on a Friday because the village board was scheduled to meet later in the evening to vote on ratifying a contract with Robert Hargrove to investigate Friedland's actions.

Triggered by Friedland's attempt to pressure the police chief into hiring his son as a police officer, Hargrove has also been contracted to help streamline the village's affirmative action practices and set up sensitivity training for all village officials and employees.

The entire program may cost as much as #30,000, according to former village manager William Cummings.

The suit was filed on May 4 by Monticello residents John Barbarite, Janet Lynn Barbarite and Victor Gordon.

Williams ruled that the trio had standing to sue the village over alleged unlawful or wasteful expenditures, as village taxpayers. But Williams rejected the argument that the village was precluded from contracting with Hargrove "merely because" the village has a human rights commission.

Williams cautioned Miller to be sure that that Hargrove's contract is entered into lawfully, or it could be overturned.

On May 5, Barbarite filed an amended complaint, which Williams said was not considered in his tentative decision. The final ruling, which will based on additional points raised in the new papers, was expected to be issued this week.

While Williams said he would not substitute his own judgment for the village board's, he said some of the board's "actions may not be well advised."

Williams pointed to "a serious problem with regard to the manner in which the resolution [to hire Hargrove] was approved."

While Barbarite has publicly labeled Friedland's attempt to solicit favorable treatment for his son "unethical," he termed the hiring of Hargrove "purely political" and therefore an improper expenditure of public funds.

Hargrove came recommended by Cummings, whose wife reportedly once worked with him at a New York City police agency.

At the May 5 village board meeting, Miller warned the board the if Williams' final ruling is against the village, board members could be forced to pay Hargrove's fee individually. The board then voted to ratify Hargrove's contract, with Friedland abstaining.

---

Above text is copyright by the author.
Duplication without permission is prohibited.