Lies, damned lies and conflicted representations on a contract
As Mark Twain might have said, Carmelo Garcia’s contract raises questions of lies, damned lies and conflicted representations when last Thursday’s HHA meeting saw that document kept secret since 2010 make its first ever public appearance before being quickly stowed away by counsel Charles Daglian.
Based on Daglian’s statements, the impression at least some HHA commissioners took at face value was the sole appointing authority had been irrevocably given to Carmelo Garcia for employees, vendors and purchases of all goods and services.
The NJ statute however doesn’t concur with that conclusion.
According to the NJ statute, the true scope is far more limiting:
“The authority may provide that the executive director
shall be the appointing authority for all or any portion of the employees of
The NJ statute, 40A:12A-18 does not give the sole authority of appointing anything other than employees to the Executive Director, in this case contracts, re: contractors and vendors. State law is the guiding directive for the HHA commissioners and the validity of Carmelo Garcia’s contract is not set for any five year period.
In addition, any delegated powers may be returned to the HHA board including the hiring of employees no matter what Garcia’s contract says. The powers of the HHA’s board are clearly emergent as it sees fit – and acts.
The contract negotiated by Mr. Daglian as some readers have commented fails in its entirety to list any affirmative list of responsibilities focusing solely on the authority of the Executive Director role above and beyond NJ statute which he represented as beyond changing until its expiration. The contract reads as a resolution, not as a comprehensive management contract.
Talking Ed Note: Outside of the limiting powers presented to the HHA commissioners last Thursday, what in the world is Charles Daglian doing advocating for his own contract while acting as the HHA board attorney at its special meeting on a counsel contract?