Condon Choice Controversy Update
5/13/2010 Update:
FLASH: Ethics Complaint filed against Ravi Bhalla
The ethical firestorm surrounding Councilman Ravinder S. Bhalla may be headed for a state investigation.
Peter “Perry” Belfiore has filed a complaint against Bhalla with the Division of Local Government Services. It outlines the circumstances surrounding Bhalla’s vote to award his office-mate Paul Condon a no-bid city contract.
Belfiore: Bhalla broke Local Government Ethics Law
The specific provisions of the Local Government Ethics Law Belfiore believes Bhalla violated include:
40A:9-22.5a, which says that “no local government officer or employee or member of his immediate family shall have an interest in a business organization or engage in any business, transaction, or professional activity, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties in the public interest,”
40A:9-22.5c, which says that “no local government officer or employee shall use or attempt to use his official position to secure unwarranted privileges or advantages for himself or others,”
40A:9-22.5d, which says that “no local government officer or employee shall act in his official capacity in any matter where he, a member of his immediate family, or a business organization in which he has an interest, has a direct or indirect financial or personal involvement that might reasonably be expected to impair his objectivity or independence of judgment,” and possibly several others.
Is Bhalla “understating” his business ties?
Belfiore says, “I strongly suspect that Mr. Bhalla is significantly understating his business ties to Mr. Condon, with respect to such typical office costs as office furniture and equipment, utility and phone bills, and many more. It would also be common for people in their situation to refer business to each other. Additionally, if they share a computer, fax or filing system, I believe under attorney ethics rules that they may be treated as if they were actual law partners. Without a full investigation, it is impossible to tell the true depths of their business relationship.” The complaint also references City Attorney Michael Kates’ effort to exonerate Bhalla. Kates serves at the will of Mayor Dawn Zimmer, who ran with Bhalla.
Ethics complaint follows Pay-to-Play controversy
Bhalla has lucrative public contracts, but failed to file the proper Business Entitity disclosure forms with the state ELEC commission for three years. As a public contractor and attorney, Belfiore says this means, “conflict of interest standards should not be alien to him.” Belfiore is a former member of the Hoboken Board of Education who lost a City Council runoff election in 2007.
Hoboken411 broke this story back in February. See the original after the jump, as well as all the updates that followed.
3/8/2010 UPDATE:
Bhalla under fire, Cunningham still mum
If you caught the front page of the Hoboken Reporter this weekend, you saw a familiar story – with some new twists.
A picture of Councilman-at-Large Ravi Bhalla sits under the headline “Conflicts and Campaign Money.” The March 7th Reporter (which was incorrectly stated as the “March 3rd” edition) followed up on the story broken here first on February 26th. As usual, the weekly fish wrap gave Hoboken411 no credit, but I’m used to that. To show we’re bigger than their petty jealousy of 411’s far larger Hoboken readership, we’ll give them credit for holding Bhalla’s feet to the fire and forcing him to answer questions that only strengthened the case against him.
The story of council conflicts that won’t go away
Bhalla made it clear he wouldn’t respond to Hoboken411, hoping the story would just go away. Wrong again Councilman. There’s too much to the Condon Conflicts to ignore. You already know Bhalla approved a $29,000 no-bid city contract for friend and officemate Paul Condon without even so much of as a public mention of his relationship. When called on it, Bhalla’s initial public comments might have left some with the impression he has no financial entanglements whatsoever with Condon. It turns out that’s not true. Under repeated questioning, Bhalla was forced to admit the following to reporter Tim Carroll:
- Despite an internet damage control campaign to the contrary, Bhalla and Condon signed a JOINT, three-year lease for the suite they share. Bhalla admitted if one were to default on the lease, the other would have to pay.
- Bhalla and Condon also share an employee in the form of a receptionist who handles business for both attorneys.
- Bhalla and Condon also share office equipment and supplies, which cost money.
Digging the hole deeper and deeper
Bhalla claims that since technically his and Condon’s law firms are separate entities, “There was no conflict, and in my sound judgment there was no appearance of a conflict.”
Same office. Same lease. Same receptionist. Same office equipment and supplies. Long-standing personal and professional relationship. No conflict in voting to give a no-bid contract? That doesn’t sound like “Change that’s Working” Councilman.
That sounds like same-old, same-old.
3/2/2010 Update:
Official Condon review underway
Much has happened since Hoboken411 broke the news Friday night of the City Council conflicts and apparent Pay-to-Play violation in the award of a no-bid contract to attorney Paul Condon.
The authors of Hoboken’s Pay-to-Play ordinance at People for Open Government have opened an investigation, one Councilwoman expressed outrage at the report, and Mayor Dawn Zimmer’s new Corporation Counsel is looking into the charges. Let’s get you caught up…
Upon further review, Condon gave $1250 to Cunningham
Our initial report indicated Paul Condon’s wife Renee Condon gave Peter Cunningham a $750 contribution for his 2007 campaign for 5th ward Council. It turns out a second, $500 contribution was made for Cunningham’s runoff election. The $1250 given by a family member of an eventual City professional services contractor is $950 more than the $300 limit allowed in Hoboken’s Pay-to-Play contracting reform ordinance. Cunningham took his seat on the council on July 1, 2007.
Paul Condon was initially hired by Mayor David Roberts in February 2008 to prosecute the SWAT-related charges against Police Lieutenant Angelo Andriani. As part of POG’s investigation about the revelations in my report, former POG President Eric Kurta went to City Hall to investigate. Among his initial findings:
“Mr. Condon did enter into an agreement to provide legal services to the city for a one-year period beginning February 28, 2008. The contributions made by Mr. Condon’s spouse, Renee Condon, were dated 3/30/07 ($750) and 5/31/07 ($500) and are within the one-year period prior to entering into an agreement, wherein contributions are limited to $300 or less.
Though the amount of the contract was for less than that of the state’s bidding threshold, it was nonetheless defined as a professional services agreement and thereby bound to comply with the P2P ordinance. This has been brought to the attention of Mr. Kates, Hoboken Corporation Counsel who will report his conclusions to the Mayor and City Council sooner rather than later, I would imagine.”
– Eric Kurta
This means under the Pay-to-Play law, Renee Condon’s $1250 donation to Cunningham legally precluded Paul Condon from accepting the no-bid professional services contract within one calendar year. Condon has been prosecuting the long, drawn out SWAT case against Andriani for over two years, which is believed to be the longest disciplinary hearing in Hoboken history.
2010 case separate from 2008 charges
It shouldn’t be missed that City Attorney Kates stressed the new, no-bid $29,000 contract awarded to Condon on the recommendation of Mayor Zimmer is legally a new charge against Andriani which is not directly connected to the SWAT charges. Kates stressed the two cases are separate, and will use separate hearing judges. Condon’s familiarity with the SWAT case has no bearing on whether he should prosecute the Florida Airport badge-waving allegations. Kates was clear on this point, and it’s all on the meeting video.
The question now is when, not “if” P2P law was violated
City Council members are elected for four years, but a convenient quirk in POG’s law only limits contributions to from city contractors for one year after the contribution is made.
The one-year prohibition is buried in the law, and was admittedly missed in our original story, which indicated the Pay-to-Play law would ban a 2010 contract following a 2007 contribution. In fact it does not. Consider that accidental omission corrected and regretted – and realistically an enormous loophole in the ordinance.
However, the law says if a vendor violates the Pay-to-Play law they are banned from contracting with Hoboken for four years. Since the 2007 contribution made the 2008 contract illegal under the Pay-to-Play law, this puts the status of both of Condon’s contracts in question.
Cunningham and Bhalla’s personal and business ties to Condon are outlined in the original Hoboken411 exclusive that broke this story wide open below…
(411 Note: Some of the information below has been revised and updated above.)
2/26/2010:
HOBOKEN411 EXCLUSIVE:
Council conflicts and Pay-to-Play violation uncovered
Last week the Hoboken City Council awarded a $29,000 no-bid contract to Hoboken attorney Paul Condon. City council watchers say two members of Mayor Dawn Zimmer’s majority should have abstained from the vote due to their conflicts of interest. Instead they voted with the rest of the council without a peep. A responsible press reports on the conflicts of politicians who hold elective office, especially those who campaigned against the crony/pay-to-play culture that has existed for so long.
Hoboken411 presents the facts:
Condon’s connections to Bhalla and Cunningham
Paul Condon’s law office is located in Suite 4A at 33-41 River Street. Councilman-at-Large Ravi Bhalla’s law office is also located in Suite 4A at 33-41 River Street. Condon and Bhalla share an office, putting them in a business relationship that should have been disclosed to the public before Bhalla voted in favor of awarding the no-bid Special Legal Counsel contract to Condon. Bhalla never mentioned his relationship with Condon during the discussion of the resolution, and voted yes when he should have abstained.
Cunningham’s conflicts: business and campaign cash
Fifth Ward Councilman Peter Cunningham’s wife Jen works at Hudson Place Realty. Paul Condon’s wife Renee works at Hudson Place Realty. Jen Cunningham and Renee Condon have on occasion jointly offered and marketed Real Estate for sale, creating a business relationship that goes beyond simply working for the same agency. In addition, Renee Condon made a $750 campaign contribution to Peter Cunningham’s election fund in 2007. This contribution is in violation of the contractor Pay-to-Play ordinance advanced by People for Open Government.
What does POG’s ordinance say about this kind of contribution?
You can read the whole ordinance here. It says the law bans contributions to Hoboken candidates from business entities (including individuals, family members, firms of all types and affiliates) prior to receiving professional services contracts with the City of Hoboken. That limit is $300 per year to a candidate like Peter Cunningham, who accepted $750 from Renee Condon, wife of Paul Condon, who was just awarded a no-bid public contract by the Zimmer Administration.
Cunningham’s action also opened the city up to a lawsuit, according to the POG ordinance:
SECTION 7 CITIZENS PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION: Notwithstanding any other common right of law, any Hoboken citizen or citizens group shall have the right to sue any or all entities in violation of this ordinance, including the business entity awarded a contract or agreement to provide “professional services” or “extraordinary unspecified services”, the candidate or committee as specified in subsection 1(a) above, and/or the City Hoboken, in order to compel those entities to comply with this ordinance.
Condon’s political activities
Paul Condon is no stranger to Hoboken politics. In 2004 he ran an unsuccessful campaign for Board of Education, and considered a bid – but did not run – for City Council in 2007. Last week he was awarded a no-bid contract to be the Special Legal Counsel handling the matter of suspended police Lieutenant Angelo Andriani’s activities in a Florida airport. Under New Jersey law a “professional services contract” of $29,000 or less does not need to go out for public bidding. The Mayor has the power to recommend an attorney for a council vote. In this case it was Condon, whose relationships with Bhalla and Cunningham go far deeper than they’ve disclosed.
Hoboken NJ









42 Responses to ** Condon Choice Controversy Update **
March 1st, 2010 |
Ms Zimmer put here names up and Mr Cunningham and Mr Bahalla found there hand in the cookie jar. And they made fun at Mayor Roberts and Mayor Cammanrano. WE WERE LIED TO. WHERE IS OUR 25% TAX CUT????? Oh, it went o fund someone campaign. You know what really getsme. Mr Bahalla pointing out that the state law allows Ms Zimmer to sit as temporary mayor and council president abd when it comes to him it is ok to break the law. Especially Mr. Cunningham who pushed for Pay to Play and then ignores it. I gues Mr Lenz is happy now he can statrt to push Ms Marsh for Mayor. Oh by the way where is Ms Gramham, she also was a big pay tp play fan????
Login or Register to reply
March 1st, 2010 |
If we are going to put a RFP out for legal services in a particular legal matter (this is for Andriani, per the docs), you don’t do it when the case is 90% finished. You do it at the beginning when you first select a firm to represent the city in a matter. This guy has been working on this particular case for a couple years, right? Why switch now? Wouldn’t hiring a new firm and having them get up to speed and billing us for reviewing all the old docs cost a heck of a lot more? Lawyers charge by the hour no matter what they are doing. A new lawyer or firm will spend a long time getting up to speed, time they will be charging us hundreds per hour to review work already done. Makes no sense to put it out for bid so late in the game.
Remember, when it comes to professional services contracts like this one, what matters is what they are billing us per hour and how many hours they work, not what the total $ amt allowed is. This guy is getting an amount “not to exceed $29K”, but that doesn’t mean he will get the full amount. He will bill us per hour and it will count against that $29K. I am pretty sure any other legal firm hired would cost a whole lot more even if they charge less per hour b/c of the number of extra hours they will have to put in just to get up to speed. Well, I am pretty sure that will be the case unless the new lawyer we might hire is a discraced under-indictment attorney who is currently unemployable and desperate to raise money to pay for his criminal defense attorneys. But that lawyer I wouldn’t want the city to hire.
In response to KenOn10 who said:
Another hallmark of shady business, right out of the John Corea playbook: a $29,000 contract, right below the amount whereby a bid would be required. The bidding process generally means the city will pay a competitive price… now, well, not so much.
I am very disappointed.
Login or Register to reply
March 1st, 2010 |
Another thing that is clear now is who was conducting the “investigation” for the last 2 years while Andriani sat at home collecting $11,000/month.
Login or Register to reply
March 1st, 2010 |
Why is PC not smiling like all the other folk?
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
The plot thickens… juicy details, love it!!
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
Too bad the taxpayers of Hoboken are not like Europeans or Latin Americans and start marching in the streets and refusing to pay their real estate taxes, but no, the whimpy Hobokenites just bend over and take over and over and over and over and over , etc etc etc.
Enjoy the continually Butt-f***ing.
Glad I sold and moved out of Hoboken.
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
Until we do start marching in the steets nothing will ever get done. Remember when Hoboken Revolt protested outside Cammarano’s house and city hall to resign? What happened? He resigned from the immense internal and external pressure.
Now what Revolt needs to do is organize the same protests, invite the Media and demand action is taken.
Dawn can’t hide under her desk like George Costanza for another 3 years…can she?
In response to mookie who said:
Too bad the taxpayers of Hoboken are not like Europeans or Latin Americans and start marching in the streets and refusing to pay their real estate taxes, but no, the whimpy Hobokenites just bend over and take over and over and over and over and over , etc etc etc.
Enjoy the continually Butt-f***ing.
Glad I sold and moved out of Hoboken.
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
Wow. This just gets worse and worse. From what Mr. Kurta says it looks like a tangled legal web needs to be unwoven. Thanks Hoboken411 for looking into this. The more we find out, the more Ravi Bhalla and Peter Cunningham look like hypocrites.
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
lmao. And they always put the blame on the born and raised for putting people like this in office. Well, now it’s happened to you la la’s who demanded change and reform. I wouldn’t have given Cunningham or Bhalla the time of day if I were able to vote in their wards.
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
Regardless of weather Mr Cunningham or Mr Bahlla are or are not within the Pay to Pay law both should withdraw Mr Condon name from the contract. If they are really about reform that is what they should do. Clearly, had something like this occurred under the Roberts Administartion you can bet Mr Cunningham abd POG would be all of it.
Login or Register to reply
March 2nd, 2010 |
Don’t hold your breath waiting for Ann Graham to weigh in on this story.
The former POG President was given a Planning Board gig by Zimmer following her support of the Mayor’s campaigns. Graham was named chair of the Planning Board at her very first meeting.
In response to upyurs who said:
Ms Zimmer put here names up and Mr Cunningham and Mr Bahalla found there hand in the cookie jar. And they made fun at Mayor Roberts and Mayor Cammanrano. WE WERE LIED TO. WHERE IS OUR 25% TAX CUT????? Oh, it went o fund someone campaign. You know what really getsme. Mr Bahalla pointing out that the state law allows Ms Zimmer to sit as temporary mayor and council president abd when it comes to him it is ok to break the law. Especially Mr. Cunningham who pushed for Pay to Play and then ignores it. I gues Mr Lenz is happy now he can statrt to push Ms Marsh for Mayor. Oh by the way where is Ms Gramham, she also was a big pay tp play fan????
Login or Register to reply
March 3rd, 2010 |
Like dominos the politicos fall,
their agendas change, embarrassing all,
for transparency the public waited,
me thinks those chairs are pixilated…
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
I’m sorry, but it really sounds like you’re fishing for corruption that doesn’t exist here. Just because a relationship exists or contributions were made doesn’t mean that those are the reasons decisions were made. From everything I’ve read, Mr. Condon is easily the right person for the job. You’re using shared office space and supplies as evidence of corruption? This is absolutely pathetic and you should all be ashamed. If anything, Mr. Bhalla’s relationship with the other attorney puts him in a better position than anyone else to decide if he should be given this responsibility. It’s petty articles like this that make me embarrassed to have recommended this website to friends in the past.
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
Furthermore, you’re missing a key element in your argument: evidence that Paul Condon needs this bid to avoid defaulting on his lease. Councilman Bhalla has no conflict of interest unless this is the case.
In response to Margaret who said:
Like dominos the politicos fall,
their agendas change, embarrassing all,
for transparency the public waited,
me thinks those chairs are pixilated…
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
Awarding the contract – not such a big deal.
Voting on the contract, given a clear conflict of interest – poor judgment. Abstaining should have been a no-brainer for a smart and savvy lawyer who is supposed to be a ‘reformer.’
In response to matt1122 who said:
I’m sorry, but it really sounds like you’re fishing for corruption that doesn’t exist here. Just because a relationship exists or contributions were made doesn’t mean that those are the reasons decisions were made. From everything I’ve read, Mr. Condon is easily the right person for the job. You’re using shared office space and supplies as evidence of corruption? This is absolutely pathetic and you should all be ashamed. If anything, Mr. Bhalla’s relationship with the other attorney puts him in a better position than anyone else to decide if he should be given this responsibility. It’s petty articles like this that make me embarrassed to have recommended this website to friends in the past.
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
Except there is no conflict of interest. There is no evidence that Mr. Condon was going to default on his lease, and therefore Mr. Bhalla gains nothing.
In response to oceanbloo who said:
Awarding the contract – not such a big deal.
Voting on the contract, given a clear conflict of interest – poor judgment. Abstaining should have been a no-brainer for a smart and savvy lawyer who is supposed to be a ‘reformer.’
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
au contraire… no one is saying corruption exists. what we have here is a clear conflict of interest and a situation that is unethical. what is pathetic is the fact that this information that is fact, is being downplayed by the very people that screamed bloody murder over patronage jobs being handed out. what is pathetic, is that these very people used this as a platform for their campaigns for change. what is pathetic, is that members of P.O.G. and Hoboken revolt, go off half-cocked w/o any facts at council meetings when it involves B&R’s… however, here they are presented w/ facts and they stay mum. what is pathetic, is you matt… you should be embarrassed.
In response to matt1122 who said:
I’m sorry, but it really sounds like you’re fishing for corruption that doesn’t exist here. Just because a relationship exists or contributions were made doesn’t mean that those are the reasons decisions were made. From everything I’ve read, Mr. Condon is easily the right person for the job. You’re using shared office space and supplies as evidence of corruption? This is absolutely pathetic and you should all be ashamed. If anything, Mr. Bhalla’s relationship with the other attorney puts him in a better position than anyone else to decide if he should be given this responsibility. It’s petty articles like this that make me embarrassed to have recommended this website to friends in the past.
Login or Register to reply
March 8th, 2010 |
Ms Castellano said it best in the Reporter. “You could have voted no and your FRIEND still would of gotten the job.”
They ran on a position of open and transparent issues. POG and the whole punch lied to us. WHERE IS OUR 25% TAX DECREASE>
Login or Register to reply
March 9th, 2010 |
Ms. Castellano seems to be the voice of reason in this one, but because she is the cousin of a disgraced mayor and his son she will never be heard. It appears to be a conflict of interest since nothing has been proven that there ever was a pay for play deal here. It does seem quite suspicious that Mr. Bhalla and Condon share office space and a receptionist, was there a contribution made to the campaign in a large amount? This whole scenario is confusing me, maybe I’m not comprehending the wording of this article. Word spin? Who knows.
Login or Register to reply
March 9th, 2010 |
I’m sorry, I don’t see a conflict of interest here. It’s fabricated by those looking for wrongdoing where it does not exist. Bhalla voted because he didn’t feel he had a conflict of interest. Who are you to tell him that his friendship outweighs his feeling of civic duty?
Condon went through the normal channels. There is absolutely no evidence that his wife’s donations were made with conditions of his selection by the city for that job. If they violated the P2P law it’s our legal system’s place to take action. Smearing peoples names in the media and calling them corrupt OR unethical when they have only done what they felt was right is a perfect example Hoboken political BS.
In response to mickey finn who said:
au contraire… no one is saying corruption exists. what we have here is a clear conflict of interest and a situation that is unethical. what is pathetic is the fact that this information that is fact, is being downplayed by the very people that screamed bloody murder over patronage jobs being handed out. what is pathetic, is that these very people used this as a platform for their campaigns for change. what is pathetic, is that members of P.O.G. and Hoboken revolt, go off half-cocked w/o any facts at council meetings when it involves B&R’s… however, here they are presented w/ facts and they stay mum. what is pathetic, is you matt… you should be embarrassed.
Login or Register to reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.