I got a campaign call from the Barrett campaign. The caller ID read Freedman Derosa & Rondeau.

While I am sure this is legal, is it ethical?

No it is not ethical.

Neither is it "ethical" to be the City of North Adams Attorney, and also be a real-estate business partner with Eric Rudd.

It's not only unethical, I'd guess that it's a violation of state contracting laws regarding FDR's relationship with the city. This matter should be reported to the State Ethics Commission.

It's also interesting because DeRosa is working in the background for Alcombright from what one of their attorneys told me yesterday.

BTW, I got one too. I'll be calling Boston on Monday to start the complaint rolling.

we've got an answering machine.it really cuts down on the BS

Truthsayer wrote:

It's not only unethical, I'd guess that it's a violation of state contracting laws regarding FDR's relationship with the city. This matter should be reported to the State Ethics Commission.
It's also interesting because DeRosa is working in the background for Alcombright from what one of their attorneys told me yesterday.

I don't think it is illegal for a firm to make an in-kind donation of the use of their phones. The Kerry Campaign also held a phone bank at this office.

Voter wrote:

<quoted text>I don't think it is illegal for a firm to make an in-kind donation of the use of their phones. The Kerry Campaign also held a phone bank at this office.

ANNNNNNNNNNTTTTT!, went the buzzer.

It is ABSOLUTELY ILLEGAL under Massacusetts General Laws Ch. 268A. Section 23 for Freedeman, DeRosa, & Rondeau to have made the phone calls, and the Barrett campaign to have allowed it.

I have just completed filing a complaint against BOTH the Mayor and FDR for both an ethics violation and a violation of state election laws governing municipal elections.

Anyone else who has the guts to file a complaint online, all info is kept 100% confidential, and the link is as follows:

http://www.mass.gov/...

If the link doesn't come through, copy and paste in your browser. You will also find the statutes governing this blatantly illegal action by both the city solicitor and the Barrett campaign. In one or two business days, The Transcript can confirm the filing of the complaint by contacting the State Ethics Commission

Voter wrote:

<quoted text>I don't think it is illegal for a firm to make an in-kind donation of the use of their phones. The Kerry Campaign also held a phone bank at this office.

FYI, The Kerry Campaign doesn't pay the legal bills from FDR to the city, does it? They receive compensation from the City for defense and legal advise at the behest of the Mayor. That is a conflict of interest.

Tested the link. It works.

Complaint accepted and acknowledged.

Truthsayer wrote:

Complaint accepted and acknowledged.

Well done and thank you.

Truthsayer wrote:

Complaint accepted and acknowledged.

Why don't you post a copy of the law so that we could all read it instead of taking your word for it---I'd do it if I knew how---I just read and re-read it---and it is vague in places---and what's inportant is not so much what the law says or may say to you--but how it is enforced by the Ethcis Commission--for that you need to find rulings from various cases----I accessed it my googling
MGL Chapter 268A Section 23 chbpod

chbpod wrote:

<quoted text>
Why don't you post a copy of the law so that we could all read it instead of taking your word for it---I'd do it if I knew how---I just read and re-read it---and it is vague in places---and what's inportant is not so much what the law says or may say to you--but how it is enforced by the Ethcis Commission--for that you need to find rulings from various cases----I accessed it my googling
MGL Chapter 268A Section 23 chbpod

Clark, you know me well enough to know I research thoroughly, because that's what winning lawyers do. Rather than blather here, I've filed a complaint, and it's receipt has been acknowledged. They investigate each complaint. With FDR deriving income from the city coffers, funded by taxpayers, and their payments often requested/directed by Barrett, it's a conflict.

However, here is the link to the state. Probe their website (Google is lazy). Dig and search.

http://www.mass.gov/...

You Barrett haters will do anything to waste the cities time and money. You will loose as usual and the city will loose because we have to pay for it. That includes you too unTruthsayer.
If you Barrett haters would spend half as much time supporting the city as degrading it, we would be much better off.

Truthsayer wrote:

<quoted text>
Clark, you know me well enough to know I research thoroughly, because that's what winning lawyers do. Rather than blather here, I've filed a complaint, and it's receipt has been acknowledged. They investigate each complaint. With FDR deriving income from the city coffers, funded by taxpayers, and their payments often requested/directed by Barrett, it's a conflict.
However, here is the link to the state. Probe their website (Google is lazy). Dig and search.
http://www.mass.gov/...

The FACT is I don't know you "well enough" I have no idea who you are-- or that you are a "winning lawyer"and although Googgle" may be lazy-- it brought me directly to the law-- rather than muddle through the maze of the massgov site---NOW are you going to post the law or not???---or if youhave case law at your disposal= please post that--one lawyer can read a law differently than another lawyer---and so do the courts--stop being evasive---oh I forgot that's what lawyers do--- chbpod

chbpod wrote:

<quoted text>
The FACT is I don't know you "well enough" I have no idea who you are-- or that you are a "winning lawyer"and although Googgle" may be lazy-- it brought me directly to the law-- rather than muddle through the maze of the massgov site---NOW are you going to post the law or not???---or if youhave case law at your disposal= please post that--one lawyer can read a law differently than another lawyer---and so do the courts--stop being evasive---oh I forgot that's what lawyers do--- chbpod

Evasiveness gets $250 an hour. Straight answers about $150.00. Do the math. The state's going to decide this one. John B. is going to have to pay his own legal fees because this involves the city solicitor. It's done.

FYI, I love the anonymity of posts. It gets under people's skins. Enjoy the weekend, Clark.

My Yak wrote:

You Barrett haters will do anything to waste the cities time and money. You will loose as usual and the city will loose because we have to pay for it. That includes you too unTruthsayer.
If you Barrett haters would spend half as much time supporting the city as degrading it, we would be much better off.

It's not going to cost the city a dime. Because this involves the City Solicitor and the Mayor, the Mayor has to pay for his own defense costs out of his pocket, and the solicitor out of his. Cost to North Adams:$0

I don't hate Barrett, as you believe. I simply believe that a man who walks around as Mayor for 26 years imposing his standards of decency and interpretations of the law, should be held accountable for his acts.

Or maybe you think everyone burned by Bernie Madoff are simply "Madoff Haters", too.

As for supporting the city, I pay more than my fair share of taxes, thank you. I buy nearly exclusively in the city, and unlike the majority of you, will spend the extra money for something at a local business instead of traipsing over to Wal-Mart or the mall.

Standards are what we all follow, and the Mayor, who likes setting the standards around here, needs to set the example not be made an example of.

My Yak wrote:

You Barrett haters will do anything to waste the cities time and money. You will loose as usual and the city will loose because we have to pay for it. That includes you too unTruthsayer.
If you Barrett haters would spend half as much time supporting the city as degrading it, we would be much better off.

yeah, lets not investigate or prosecute malfeasance because it might cost the city money.

great idea...idiot.

Truthsayer wrote:

<quoted text>
Evasiveness gets $250 an hour. Straight answers about $150.00. Do the math. The state's going to decide this one. John B. is going to have to pay his own legal fees because this involves the city solicitor. It's done.
FYI, I love the anonymity of posts. It gets under people's skins. Enjoy the weekend, Clark.

Whar do you call 500 lawyers in chains at the bottom of the sea?? A great star/e

An ethics violation involving the mayor and the city solicitor, and the fact that it involves free services given in an election, means Barrett can't use them to pay his legal fees.

He has to pay them himself. If John DeRosa helps him pro bono under the table, that will be another violation for DeRosa to the Mass. BAR (that complaint goes out Monday morning).

This also forms the basis for a lawsuit against them by any taxpayer who wants to take up the challenge.