<xmp> <body> </xmp>

John Rowland: Paid in full

Sunday, May 06, 2012
Time: 2:17 PM

Cross post from HatCityBLOG

I guess crime pays...

Despite a state law aimed at stripping such benefits from politicians who use their office for corruption and personal gain, former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland will be paid more than $1.3 million by taxpayers over the next 20 years in pension benefits, plus some darn good health care coverage.

Rowland and his wife are eligible to go on the state employee health plan at a cost of as low as $29 a month in premiums out of his pocket and a cost to taxpayers of as much as $1,900 a month. The cost for prescription drugs to Rowland under this plan? No co-pay at all for many types of medication, and a “maximum” of a $6 co-pay for others.


After Rowland resigned and was convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, mail fraud and tax fraud, the state legislature passed a bill (later signed by Rowland’s successor, Gov. M. Jodi Rell) that makes it possible for the state’s attorney general to seek a court action removing pension and health benefits should a state employee be found guilty of embezzlement of public funds, felonious theft from the state, bribery or felonies committed through the misuse of a government office or job.

But it was not enacted retroactively. and according to the state attorney general’s office, the state can’t strip Rowland of his pension.

“It does not appear there is any provision under state law to support revoking or reducing the qualified pension of a former state elected official who was convicted prior to passage of the revocation statute, for crimes involving their office,” spokesperson Susan Kinsman said. “We are also not aware of any provisions of the state pension plans that would permit pension forfeiture for bad acts.”


posted by ctblogger at 2:17 PM | Permalink|


Add a comment

© 2017 Hat City Blog | READ, WATCH, AND LEARN.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.


Lowest Gas Prices in Danbury
Danbury Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

make money online blogger templates

Danbury City Charter
Danbury Code of Ordinances
Robert's Rules of Order


Danbury 2005 election results
Danbury 2007 election results
Danbury 2009 election results
Danbury 2011 election results
Danbury 2013 election results
Danbury 2015 election results
City of Danbury calendar

The Mercurial
Danbury News Times
Danbury Patch
Danbury Daily Voice
Tribuna Newspaper
Danbury El Canillita
(Spanish edition)

Danbury El Canillita
(English translation)

Comunidade News
(Portuguese edition)

Comunidade News
(English translation)

On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.

The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.

Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.

Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.



Danbury Area Coalition for the Rights of Immigrants v.
U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security
3:06-cv-01992-RNC ( D. Conn. )

(02.25.08) Court docket

(10.24.07) Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Protective Order

(09.26.07) Press Release

(12.14.06) Complaint

Barrera v. Boughton, No. 07-01436
(D. Conn. filed Sept. 26, 2007)

(02.25.08) Court Docket

Amended complaint

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss State Law Claims

Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

Order on Motion to Dismiss

Defendants' Answer to Amended Complaint

NEW HAVEN REGISTER: Immigrant's 2006 arrest was flawed Danbury mayor testifies

(10.05.07 (VIDEO) Boughton mislead the public about Danbury's involvement in raid

(09.18.07) Yale Law Students expose Danbury involvement in raid

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Interview with Yale Law Students at FOI presser

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 FOI complaint media roundup

City Clerk Jean Natale standing next to skinhead sparks outrage

(10.03.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 rally

(09.29.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 case deepens

Word of raid spread across the country

(09/29/06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 protest news conference

(09/29/06) Immigrant newspaper "El Canillita" gives best account of ICE day labor raid at Kennedy Park


Dunkin Donuts logo