Niagara ReporterOn Wednesday night, all five members of the Niagara Falls City Council voted unanimously to revoke the membership of council appointed Niagara Falls Water Board (NFWB) member Michael Asklar due to “numerous complaints” and “dissatisfactory performance,” and to replace him with James S. Dean. Mark Scheer of the Niagara Gazette called the council’s decision “a move likely to land them in court.”
This bi-partisan, unanimous vote came after months of finger pointing and saber rattling between both entities. Joe Genco of the Niagara Express called James S. Dean a “Democratic political operative,” stating “Dean is a Democratic committee person and was the individual who challenged the election petitions of Demetreus Nix and Glen Choolokian in the race for mayor last year.”
In that same article, journalist Genco claims that “Water Board representatives allege the real agenda is to load the board with union-friendly representatives to make contract negotiations, which are underway, easier for the union and more taxing for ratepayers.”
Michael Asklar was appointed to the NFWB by the Niagara Falls City Council in 2021. His term ends in 2025. Appointments of this type are temporary by nature to avoid political interference.
Niagara Falls City Council Chairman Jim Perry (Photo from LinkedIn)
Asklar’s performance recently came under fire by Chairman Jim Perry who addressed a scathing letter to the NFWB appointee on July 8th. Perry was an administrative executive for the NFWB, with whom he clashed during his employment.
What has yet to be discussed is exactly where Mayor Restaino stands in all of this, as it is widely known (at least in political circles) that NFWB Chairman Nick Forster is closely associated with the mayor; having helped raise funds for the mayor’s election campaign.
In Perry’s July 8th letter, he accused Asklar of not having “alerted the City Council to improper issues, illegal activities, or possibilities of New York State ethics violations whereas this has not been the case with other representatives we have appointed.”
In defense of Asklar, the insurance company for the NFWB hired the law firm Kaufman, Borgeest & Ryan LLP.
Jennifer Puglisi (Photo from LinkedIn)
On July 18th, Jennifer Puglisi (representing the firm) responded to Perry’s July 8th letter; issuing a lengthy and well-articulated response which addressed the vague allegations in Perry’s letter; calling the “charges” against Asklar a “witch hunt.”
Writes Puglisi, “First and foremost, Mr. Asklar adamantly denies all allegations, claims and/or ‘charges’ contained in your letter. The ‘charges’ are vague, overbroad, unsupported by evidence, wrongfully targeted, nonsensical and completely baseless. While you note that your ‘charges’ are received from various sources, it is notable that no such sources are identified within your correspondence nor does your letter allow Mr. Asklar an opportunity to confront the sources. For these reasons alone, your letter, claims, allegations and/or ‘charges’ fail to meet the standard to remove Mr. Asklar from his membership with the Niagara Falls Water Board. Your July 8. 2024 correspondence appears to be no more than a malicious fishing expedition, at best an effort to find an excuse to remove a duly-appointed Member of the Water Board based on a personal animus.”
There is no question as to whether or not something smells foul at the NFWB (other than the untreated water, that is). Last year, The Niagara Reporter covered a string of recent allegations centering around questionable expenditures and practices at the NFWB. Water rates in the City of Niagara Falls are two to three times higher than neighboring municipalities.
The high costs are largely due to the $120,000,000 absorbed debt under which the NFWB was created; in addition to personnel costs (including retirees from the City of Niagara Falls), which equals about 41% of the NFWB budget.
Whether or not Michael Asklar is to blame for any of these wrongdoings is up for debate. The breadth and scope of the allegations against Asklar, combined with the inflated rates at the NFWB; both warrant an ongoing investigation by The Niagara Reporter until we are able to get to the bottom of these serious issues.
Puglisi’s lengthy response makes strong counterpoints to Perry’s initial letter, though she does mention, “Further, the letter is signed by you in your individual capacity as Chair of the Niagara Falls City Council. There is no reference that the allegations against Mr. Asklar were adopted by a majority vote of the City Council, or even publicly discussed and/or presented for a vote by City Council. Rather, this appears as an arbitrary letter of your personal opinions that are not supported by any evidence and/or support of the other members of the City Council, and constitute mere insinuations. Thus, this is an insufficient and procedurally defective attempt to remove Mr. Asklar from his membership with the Water Board.”
Perry, in his efforts, was unanimously backed by the entire Niagara Falls City Council in their decision to revoke Asklar’s NFWB membership on Wednesday night.
On the other hand, Puglisi brandishes her ability for foresight when she included the following paragraph in her letter: “Given the unfounded nature of your claims and the details above, we trust that this response will resolve this matter and there will not be a vote to attempt to remove Mr. Asklar as a member of the Niagara Falls Water Board. Removal based on the baseless insinuations in Chairperson Perry’s July 8. 2024 letter would be procedurally improper as well as arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion, and we stand ready to proceed immediately with a court proceeding to overturn such a gross abusive and unjust act. Should the City Council nonetheless continue with these allegations, it is requested that the Council provide the ‘sources’ and/or names of the individuals that divulged any information relative to these claims together with all documentation that the Council alleges supports these claims.”
The Niagara Reporter spoke with Council Chairman Jim Perry regarding Wednesday’s decision to remove Asklar.
Perry told the Reporter, “We had a lot of complaints from the civil service commission, from employees and from the USW. We looked into a lot of the allegations and we found that there was a lot of merit behind them. I talked to the other members of the council, we did our own investigation and we found that it was appropriate for us to call Asklar in for a meeting. He wasn’t very cooperative with us. He was supposed to represent the city council and he didn’t feel that it was necessary for him to do so, so we figured we’d put someone in who would represent us and the City of Niagara Falls.”
Puglisi’s letter contains a predetermined counter-argument to Perry’s statement, saying “When Mr. Asklar was appointed to the Water Board by the City Council, he took an oath to uphold ethical, financial and fiduciary responsibilities and to exercise his independent judgment in the best interests of the Water Board. Mr. Asklar’s obligations and responsibilities are to the Water Board, not the City Council, though you cannot deny that he has been responsive and addressed each concern you have raised with him…”
Perry also told the Reporter, “Asklar did not fulfill his fiduciary and ethical responsibilities. A lot of the things he voted for increased the rates and had to do with preferential hiring, and voting for cosmetic improvements during a time when rates were going up.”
Chairman Perry questioned the ethics regarding the insurance company for the NFWB hiring a law firm to represent Asklar.
“Doesn’t that strike you as being a little bit suspect that the NFWB would hire an attorney, when it’s an unpaid position and Asklar is appointed by the city council who wants to remove him?” Perry asked The Reporter.
NFWB member Rick Sirianni also spoke with The Reporter, “I was appointed by the Governor and I appreciate the confidence that the Governor and her staff had in me. I think some out of control spending is going on at the waterboard and we’re starting to address it. I think there’s a problem with some civil service things they’re not following, and not giving opportunities to the residents of the City of Niagara Falls. We’re trying to make the cleanest water we can at the best rates we can.”
Sirianni continued, saying “I don’t know who is to blame for the rate hikes. I blame the entire water board. The city council picked Asklar a few years ago. I didn’t make that pick and I didn’t remove him, but if they don’t like what he’s doing… they feel they have a right to remove him. I’ll work with any board member there is, we should try to find common ground but right now we don’t have that. It’s being run unlike any organization I know of…”
Regarding the NFWB insurance handler hiring a law firm to represent Asklar, Sirianni told The Reporter, “I don’t agree with that and I tried to stop that. I don’t believe that the water board is responsible for that. I understand board members of any municipality having insurance for liability. If they did or said something wrong, I understand that. But when you’re an appointed position and not an elected position, I don’t believe that it should cost ratepayers any money. I tried to stop it but it was a two-to-two vote so they’re going to continue to do that as of Monday.”
To be certain, the insurance company handling the errors and omissions for the NFWB is providing coverage for Asklar’s legal representation.
Michael Asklar was unable to be reached for comment; prompting Perry to reply, “He never gave us any contact information despite him being our appointee. We don’t have a phone number for him. Whenever I have to get a hold of him, I have to contact Sean Costello and have him contact him for us. None of the council members have Asklar’s phone number.”
As of now it is unknown who will represent the Niagara Falls City Council if they are taken to court by Kaufman, Borgeest & Ryan LLP. The most likely candidates for representation will either be corporation counsel Thomas DeBoy or Hodgson Russ LLP (who is representing the City of Niagara Falls in the Centennial Park eminent domain lawsuit). Should it be the latter, local taxpayers will be expected to foot the bill for legal fees.
