IN THE MATTER OF FRANCES T. VELLA-MARRONE
COIB Case No. 98-169
April 26, 2000
SUMMARY: In COIB v. Frances T. Vella-Marrone, COIB Case No. 98-169 (2000), the Board fined Frances T. Vella-Marrone, a former School Construction Authority official, $5,000 for using her position to obtain a job for her husband at her agency and for attempting to obtain a promotion for him in 1996 and 1997. A 16-year-old girl was killed on January 9, 1998, in the area where Marrone's husband had removed a security fence at a public school construction site in Brooklyn. Mr. Marrone had not been supervisor on that site in the three months prior to the accident.
STIPULATION AND DISPOSITION
Respondent Frances T. Vella-Marrone states the following:
1. I was employed from approximately May 30, 1995 until May 7, 1998 by the New York City School Construction Authority ("SCA") as the Special Assistant to Paul Atanasio, Trustee of the SCA. I am no longer employed at the SCA.
A. Obtaining a Job for my Husband at the SCA
2. In the late Fall of 1995, or the early Winter of 1995-1996, I asked Barry Light, then President of the SCA, if I could put in my husband's (Gary Marrone) resume for a vacant Project Officer ("P.O.") position at the SCA. I only disclosed to President Light that Gary Marrone was my husband when Light asked if I was related to Gary Marrone.
3. President Light told me that I could not put in the resume because the SCA's "Avoidance of Nepotism" procedure (the "Anti-Nepotism Policy") prohibited employment at the SCA of "relatives," including spouses, of SCA employees such as myself. Light resigned from the SCA on March 1, 1996.
4. In addition to contacting Light, I approached Michael Kaleda, then an SCA Chief Project Officer, and told him that I had a good candidate, Gary Marrone, for him to consider for a P.O. vacancy. According to Kaleda, I said, that "[Trustee] Paul [Atanasio] wants it."
5. I did not initially tell Kaleda that Gary Marrone was my husband.
6. Kaleda's role in the hiring process was to interview and to help select the successful P.O. candidates. Kaleda and a superior, were the two SCA construction officials who were required to sign off on the hiring of P.O. applicants.
7. I contacted Kaleda repeatedly until he set up an interview of my husband and I expressed great interest to Kaleda about the results of Gary Marrone's interview.
8. Gary Marrone was interviewed by Kaleda for a Project Officer One ("P.O. I") job on or about April 4, 1996.
9. Gary Marrone's employment application eventually became known to Barbara Chernow, then the SCA's Vice President for Administration.
10. When Chernow became aware of the possibility that the SCA might hire Marrone, she told me that it was a mistake for me to be involved in the hiring of my husband and that it had the appearance of a conflict of interest.
11. I told Chernow that my husband needed a job immediately and rejected her suggestion that he apply elsewhere, such as at the New York City Department of Design and Construction.
12. On or about April 4, 1996, Gary Marrone was offered a P.O. I job at the SCA with an annual salary of $55,916.
13. Prior to receiving the SCA job offer, Gary Marrone was offered a job by the New York City Housing Authority ("NYCHA".)
14. Gary Marrone accepted the SCA job, rather than the NYCHA job, because the SCA job paid more.
B. Attempting to Obtain a Promotion at the SCA for My Husband
15. In the late Spring or early Summer of 1997, Gary Marrone submitted his resume in response to a vacancy posted for a P.O. II position posted at the SCA.
16. Applicants for the P.O. II position were screened to be interviewed, and were interviewed by three-member committees composed of Chief Project Officers and Deputy Chief Project Officers.
17. Gary Marrone was not initially selected to be interviewed by a three- member panel.
18. Upon learning that my husband was not selected to be interviewed, I went to William Reisacher, then Senior Director of Project Management, and requested that he give my husband an interview. Reisacher was superior to all the Chief and Deputy Chief Project Officers who served on the three-member interview panels.
19. After my discussion with Reisacher, Gary Marrone was given an interview for the P.O. II position, and was interviewed by a three-member panel, in the Summer of 1997, and he did not get the job.
C. Gary Marrone's Performance as a P.O.I
20. Gary Marrone's P.O. I duties included, among other jobs, supervising the roof repair by Espo Construction Inc. at P.S. 131 in Brooklyn.
21. In his role as P.O. I at P.S. 131, Gary Marrone ordered, on October 17, 1997, the removal of a security fence outside the school. Gary Marrone was replaced as P.O. I at P.S. 131 on October 20, 1997. I represent that Mr. Marrone had no connection with this construction site, as Project Officer, after October 17, 1997.
22. A sixteen year old girl was killed on January 9, 1998 in the area where the security fence had been removed by a brick blown from the roof of P.S. 131. I represent that no claims, either criminal or civil, have been asserted against Mr. Marrone as a result of this fatality. I represent that there are no negative entries in Mr. Marrone's SCA personnel file regarding the fatality.
23. I freely and voluntarily admit that my conduct in using my position at the SCA in order to obtain a job for my husband and to attempt to obtain a promotion for my husband violated Charter Sections 2604(b)(3) and 2604(b)(2), which state respectively that,
“No public servant shall use or attempt to use his or her position as a public servant to obtain any financial gain, contract, license, privilege or other private or personal advantage, direct or indirect, for the public servant or any person or firm associated with the public servant."
"No public servant shall engage in any business, transaction or private employment, or have any financial or other private interest, direct or indirect, which is in conflict with the proper discharge of his or her official duties."
24. In recognition of the foregoing, I agree to pay a fine of five thousand ($5,000) dollars to the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board upon the signature by all parties of this Disposition.
25. Although I understand that my circumstances are different because of the active role I played with
respect to my husband's employment at the SCA, there were a few other married couples, working at the SCA, (some of whom married after both were already working at the SCA), at the time I sought a job at the SCA for my husband. I understand that these few cases did not justify my conduct, and that my violation of the Charter lay in my taking steps officially to obtain a job and promotion for my spouse. As a result of the investigation that surrounded this accident, I left my position at SCA after admitting my error in judgment, and endured a period of unemployment spanning four months. Although I have since found private employment, my salary is considerably reduced. In the aftermath of the accident, my family and I have suffered intense public scrutiny, deep anguish and shame, stress and humiliation, as well as reduced economic circumstances. As in the case of Nancy Campbell Ross, COIB Case No. 97-76, OATH Index No 538/98, at p.8, these mitigating factors (loss of job, income, reputation, admission of error), without which a substantially higher penalty would be called for, warrant a civil fine of $5,000. The Board also acknowledges Ms. Marrone's long-term involvement in community and pro bono activities as well as civic honors from legislative bodies, Boy Scouts, the New York City Parks Department, the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office and various community groups.
26. I agree that this statement is a public and final resolution of the charges against me. Furthermore, I agree to provide a copy of this Disposition to any City agency where I may apply for employment upon the request of such agency or in response to any inquiry calling for such information.
27. This Disposition shall not be effective until all parties below have affixed their signatures.
28. I confirm that I have entered into this agreement knowingly and intentionally, without coercion or duress, and after consulting with an attorney. I accept all terms and conditions contained herein without reliance on any other promises or offers previously made or tendered by any past or present representative of the SCA or the Conflicts of Interest Board and I fully understand all the terms of this agreement.
29. The New York City Conflicts of Interest Board accepts this Disposition and the terms and conditions herein as a final disposition of the above captioned matter, and, accordingly, hereby closes the case, and affirmatively states that no further action will be taken by the Conflicts of Interest Board against respondent based on the facts and circumstances referred to herein.
Frances T. Vella-Marrone
Respondent
John J. D'Emic
Attorney for Respondent
The City of New York Conflicts of Interest Board
Benito Romano
Acting Chair
Dated: April 26, 2000