Projo 7 to 7 News Blog

PROVIDENCE -- Mayor David N. Cicilline wants the City Council to change an ordinance in order to bar city employees who serve time for corruption from getting taxpayer-subsidized pensions. And the mayor said he has retained a lawyer to try to stop a former City Hall official from collecting pension.

The mayor's office said today the submitted proposal is prompted by the city Retirement Board's recent decision to award a partial pension to Frank E. Corrente -- once a top official in former Mayor Vincent A. Cianci Jr.'s administration -- who was convicted for racketeering, conspiracy and attempted extortion as a result of the Operation Plunder Dome probe at City Hall.

Cicilline also said he will try to stop Corrente from getting pension and has retained lawyer Kelly Sheridan to prosecute in Superior Court on behalf of Providence residents.

"We are under no illusions that this will be an easy case," the mayor said in the news release. "Mr. Sheridan has advised me that it would significantly strengthen the city's position in this legal challenge if the City Council affirmatively joins the effort."

The amendment to city ordinance would automatically revoke the pension of any employee who serves at least one year in prison for a crime related to the person's job in city government, according to the mayor's office. A conviction that meets that description would be a breach of an employee's contract with the city.

"There's no question, any city employee who serves time for public corruption for betraying the taxpayers of Providence should not receive a pension," Cicilline said. "There is no acceptable explanation for rewarding an individual for bad behavior."

-- projo.com staff writer Michael P. McKinney

Your Turn: Should the pension of a city employee who serves at least a year in prison for a job-related crime automatically be revoked?

| More

Comments

jms said:

The Mayor knows that to attach an amendment to a current ordinance and attempt to apply it retroactively would not withstand a Court challenge.Still he continues to spend the taxpayers money on this matter and others ,(ie forensic audits) ,to further agendas which appear to be personal,not the public ones he articulates.

Link | October 9, 2008 7:20 AM
Report Abuse

---

Scott said:

It is without a shadow of doubt that the individual that uses their power of office to reap the benefits of illegal activity should not have the privilage to reap the benefits of the hard working and loyal. Any individual guilty of any wrong doing within their appointed position should not have the oppertunity to collect anything. It doesn't matter if you are incarcerated for 1 year or 1 day. You did the crime and now you must pay the penalty. Times are difficult enough for any law abiding individual who works themself ragged to provide for their family and enjoy life to its fullest to have their hard earned money that they pay taxes on given to a crook.

Link | October 9, 2008 7:50 AM
Report Abuse

---

Roland said:

Does anyone see the irony here?

Link | October 9, 2008 5:35 PM
Report Abuse

---

joe said:

Don't worry Roland,plenty of us see the irony all too clearly.

Link | October 11, 2008 12:30 AM
Report Abuse

---

Leave a comment

Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish.

Name:

Email:

URL:  

Remember personal info?

Captcha:

Type the characters you see in the picture above.