Sometimes you get tired of facts and figures. Here is a "human interest" story.
This is an old posting from 2009. Considering the behavior of the former NYCERS Chair, Martha Stark , that came to light last year, this deposition of Karen Mazza from November, 2006 is worth a second read.
You will notice our old friend Paul Marks making an appearance. This deposition was given two months after Dara Ottley-Brown was moved over to Standards and Appeals. She's still there at $151K/year. One month later Stark begins a short term affair with Subordinate 2 at Finance. At least that's the start date that Subordinate 2 gave to DOI.
The first thing you should do is scan for all the times Mazza answers "I don't remember" (50 times) or "I don't know" (30 times). These phrases speak for themselves. Page 60 is the start of a very entertaining section.
1
1
2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
3 COUNTY OF NEW YORK
4 ------------------------------------x
5 JOHN J. MURPHY,
6 Plaintiff,
7 Index No.
8 -against- 106059/06
9 CITY OF NEW YORK, BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
10 THE NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
11 SYSTEM, MARTHA STARK, CHAIR AND DEPARTMENT
12 OF INVESTIGATION, VINCENT E. GREEN,
13 SUPERVISING INSPECTOR GENERAL,
14 Defendants.
15 ------------------------------------x
16 November 21, 2006
17 10:35 a.m.
18
19 Deposition of KAREN MAZZA, held at the
20 offices of Corporation Counsel of the City of New
21 York, 100 Church Street, New York, New York,
22 pursuant to notice, before Barbara Driscoll, a
23 Notary Public of the State of New York.
24
25
2
1
2 A P P E A R A N C E S:
3
4 ROSEMARY CARROLL, ESQ.
5 Attorney for Plaintiff
6 3712 Route 9G
7 Germantown, New York 12526
8
9
10 MICHAEL CARDOZO
11 Attorneys for Defendants
12 New York City Law Department
13 Office of the Corporation Counsel
14 100 Church Street
15 New York, New York 10007-2061
16 BY: PAUL MARKS, ESQ.,
17 of Counsel
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
1
2 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by
3 and between the attorneys for the respective
4 parties herein, that filing and sealing be and
5 the same are hereby waived.
6
7 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED
8 that all objections, except as to the form of
9 the question, shall be reserved to the time
10 of the trial.
11
12 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED
13 that the within deposition may be signed and
14 sworn to before any officer authorized to
15 administer an oath, with the same force and
16 effect as if signed and sworn to before the
17 officer before whom the within deposition was
18 taken.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
1 Mazza
2 K A R E N M A Z Z A,
3 called as a witness, having been first duly sworn
4 by the Notary Public (Barbara Driscoll), was
5 examined and testified as follows:
6 EXAMINATION BY
7 MS. CARROLL:
8 Q. Please state your full name.
9 A. Karen Mazza.
10 Q. My name is Rosemary Carroll. I am the
11 attorney for the plaintiff in this civil action.
12 I will be asking you some questions regarding the
13 claims in the case.
14 You are required to answer those
15 questions truthfully and to the best of your
16 ability by an oral statement. Don't shake your
17 head. Answer orally. At any time you wish to
18 speak with your lawyer, you may do so, except when
19 a question is pending. At that point you can't
20 speak with your lawyer.
21 If you wish to take a break at any
22 time, you may do so, just ask. If you don't
23 understand a question, ask me and I will rephrase
24 it for you. Those are the rules. I will assume
25 if you answer a question, you understood it and
5
1 Mazza
2 that your answer will be the answer that will be
3 in the record and will be part of this case.
4 Is there any reason that you could not
5 testify truthfully today?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Are you under any medication?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Prior to this deposition, did you
10 review any documents?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What documents did you review?
13 Do you have them with you?
14 A. No.
15 Q. What documents did you review?
16 A. The transcript of my testimony at DOI.
17 Q. When you say the transcript of the
18 testimony, was it a Q and A or was it a summary?
19 A. It was a Q and A. It was given to
20 me -- I think it was prepped by you.
21 What else did I look at? Other --
22 summary of E-mails, the letter that was sent to
23 the board of trustees.
24 Q. The letter that was sent to the board
25 of trustees by whom?
6
1 Mazza
2 A. An anonymous person.
3 Q. The anonymous letter?
4 A. The DOI report.
5 Q. The summary of E-mails, you mean the
6 actual E-mails themselves or was there a summary
7 of E-mails?
8 A. The E-mails themselves but not in
9 individual pages. They were sort of all put
10 together.
11 Q. From whom did you obtain the materials
12 that you reviewed in connection with this
13 deposition?
14 You said you got the transcripts from
15 Mr. Marks.
16 A. From Paul.
17 I think I got the anonymous letter I
18 got from the trustees, and the DOI report I got
19 from the trustees.
20 Q. The transcript of the testimony and the
21 summary of the E-mails, were they reviewed by you
22 proximate to this deposition? By that I mean
23 within the last few weeks or so.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The anonymous letter which you said you
7
1 Mazza
2 had from one of the trustees, did you have that
3 letter well prior to your preparation for this
4 deposition?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is that also with respect to the DOI
7 report?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. In addition to a Mr. Marks, is there
10 any other person with whom you discussed in any
11 manner and in any regard the deposition today?
12 A. I notified Diane D'Alassandro, the
13 executive director, that I was coming. That was
14 it.
15 Q. Didn't speak with any other person,
16 Felita Baksh, your immediate supervisor?
17 A. Diane is my immediate superviser.
18 Q. What about any other person?
19 A. Just to tell people I would be out of
20 the office today.
21 Q. Who was that?
22 A. My staff, other directors at NYCERS.
23 Q. What about the subject area of the
24 deposition; did you discuss it with
25 Ms. D'Alassandro?
8
1 Mazza
2 A. Just to tell her it was a deposition in
3 this particular case.
4 Q. Any other conversation about the
5 deposition with any other person?
6 A. No.
7 Q. I mean at any time since you knew you
8 were going to be deposed.
9 A. Other than telling people I was going
10 to be out of the office for the deposition, no
11 other discussion.
12 Q. Have you had any discussion with Martha
13 Stark within the last month regarding this matter
14 or any matter?
15 A. No -- regarding any other matter? Yes.
16 She is the chair of the body of trustees.
17 Q. But your conversations with her did not
18 involve the deposition you were scheduled for?
19 A. No.
20 Q. You're aware she had a deposition in
21 this case?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. How are you aware of that?
24 A. I was told of the dates of her
25 deposition by Mr. Marks.
9
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did Ms. Stark discuss with you her
3 deposition in any regard?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Are you employed by NYCERS?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. When were you first hired by NYCERS?
8 A. February 1997.
9 Q. By whom were you hired?
10 A. Mr. Murphy.
11 Q. In what capacity?
12 A. General counsel.
13 Q. You're a lawyer?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. When were you admitted to the bar?
16 A. April 1983.
17 Q. Prior to being hired in February of
18 1997 by NYCERS, did you have any employment in
19 city government?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you ever work for the department of
22 finance?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. When was that?
25 A. From 1992 to 1994 or 1995 -- I am
10
1 Mazza
2 trying to remember.
3 Q. In what capacity did you work for the
4 department of finance?
5 A. I was counsel to mayor's pension unit.
6 Q. Who was the commissioner of the
7 department of finance?
8 A. Carol O'Cleireacain.
9 Q. Counsel to the mayor's pension unit is
10 a position different from counsel to the
11 department of finance?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Who was the counsel to the department
14 of finance?
15 A. I don't remember.
16 Q. Was that your first job in city
17 government?
18 A. No.
19 Q. What was your first job in city
20 government?
21 A. I was an assistant general counsel and
22 deputy general counsel in the department of
23 probation.
24 Q. When was that?
25 A. 1983 to 1987.
11
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did you subsequently work for the city
3 between 1987 and 1992?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Where were you working between 1987 and
6 1992?
7 A. Westchester County District Attorney's
8 Office.
9 Q. What were you doing?
10 A. I was an assistant DA in the MTA
11 Inspector General's office.
12 Q. When was that, the Inspector General's
13 office?
14 A. I am trying to think of the years.
15 1988 to 1992 or late 1987 to 1992.
16 Q. Then 1992 to 1994, you worked for
17 finance.
18 What was your next job after finance?
19 A. I worked for New York City
20 Comptroller's office.
21 Q. When was that?
22 A. 1994 to 1997.
23 Q. In that employment, did you have
24 occasion to work with Martha Stark in any
25 capacity?
12
1 Mazza
2 A. At the comptroller's office?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. No.
5 Q. What about in finance?
6 A. She was also employed at finance, but I
7 didn't work with her. We were in separate
8 divisions.
9 Q. You're currently employed as general
10 counsel at NYCERS?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you have any disciplinary record in
13 any of your employment with the city?
14 A. No.
15 Q. By disciplinary record, I mean either
16 written specifications and charges or any sort of
17 reprimand or inclusion in your personnel file of
18 anything that would be disciplinary.
19 A. Not that I am aware of, no.
20 Q. You have never been reprimanded in any
21 of the capacities you have served in in city
22 government?
23 A. No.
24 Q. I will show you what was previously
25 marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 to the DeFreitas
13
1 Mazza
2 deposition and inquire as to whether or not this
3 is the anonymous letter you referred to when I
4 asked you what document you had reviewed in
5 connection with the deposition today.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. When is the first time that you saw
8 this letter?
9 A. I don't know exactly, but it was
10 subsequent to my interview with DOI.
11 MS. CARROLL: Off the record.
12 (Discussion off the record.)
13 MS. CARROLL: Mark this as Mazza
14 Exhibit 1.
15 (Mazza Exhibit 1, document, marked for
16 identification, as of this date.)
17 Q. I will show you this document.
18 We can agree that your interview was
19 July 13, 2004?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Turn to pages 14 and 15, please, and
22 read that to yourself. I want to ask you some
23 questions regarding obtaining of the anonymous
24 letter, Exhibit 1, to the DeFreitas deposition.
25 The anonymous letter is dated June 1.
14
1 Mazza
2 Are you certain that you didn't receive it on or
3 about June 8, 2004?
4 A. I did not see it on June 8, no.
5 Q. You were told about it on June 8?
6 A. I was asked how I -- I was asked -- as
7 I said in here, I was asked by a trustee how I
8 was -- in light of the letter which I asked her
9 what letter, she proceeded to tell me about the
10 letter that had been written.
11 Q. Who is the trustee?
12 A. Diane Bratcher.
13 Q. She told you on or about June 8?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What did she tell you about the letter?
16 A. To the best of my recollection, she
17 told me that the trustees had received an
18 anonymous letter alleging that Mr. Murphy and
19 Ms. Browne were having an affair and it also
20 included information about me, that I had helped
21 Felita Baksh to fix up her resume for a job at
22 NYCERS.
23 MS. CARROLL: Read that back, please.
24 (Record read.)
25 Q. Was there any mention by Ms. Baksh to
15
1 Mazza
2 you that there were allegations in the letter that
3 Browne received raises and promotions not on the
4 merits but because of her affair with Murphy? Do
5 you remember her telling you that?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 Q. As you sit here, can you categorically
8 say it didn't happen or is it just you don't
9 remember one way or the other?
10 A. I would say she didn't tell me that
11 much that day till -- that way because we were
12 standing in a hallway, so I would say no.
13 Q. My question isn't detail. My question
14 is, had she told you about the letter, that there
15 are allegations of misconduct, i.e., that Murphy
16 had given promotions and raises; any mention about
17 that whatsoever concerning Browne?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. When she said there was information
20 about fixing Baksh's resume, you said there was
21 information to that effect?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What did you say to her when you got
24 that information?
25 A. I don't remember.
16
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did Ms. Baksh say anything additional
3 regarding whether or not John Murphy admitted or
4 denied the relationship?
5 A. Do you mean Ms. Bratcher?
6 MS. CARROLL: Read back the question.
7 (Record read.)
8 Q. Change it to Bratcher, yes.
9 MS. CARROLL: Read it back again.
10 (Record read.)
11 A. No.
12 Q. When you were asked at the DOI
13 interview, you didn't reveal the name according to
14 transcript. Were you ever compelled by DOI to
15 provide the name?
16 A. No.
17 Q. What additional information, phone call
18 did you get from a trustee about the letter?
19 A. I don't understand what you mean.
20 Q. In the last sentence of the transcript
21 on page 15 in the area I asked you to read, it
22 says, then I got a phone call from another
23 trustee.
24 Who was the trustee?
25 A. It was two trustees, Mike Musaraca and
17
1 Mazza
2 Joel Giller, G I L L E R.
3 Q. You called them or they called you?
4 A. They called me.
5 Q. When did Musaraca call you, prior to
6 Bratcher telling you?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Prior to you being interviewed by DOI?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. We are talking about a date sometime
11 after June 8 and prior to July 31 of 2004?
12 A. It was June 9.
13 MR. MARKS: The date of interview is
14 June 13. You said 31.
15 Q. Mike Musaraca called you June 9, 2004?
16 A. Yes, and Mike Musaraca. They were on
17 the phone together.
18 Q. Who was Joel Giller at that time?
19 A. He was in counsel's office at DC 37. I
20 don't know what his exact title was.
21 Q. Who was Mike Musaraca at that time?
22 A. He was in -- he works and worked for DC
23 37 and they were both trustees at NYCERS, but I
24 don't know what Mr. Musaraca's title was.
25 Q. They were both board --
18
1 Mazza
2 A. Members.
3 Q. -- Musaraca Giller at the time you got
4 the call on June 9, 2004, were on the board of
5 trustees for NYCERS representative of DC 37?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you have any other contact with the
8 trustees about the anonymous letter prior to the
9 July 13 DOI interview?
10 A. I don't remember.
11 Q. Did you ever have any conversation with
12 any specific trustee other than Giller, Musaraca
13 or Bratcher prior to July 13, 2004?
14 A. I don't -- I don't remember.
15 Q. Did you have any conversation with
16 Toussaint --
17 A. No.
18 Q. -- or Martinez?
19 A. I may -- I do remember saying to Ramon
20 I didn't do anything wrong. I did not speak to
21 Roger Toussaint.
22 Q. In this conversation that you had with
23 Mike Musaraca and Joel Giller, what did they say
24 to you when they called you?
25 A. They asked me how I was doing. They
19
1 Mazza
2 asked me if I knew about the letter and I replied
3 that I did.
4 Q. Did you tell them how you knew about
5 the letter?
6 A. No.
7 Q. What did you tell them you knew about
8 the letter?
9 A. I don't think I told them --
10 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
11 You can answer.
12 A. I don't think I told them that -- I
13 didn't say anything specific about what I knew was
14 in the letter. I told them that I had spoken to
15 John and let them know I knew about the letter.
16 Q. What did you tell John, I knew about
17 the letter.
18 A. I told them that one of the trustees
19 approached me and told me that they had received
20 an anonymous letter, received an anonymous letter
21 regarding him and Ms. Browne. That is all I said
22 about the letter. That is all I said about the
23 letter. I said that --
24 Q. When did you speak with John Murphy
25 about the letter?
20
1 Mazza
2 A. June 9.
3 Q. Was this prior to the Musaraca/Giller
4 phone call?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Murphy told you that he was having a
7 relationship with Browne?
8 A. No, he did not.
9 Q. Did Murphy deny the relationship?
10 A. No, he did not.
11 Q. What did he say about it?
12 A. He didn't say anything. He asked me
13 how -- he didn't say anything about the
14 relationship.
15 Q. You didn't ask him about it?
16 A. No.
17 Q. What about the allegations in the
18 letter that Brown received promotions and raises
19 because of the relationship; did you discuss that
20 with Musaraca and Giller?
21 A. No.
22 Q. What did you discuss with them other
23 than you knew about the letter?
24 A. I told them that I had spoken to John
25 -- I told them I was upset, that I had spoken to
21
1 Mazza
2 John and that was the extent of it.
3 Q. Did they tell you that they had spoken
4 with Mr. Murphy or with anybody else about the
5 letter?
6 A. The exact -- they didn't say they spoke
7 to him. The exact words they said to me was he
8 doesn't deny it.
9 Q. Meaning the relationship?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did they say anything regarding whether
12 he denied the allegations regarding Browne's
13 promotions and raise; was that subject raised?
14 A. I am sorry.
15 Q. You know that the letter contains
16 allegations that Browne received raises and
17 promotions because of the relationship with
18 Murphy, correct?
19 A. Right.
20 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form. I
21 don't want to make a speaking objection, but
22 she did testify she hadn't seen the letter.
23 MS. CARROLL: But now she knows the
24 letter.
25 Q. Was there any discussion at or about
22
1 Mazza
2 this time about the allegation that Browne
3 received the raises and promotions because of her
4 relationship with Murphy?
5 A. No.
6 Q. How long were you on the phone with
7 Giller and Musaraca?
8 A. Maybe five minutes.
9 Q. Did they fax you the letter?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did they discuss anything further about
12 the content of the letter?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Didn't you discuss with them the
15 allegation against you regarding Baksh's resume?
16 A. No.
17 Q. You didn't discuss that at all?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You knew about the letter prior to the
20 time you spoke with Mr. Murphy?
21 A. On June 9?
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Baksh spoke to you before Murphy did?
25 A. Yes.
23
1 Mazza
2 Q. In your conversation with Musaraca and
3 Giller, you didn't mention to them that you were
4 annoyed about the allegation against you?
5 MR. MARKS: Objection to form.
6 You can answer.
7 A. I don't think so. I don't remember.
8 Q. There is a mention on page 15 to Mazza
9 deposition that you got -- it appears to be
10 another phone call; is that accurate? Was there a
11 third phone call, a third contact?
12 A. No.
13 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
14 Q. It says on the top of page 15, then I
15 got a call from another trustee. Then later on,
16 it says from two trustees.
17 Does that refer to the universe of
18 Bratcher, Giller and Musaraca and that is it?
19 A. There is one phone call and it was from
20 Mike Musaraca and Joel Giller.
21 Q. That is the five minute phone call?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. There was only one of those?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. The contact with Bratcher was by phone
24
1 Mazza
2 or otherwise?
3 A. No. It was on June 8 at a --
4 Q. At the law department function?
5 A. Yes, seminar.
6 Q. She told you that the letter existed?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. She told you about the allegation of
9 the affair in the letter?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. With respect to the issue of raises or
12 promotions, what did Bratcher tell you?
13 A. I don't remember her telling me
14 anything about that.
15 Q. What about the subject of your
16 doctoring the Baksh's resume; what was your
17 conversation about that?
18 MR. MARKS: Objection to form.
19 You can answer.
20 A. I don't remember.
21 Q. What did you tell Bratcher when she
22 told you about the letter?
23 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
24 You can answer.
25 A. What did I tell Bratcher when she told
25
1 Mazza
2 me about the letter, when she told me about the
3 allegation or the letter?
4 Q. Yes. When she told you about the
5 allegation in the letter, about Murphy and Browne
6 having an affair and that it was alleged that you
7 altered the letter or fixed the resume.
8 A. I don't remember her telling me about
9 the part about me.
10 I do remember her telling me about the
11 part about the affair and I said to her it is not
12 true. I know it is not true.
13 Q. There was a meeting scheduled by the
14 board of trustees of NYCERS in June of 2004. One
15 subject of which was this anonymous letter; do you
16 recall that?
17 A. There was a regular board of trustees
18 meeting.
19 Q. This was one of the issues for that
20 agenda for that meeting, correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Prior to that meeting, did you submit
23 any material to refute the allegation in the
24 letter that you had revised Baksh's resume?
25 A. I had not seen the letter at that
26
1 Mazza
2 point.
3 Q. Yes, but you knew prior to the meeting
4 that the allegation was made, right?
5 A. Had I --
6 Q. Is that right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. My question is, did you submit anything
9 to the trustees regarding that allegation?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you speak to anybody about it?
12 A. Anybody in the world?
13 Q. Anybody in city government, at NYCERS.
14 A. I am sure I did.
15 Q. You spoke to Baksh?
16 A. I may have. I don't remember speaking
17 to --
18 Q. You spoke to Browne?
19 A. I spoke to Mr. Murphy, I am sure. I
20 spoke to Mr. Aron, I am sure. I spoke to
21 Ms. Browne, I am sure. I spoke to Ms. Baksh.
22 Q. Did you in speaking to Mr. Murphy and
23 Mr. Aron admit that, in fact, you had made some
24 changes in the resume of Baksh?
25 A. I don't remember what I said to them.
27
1 Mazza
2 Q. What about to Browne and Baksh; what
3 was your conversation?
4 A. I don't remember exactly what the
5 conversation was.
6 Q. I don't need exactly --
7 A. I don't remember.
8 Q. Let me finish. The gist of your
9 conversation --
10 A. I don't remember.
11 Q. You don't remember anything you said to
12 Murphy, Aron, Browne or Baksh about the allegation
13 in the anonymous letter regarding yourself.
14 A. No.
15 Q. It is your testimony that you didn't
16 say anything to either Giller or Musaraca about
17 the allegations in the letter regarding yourself?
18 A. I don't recall discussing it with them.
19 Q. This board of trustee meeting in June
20 of 2004 in which the Exhibit 1 in DeFreitas is
21 considered, were you in attendance at that
22 meeting?
23 A. I was not in attendance when the letter
24 was discussed.
25 Q. Which lawyers, if any, were, to your
28
1 Mazza
2 knowledge?
3 A. I don't think there were any lawyers in
4 the -- I don't know. I don't think there were any
5 lawyers in the room when they discussed it.
6 Q. Do you know Susan Sanders was there or
7 any of the other law department attorneys?
8 A. I don't think so.
9 Q. You don't know as a fact?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you remember seeing an agenda in
12 which the letter was referenced?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Had you been at the meeting when it was
15 called to order?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. There came a time when the letter came
18 up for discussion and you left the room?
19 A. I believe they went into executive
20 session.
21 Q. What is executive session?
22 A. It is off-the-record discussion among
23 the trustees.
24 Q. Is it always off the record?
25 A. No.
29
1 Mazza
2 Q. Who makes the determination of whether
3 it is off the record?
4 A. The trustees themselves.
5 Q. By vote or how?
6 A. By motion.
7 Q. Is that motion recorded?
8 A. Yes.
9 RQ MS. CARROLL: I will make a demand for
10 that which I will put in writing. I would
11 like the transcript of that portion that
12 indicates that this executive session off the
13 record was voted.
14 MR. MARKS: You have it.
15 MS. CARROLL: That one page, that is
16 the whole thing?
17 MR. MARKS: It is more than one page.
18 It indicates they are going into executive
19 session --
20 MS. CARROLL: But it doesn't say off
21 the record.
22 MR. MARKS: You have a transcript of
23 whatever proceeding before the NYCERS board --
24 the transcript of everything that occurred
25 before they went to executive session. There
30
1 Mazza
2 is nothing else.
3 Q. You don't know one way or the other
4 whether there was a motion in this particular case
5 to have the executive session off the record,
6 right?
7 A. Do I know it right --
8 Q. Do you know it as a fact?
9 A. From that date?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. I don't remember.
12 Q. So you don't know it as a fact.
13 How long was this off the record
14 executive discussion?
15 A. I don't remember.
16 Q. Who was in attendance at that executive
17 session other than the trustees, if anyone? Was
18 there any outside person called in to your
19 knowledge?
20 A. I don't remember.
21 Q. Did they ever ask you to make any
22 presentation?
23 A. No.
24 Q. What occurred after the executive
25 session was concluded? Did the meeting resume for
31
1 Mazza
2 starters?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. When the meeting resumed, was there any
5 statement as to what would occur?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 Q. Did you have any role in the decision
8 to refer the allegations mentioned in Exhibit 1 to
9 DOI?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Had you been consulted in any regard by
12 any of the trustees as to a course of action that
13 should be taken in connection with the allegations
14 in Exhibit 1?
15 A. No.
16 Q. When you heard that there was this
17 letter from the trustees as you testified, did you
18 indicate to them that legal counsel should be
19 involved in the decision as to how to handle the
20 Exhibit 1?
21 A. No.
22 Q. To your knowledge, had other complaints
23 or allegations with respect to NYCERS that came
24 before the board been referred to DOI?
25 A. Say that again.
32
1 Mazza
2 MS. CARROLL: Read it back.
3 (Record read.)
4 A. Referred by the board?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Exhibit 1 makes mention of a intimate
8 relationship between Murphy and Browne.
9 You had prior to June 8 or June 9 of
10 2004 heard rumors of such a relationship?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did you ever advise John Murphy of the
13 rumors?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. When was that?
16 A. I don't know exact dates.
17 Q. We are talking about June of 2004
18 immediately, prior a year prior?
19 A. I would say anywhere from the time we
20 moved to Adams Street which was in 2000 up until
21 2004.
22 Q. When you say moved to Adams Street, you
23 mean moving NYCERS --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- in about 2000?
33
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. You advised Murphy in or about 2000
4 that you were aware of rumors that there was a
5 relationship between Murphy and Browne?
6 A. No.
7 What I said was anywhere between 2000
8 when we moved to Adams Street and 2004, I would
9 have advised him of rumors that I had heard.
10 Q. But you don't know when you so advised
11 him?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Was it on more than one occasion?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You have to let me finish the question.
16 A. Sorry.
17 Q. Was anybody there other than you and
18 Murphy when you made these inquiries?
19 A. No.
20 Q. What was you conversation with Murphy,
21 to the best of your knowledge?
22 A. First of all, they weren't inquiries.
23 I didn't make inquiries to him. I told him what I
24 had heard.
25 Q. What did you tell him?
34
1 Mazza
2 A. I told him that people were talking
3 about him and Niki having a relationship.
4 Q. Is this prior to Leo Vallee leaving in
5 the end of 2001?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 Q. You have no specific recollection that
8 your conversations with Murphy about rumors
9 predated Vallee leaving NYCERS?
10 A. No.
11 Q. It is likely it is after Vallee left
12 NYCERS?
13 A. I don't recall.
14 Q. What was your conversation with Murphy
15 on these occasions?
16 A. I would go in his office. I would tell
17 him that I had heard rumors.
18 Q. What did you say?
19 A. I would say people are talking; people
20 are saying, you know, again, that you and Niki are
21 having an affair and that would be it.
22 Q. What was his conversation with you?
23 A. Usually there was no response.
24 Q. Is that the sum and substance of what
25 you told him in these conversations?
35
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. You never said to him, if you're having
4 such a relationship, it would be in violation of
5 any regulation or rule; you never told him that?
6 A. No.
7 MS. CARROLL: We will mark a memorandum
8 dated December 9, 2002 as Mazza Exhibit 2.
9 (Mazza Exhibit 2, memorandum dated
10 December 9, 2002, marked for identification,
11 as of this date.)
12 Q. The penultimate paragraph of the memo
13 says, finally, romantic relationships are strictly
14 in violation of the code.
15 What code are you referring to?
16 A. I don't remember.
17 Q. In fact, the code that defines the
18 organization of the conflicts of interest board
19 does not specify any prohibition against romantic
20 relationships by city employees, right?
21 A. I have to reread COIB.
22 Q. At this point you don't know.
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Prior to the anonymous letter
25 specifying the Murphy/Browne relationship during
36
1 Mazza
2 your tenure at NYCERS as counsel, had there been
3 occasions where there were employees who were
4 having intimate relationships?
5 A. There were allegations.
6 Q. Did you make any recommendations
7 regarding such allegations in your capacity as
8 counsel, I mean?
9 A. I had discussions with Mr. Murphy and
10 Mr. Aron, but I don't believe I had make
11 recommendations.
12 MR. MARKS: What did these discussions
13 entail?
14 MS. CARROLL: Off record.
15 (Discussion off the record.)
16 MS. CARROLL: I will reframe the
17 question.
18 Q. Did you ever prepare any guidelines for
19 employees that treated this issue of intimate
20 relationships between subordinates and superiors?
21 A. Written guidelines?
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. No.
24 Q. Did you ever give any training on the
25 issue?
37
1 Mazza
2 A. Myself?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. No.
5 Q. This is legal issues?
6 A. Did I give training? No.
7 Q. Did you prepare materials for training?
8 A. No.
9 Q. I mean the attachment to Exhibit 2
10 talks about legal realities, superior subordinate
11 relationships.
12 My question to you is, at any time did
13 you ever prepare guidelines in this matter for
14 NYCERS?
15 A. No.
16 Q. We have marked Exhibit B to the Murphy
17 deposition D 0100 which I will give you in a
18 moment to look at. Have you had an opportunity to
19 read the document?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you prepare the portion of this
22 document that is denominated section H?
23 A. Section H?
24 Q. Yes, H.
25 A. I don't think I wrote this.
38
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did you ever give any training, prepare
3 any guidelines or take any action as counsel for
4 NYCERS in furtherance of explaining the import of
5 section 8 of Exhibit 2?
6 A. I did not do training in this.
7 Q. Is there anywhere defined, to your
8 knowledge, in the NYCERS handbook the meaning of
9 this term used in the last sentence romantic
10 relationships?
11 A. Is it defined in the handbook? I don't
12 know. I don't have the handbook in front of me.
13 I don't know.
14 Q. You never wrote any such definition in
15 your capacity as counsel, I take it?
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. Do you know whether or not section H of
18 Exhibit 2 to the Murphy deposition was ever
19 reviewed by the law department?
20 A. I don't know.
21 Q. Do you have any knowledge of how
22 section H was prepared, by whom, the
23 circumstances, anything to that effect?
24 A. I believe -- to the best of my
25 recollection, the employee handbook was written by
39
1 Mazza
2 human resources department in NYCERS and was
3 reviewed by the directors and the executive
4 director.
5 Q. What is the basis of your statement?
6 A. Because human resources is the one who
7 was responsible for the document, for the employee
8 handbook.
9 Q. Do you know the date that H was
10 prepared?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you know whether or not it preceded
13 you as counsel?
14 A. We didn't have an employee handbook
15 before I was counsel.
16 Q. Then you know the answer that it didn't
17 precede you?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. The people that were in charge of HR
20 were not lawyers at NYCERS?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. You're saying that the HR people
23 prepared this; that you had no input as the NYCERS
24 lawyer in reviewing H?
25 A. That is not what I said. What I said
40
1 Mazza
2 was that the employee handbook was written by the
3 human resource department.
4 Q. I asked you, did you have any role in
5 reviewing the section.
6 A. I reviewed the whole employee handbook,
7 not just H.
8 Q. I reviewed the whole employee handbook.
9 Did you provide any sort of legal
10 guidance with respect to the matters in H?
11 A. I don't understand what you mean.
12 Q. Do you know whether it corresponded
13 with any citywide standards reviewed by the law
14 department or otherwise for employment of
15 relatives in city government?
16 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
17 You can answer.
18 A. It was NYCERS policies, not citywide
19 policies.
20 Q. I understand that. NYCERS is part of
21 the City of New York.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. The law department is the counsel for
24 the City of New York?
25 A. Yes.
41
1 Mazza
2 Q. My question to you is, did you take any
3 steps to insure that this statement was consistent
4 with citywide legal policy on the employment of
5 relatives?
6 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
7 You can answer.
8 A. No.
9 Q. The statement in Exhibit 2 is that
10 romantic relations are strictly in violation of
11 the code. You don't know, as a matter of fact,
12 whether that statement is accurate or inaccurate,
13 right?
14 A. Right.
15 Q. With respect to romantic relationships
16 at NYCERS, what action, if any, was taken by you,
17 and advice is an action -- advice is an action
18 taken by a lawyer -- to counsel Mr. Murphy,
19 Mr. Aron or anyone regarding how such
20 relationships should be dealt with from the
21 personnel perspective?
22 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form. You
23 can answer.
24 To the extent that you're asking her
25 for the substance of any legal advice she
42
1 Mazza
2 provided to anybody at NYCERS, I object on the
3 grounds protected by attorney-client
4 privilege.
5 MS. CARROLL: Read it back.
6 (Record read.)
7 MS. CARROLL: Take out by you and legal
8 advice.
9 Q. What action was taken when this issue
10 came up with respect to employees at NYCERS?
11 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
12 MS. CARROLL: I need to take a break.
13 (Recess taken.)
14 A. When I heard allegations, I would
15 discuss them with Mr. Murphy.
16 Q. Was there any action taken like
17 reassignment or cautionary memo to the subject or
18 any other personnel action?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Prior to June 1, 2004, what was
21 Androniki Browne's reputation at NYCERS?
22 A. She had a very good reputation.
23 Q. Prior to June 1, 2004, did you ever
24 personally observe any favoritism shown towards
25 Browne by Murphy with respect to raises or
43
1 Mazza
2 promotions?
3 A. I am not involved in raises or
4 promotions.
5 Q. So the answer is no?
6 A. I didn't observe it because I am not
7 involved in it.
8 Q. You have no information or knowledge
9 that any favoritism was shown by Murphy towards
10 Browne with respect to raises and promotions?
11 A. No, because I am not involved and
12 involved in promotions and raises.
13 Q. Do you have any knowledge that Browne
14 wasn't qualified for promotions and raises that
15 she received on or before June 1, 204?
16 A. I don't know what her qualifications
17 were. I don't know what her job qualifications
18 were because I wasn't involved.
19 Q. The answer is you don't know; you have
20 no knowledge or information.
21 Did there come a time, to your
22 knowledge, that Ms. Barnett was transferred from
23 HR?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. At that time was a woman named Patrice
44
1 Mazza
2 Barnett the HR director?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did you have any discussion with Murphy
5 regarding the removal of Barnett as HR director?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you recall Mr. Murphy making you
8 aware of a memorandum prepared with respect to a
9 subordinate named Kisha Shrouder?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you remember advising Mr. Murphy
12 that his action to remove Barnett was no problem
13 from your perspective?
14 A. No.
15 Q. What do you recall about your
16 discussion with Murphy about that matter?
17 A. I don't recall a discussion.
18 Q. I take it at no time did you tell
19 Mr. Murphy that there was any legal impediment to
20 removing Barnett as HR director.
21 Did you ever tell Murphy not to remove
22 Barnett as HR director?
23 A. No.
24 Q. You had discussions with him in which
25 Mr. Murphy indicated the basis of his removal of
45
1 Mazza
2 Barnett; is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did you have the opinion that Barnett
5 was not a "good fit" as a HR director?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. What was the basis of that impression?
8 A. Having worked with her over the years
9 at NYCERS.
10 Q. Why in your estimation was Barnett not
11 a good fit as HR director?
12 A. I think Patrice's personality was not
13 what you would want in a human resource director.
14 Q. Would your impression include the
15 conclusion that she was off putting; she did not
16 make HR seem like a place where you could readily
17 go and speak with her?
18 A. I would say Patrice was not a warm
19 person.
20 Q. Did she have problems communicating
21 with people?
22 A. I can only speak for myself. She
23 communicated fine with me.
24 Q. What about in her function as an HR
25 director; what were the problems she exhibited, to
46
1 Mazza
2 your knowledge?
3 A. I don't think she was particularly warm
4 and open to people which is what I think human
5 resources is supposed to be.
6 Q. Did you observe mood swings in how she
7 dealt with people?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You, in fact, read the memorandum that
10 Barnett read to Kisha Shrouder and the responsive
11 memo that Shrouder provided to Mr. Murphy
12 regarding the same subject, right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Would it be fair to say that the
15 Barnett memo was intemperate and not previously
16 documented with respect to the alleged personal
17 failings of Ms. Shrouder?
18 A. To the best of my recollection, I
19 believe that Kisha had good reviews prior to
20 Patrice's memo and that Patrice's memo was the
21 opposite of that.
22 Q. The removal of Barnett by Murphy
23 occurred at or about the time of the Shrouder
24 memos?
25 A. Subsequent to the Shrouder memos, yes.
47
1 Mazza
2 Q. To your knowledge, there is no
3 connection between the Browne/Murphy relationship
4 and removal of Barnett as HR director?
5 A. I don't know.
6 Q. So you have no knowledge?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. Did you have any role in the decision
9 to have Browne become the deputy director of
10 membership after --
11 A. No.
12 Q. Let me finish.
13 MS. CARROLL: Off the record.
14 (Off the record discussion.)
15 Q. When you had the meeting about the
16 memos, Mr. Valle was involved in that discussion,
17 right?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. Do you have any evidence about removal
20 of Barnett was not proper?
21 A. Any evidence?
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. No.
24 Q. Were you a friend of Felita Baksh?
25 A. No.
48
1 Mazza
2 Q. When did you first know the name Felita
3 Baksh?
4 A. When she was first hired at NYCERS -- I
5 don't know when that was.
6 Q. That is when she was working for
7 Barnett with Browne in HR?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. That would go back to the '90's?
10 A. Yes -- I don't know. I said yes and I
11 don't know what year it was.
12 Q. Did you have lunch with her during the
13 time she worked at HR?
14 A. I don't remember.
15 Q. Did you ever have lunch with her?
16 A. I couldn't say yes or no. I don't
17 remember.
18 Q. What contact would you have had with
19 her in her capacity at HR, if any?
20 A. At NYCERS?
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. Legal works with HR quite a bit, so it
23 would be in relationship to disciplinary
24 proceedings or in relation to hiring issues or any
25 number of legal issues that might come in human
49
1 Mazza
2 resources.
3 Q. You knew her when she left NYCERS and
4 went to the fire department too?
5 A. Did I know her? Yes.
6 Q. I mean in the same context as you would
7 have had professional contact with her.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. With what frequency?
10 A. Relatively infrequent.
11 Q. There is an allegation in the June 1
12 letter that accuses you of revising the resume of
13 Felita Baksh when she applied for the position of
14 HR director at NYCERS, right? You have read that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. In fact, you did take some action with
17 respect to her resume, right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Whatever action you took with respect
20 to the editing or revision of the Baksh resume,
21 you did because of whatever your relationship with
22 her was, right?
23 I mean, it wasn't a legal duty of you
24 to do this as part of counsel.
25 A. No.
50
1 Mazza
2 Q. It had to be a relationship, whether
3 you call it friend or whatever, that was the
4 premise upon which it was done, right?
5 A. Yes, professional relationship.
6 Q. I will show you what has been marked as
7 Exhibit 2 to the Defreitas deposition. It is 0A
8 22. It is an E-mail from Baksh to Browne which
9 says my resume is attached. I would appreciate
10 you looking at it.
11 That memo was forwarded to you as well;
12 isn't that right? You got the resume and the
13 request to look at it.
14 A. It was forwarded to me by Niki Browne.
15 Q. Did you receive a cover letter
16 additional to the resume?
17 A. I don't remember.
18 Q. Do you have any recollection of editing
19 anything other than the resume?
20 A. I don't remember.
21 Q. If Baksh testified that you revised her
22 cover letter to the resume, as you sit here now,
23 you can't dispute that one way or the other; you
24 just don't remember?
25 A. I just don't remember.
51
1 Mazza
2 Q. You remember there was a cover letter?
3 A. No.
4 Q. When you received the resume as per
5 Exhibit 2, you he edited the resume and sent it
6 back to Baksh; is that right?
7 A. I made suggestions for changes on it
8 and I don't know if I sent it back to Felita or I
9 sent it to Niki.
10 Q. When you say you made recommendations
11 for changes, you testified that you, in fact,
12 moved parts of the resume around and took other
13 action with respect to it; isn't that right?
14 A. I don't think that is what I said.
15 Q. Do you have a recollection --
16 A. I believe I made suggestions to move
17 things around. I didn't move things around.
18 Q. When you say you made suggestions, how
19 did that occur; what form? You wrote something?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. That was on a page of paper or in an
22 E-mail separate from the body of the resume
23 itself?
24 A. I think I did it in the resume itself.
25 Q. How?
52
1 Mazza
2 A. When you do tracking in Word.
3 Q. What does that mean?
4 A. It would show what I had add -- to the
5 best of my recollection, I didn't change the
6 resume. I wrote things like I would move this
7 forward.
8 Q. You sent that to Baksh?
9 A. I don't remember if I sent that to
10 Baksh or Browne.
11 Q. It is a fact, is it not, that the
12 E-mail trail that would indicate what you
13 specifically did with the Baksh resume and to whom
14 you forwarded you deleted; isn't that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Is there any written policy of the City
17 of New York or NYCERS that you relied upon in
18 deleting the Baksh memos --
19 A. No.
20 Q. -- E-mails?
21 A. No.
22 Q. There was no written policies of NYCERS
23 or the city that you relied upon?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You just deleted it on your own?
53
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Murphy
4 your decision to delete these E-mails?
5 A. No.
6 Q. When did you delete these E-mails?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. It is a fact, is it not, that you
9 deleted the E-mails regarding the Baksh memos
10 subsequent to June 1, 2004?
11 A. No.
12 Q. It is not?
13 A. No -- you're asking if it is a fact?
14 Q. Isn't it a fact that you deleted
15 Baksh's resume E-mails subsequent to June 1, 2004?
16 A. I don't remember when I deleted Baksh's
17 resume E-mails.
18 Q. So it could have been after June 1,
19 2004; you just don't remember?
20 A. I don't remember when I deleted them.
21 Q. So the answer is yes, it could have
22 been?
23 A. Yes, it could have been.
24 Q. There came a time, in fact, when you
25 sat on a panel that was reviewing the applications
54
1 Mazza
2 of candidates for the NYCERS HR position, correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. At the time that you sat on the panel,
5 you did not advise any of the panel members that
6 you had taken action with respect to the Baksh
7 resume?
8 A. No.
9 Q. You did tell them?
10 A. No.
11 Q. The E-mails that you deleted regarding
12 the Baksh resume, did you maintain a hard copy?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Is there a back-up tape that would
15 maintain the E-mails that you deleted?
16 A. No.
17 Q. How do you know that?
18 A. Because we asked for the IT people to
19 look for it.
20 Q. When you say we, who is we?
21 A. Actually DOI asked.
22 Q. Who did they ask?
23 A. Kin Mak.
24 Q. They asked him through you, didn't
25 they?
55
1 Mazza
2 A. No.
3 Q. There was no correspondence between you
4 and DeFreitas disregarding the E-mail deletion
5 issue.
6 A. There may have been. I don't remember.
7 I know she communicated directly with Kin.
8 Q. At any time did you ever advise any of
9 the trustees that you had deleted the E-mails
10 which memorialized your role in the revision of
11 the Baksh resume?
12 A. No.
13 Q. To this day, the trustees don't know
14 that you, in fact, deleted memos which would
15 detail your role in the revision of the Baksh
16 resume, right?
17 A. Read that back.
18 MS. CARROLL: Read it back, please.
19 (Record read.)
20 A. I don't know what the trustees know.
21 Q. But you never told them to this day?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. When you say we asked the IT people to
24 follow up on deleted E-mails and then you
25 corrected your answer, did you indicate that the
56
1 Mazza
2 fire department would have your deleted E-mails?
3 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
4 A. I don't know what the fire department
5 has.
6 Q. Baksh was at the fire department when
7 these E-mails were initiated, correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You know that the fire department has
10 an E-mail system because you participated in it,
11 right?
12 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
13 Q. Did you take any steps to retrieve from
14 the fire department the E-mails that you deleted
15 regarding the Baksh resume?
16 A. Did I? No.
17 Q. Did you suggest any such action to DOI?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Did you have any contact with Baksh
20 additional to the revision of the resume you
21 testified to at any time prior to her selection as
22 HR director?
23 A. I don't believe so.
24 Q. Who is Jodi Nagel?
25 A. She was my deputy counsel.
57
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did you discuss with Ms. Nagel the
3 deletion of the E-mails?
4 A. I don't remember.
5 Q. Was she involved in the discussion with
6 yourself and Mr. Kin Mak regarding retrieving the
7 deleted E-mails?
8 A. I don't remember.
9 Q. We are talking about 2004, right? We
10 are not talking about ancient history.
11 Is it your testimony that you have no
12 recollection --
13 MR. MARKS: Objection. That is not --
14 Q. Did you discuss --
15 A. I don't know what the question is.
16 Q. The question is, is it your testimony
17 that you have no recollection whatsoever if you
18 discussed the issue of your deletion of E-mails
19 and their retrieval with Ms. Jodi Nagel?
20 A. I don't remember.
21 Q. Is she still your deputy counsel?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did she resign or something else?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did she resign?
58
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. When was that?
4 A. Two weeks ago.
5 Q. You were called down to testify
6 regarding the allegations in the June 1 letter at
7 DOI on July 1, 2004, right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. At that interview on July 13, 2004, did
10 you tell the trustees that you had deleted the
11 E-mails regarding your actions in revising the
12 Baksh memo?
13 MR. MARKS: You said did you tell the
14 trustees.
15 Q. Did you tell the DOI investigators?
16 Sorry.
17 MS. CARROLL: Read back the question.
18 (Record read.)
19 MS. CARROLL: Change trustees to DOI
20 investigators.
21 Read it back again.
22 (Record read.)
23 Q. What is the answer?
24 A. I am looking at the transcript because
25 I don't remember what I told them.
59
1 Mazza
2 Q. Do you have any current recollection
3 that you advised the DOI investigators that you
4 had deleted the Baksh revision E-mails?
5 A. No, I don't have any recollection.
6 Q. We have had marked as Exhibit 23 to the
7 DeFreitas deposition 0745, a summary of a
8 conversation in which it appears that you advised
9 DOI on that date, July 22, 2004, that you had
10 deleted the Baksh resume E-mails.
11 Do you see that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Does this refresh your recollection
14 that your first statement to DOI about revising
15 the Baksh resumes was subsequent to your testimony
16 on July 13, 2004?
17 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
18 You mean about deleting E-mails?
19 Have your question read back.
20 MS. CARROLL: Read it back.
21 (Record read.)
22 Q. You have looked at Exhibit 23?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. It is a fact, is it not, that July 22,
25 2004 is the first time you tell DOI that you
60
1 Mazza
2 deleted the Baksh resumes that indicate your
3 actions with respect to that resume?
4 MR. MARKS: The E-mails.
5 MS. CARROLL: Yes.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. You never mention the E-mail deletion
8 prior to July 22, 2004 to DOI, right?
9 A. No.
10 Q. That is correct?
11 A. That is correct.
12 MS. CARROLL: Mark this E-mail dated
13 7/29/04 as Mazza Exhibit 3.
14 (Mazza Exhibit 3, E-mail dated 7/29/04,
15 marked for identification, as of this date.)
16 Q. I will direct your attention to the
17 upper part of the memo.
18 What do you mean you're uncomfortable
19 if anybody in-house asks to see your deleted
20 E-mails; uncomfortable about what?
21 A. I wanted to know if anybody else was
22 asking to look at those deleted E-mails.
23 Q. That wasn't my question. I understand
24 that. That is what it says. My question to you
25 is, why were you uncomfortable about this
61
1 Mazza
2 information being recoverable, the deleted
3 E-mails?
4 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
5 A. I wasn't uncomfortable with it being
6 recoverable. I was uncomfortable with other
7 people asking to see it.
8 Q. I am reading what you wrote. "I am
9 somewhat uncomfortable with this info being
10 recoverable." That is not my words. That is what
11 it says here.
12 My question is, when you wrote this,
13 why did you say that? What were you uncomfortable
14 with about having this information, that is the
15 deleted E-mails, being recoverable?
16 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
17 A. That is not -- what I wrote is not what
18 I meant. When I say recoverable, I meant being
19 seen by somebody else.
20 Q. Well, you couldn't see it if it wasn't
21 recovered.
22 A. Right.
23 Q. Why were you uncomfortable that the
24 E-mails that you had deleted would be seen by
25 somebody else "in-house"? Why?
62
1 Mazza
2 A. My purpose in writing that paragraph
3 was, we were in the middle of a DOI investigation
4 and I wanted to know if anybody else was asking
5 Kin to show them my deleted E-mails.
6 Q. You're not answering my question.
7 I asked you, using your own words, why
8 were you uncomfortable with this information being
9 recoverable. I am asking you why.
10 A. I answered you and said that --
11 Q. No, you haven't answered me. Why were
12 you uncomfortable; because it would show that you
13 doctored a resume?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Why were you uncomfortable; because you
16 deleted E-mails and it related to a subject that
17 you were sitting on a panel?
18 A. What I said to you in my answer
19 previously was that what I wrote is not what I
20 meant.
21 Q. You're a lawyer, Ms. Mazza. The trade
22 of a lawyer is the usage of words. I want to
23 know, what did you mean when you used the words, I
24 am somewhat uncomfortable with this information
25 being recoverable? At that time, what did you
63
1 Mazza
2 mean?
3 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
4 Q. What did you mean?
5 A. What I meant was, I want to know if
6 Mr. Murphy was asking to see my deleted E-mails.
7 That is what I meant.
8 Q. Did you tell DeFreitas or Kin Mak or
9 anybody that you were concerned that Mr. Murphy
10 would see your deleted E-mails?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Why Mr. Murphy?
13 A. Because we were in the middle of a DOI
14 investigation.
15 Q. Why shouldn't DOI get the deleted
16 E-mails regarding the allegation that you doctored
17 the Baksh resume?
18 A. I didn't say DOI shouldn't get the
19 E-mails.
20 Q. Well, they couldn't get them because
21 you deleted them, right?
22 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
23 Q. Isn't that right; DOI couldn't get the
24 E-mails regarding the Baksh resume because you
25 deleted them, right?
64
1 Mazza
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. There was an effort to try to retrieve
4 the deleted E-mails, isn't that right? DOI was
5 trying to retrieve them?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. In fact, your testimony that there was
8 no back-up tapes, that is incorrect; isn't that
9 right?
10 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
11 A. There are back-up tapes but only for a
12 certain amount of time.
13 Q. The statement that there were no
14 back-up tapes is inaccurate?
15 MR. MARKS: That is not what she
16 testified to. You asked whether she testified
17 there were back-up tapes on which the E-mail
18 tapes would be on, not whether the agency has
19 any back-up tapes, period.
20 MS. CARROLL: We will go back over it.
21 Q. At or about the time that the inquiry
22 was being made by DOI, there were back-up tapes
23 for E-mails; isn't that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. In fact, there were back-up tapes for
65
1 Mazza
2 E-mails going back a year; isn't that right?
3 A. That, I don't know.
4 Q. Then you can't give testimony that
5 there weren't, right? There is a difference
6 between if you know a thing or you're guessing.
7 In 2004, whether or not there were
8 back-up tapes for the E-mails you deleted, your
9 testimony is that you don't know, right?
10 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
11 A. I know there were not because when they
12 tried to find them, they couldn't find them.
13 Q. How do you know that? How do you know
14 that they couldn't find them?
15 A. Because I was told by DOI.
16 Q. Who told you in DOI that Kin Mak could
17 not get back-up tapes for your deleted E-mails?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. Did you have contact with somebody
20 other than DeFreitas during the course of the
21 investigation of the allegation against you
22 regarding the revision of the Baksh resume?
23 A. There was Alberta Ancrum also working
24 on that case.
25 Q. Anybody else?
66
1 Mazza
2 A. Vinnie Green was also working on the
3 case.
4 Q. Did you have conversation with any of
5 those people, Ancrum, Green or DeFreitas,
6 regarding the matter of whether there were back-up
7 tapes for the deleted E-mails?
8 A. Someone from DOI told me they could not
9 recover the E-mails.
10 Q. They told you this verbally or in an
11 E-mail?
12 A. I believe it was verbally.
13 Q. You're the subject of one of the
14 allegations, right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Your testimony is that you deleted
17 E-mails regarding the revision of the Baksh
18 resume, right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You're telling me that with respect to
21 the issue of whether there were back-up tapes
22 which would produce the E-mails that documented
23 what, in fact, you did, DOI tells you, the
24 subject, that the back-up tapes don't exist?
25 A. Yes.
67
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did DOI also tell you whoever it was of
3 these three, Ancrum, Green or DeFreitas, that they
4 couldn't obtain the deleted E-mails from the fire
5 department E-mail system?
6 A. No.
7 MR. MARKS: I will let you go on with
8 this questioning --
9 MS. CARROLL: We are getting to it --
10 MR. MARKS: This is a case brought by
11 Mr. Murphy concerning defamation.
12 MS. CARROLL: This is very much into
13 the legally being a reckless disregard for the
14 truth.
15 Q. Why were you concerned that Mr. Murphy
16 would have access to the deleted E-mails if the
17 back-up was discovered, the back-up files?
18 A. I was just concerned.
19 Q. It is a fact, is it not, that you at no
20 time during the interview process for HR director
21 told Mr. Murphy that you had revised Baksh's
22 resume?
23 A. I didn't tell Mr. Murphy that I had
24 been asked to look at Felita's suggestions for --
25 Q. You tracked things and moved things
68
1 Mazza
2 around, right?
3 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
4 A. I didn't move things around. I made
5 suggestions about what --
6 Q. -- for moving things around.
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. When you testified at DOI, you
9 testified that you didn't know whether or not
10 Baksh had, in fact, adopted your suggestions;
11 isn't that right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. But, in fact, you had as a member of
14 the panel the Baksh resume that she submitted for
15 the position, right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. By reference to the E-mails that you
18 had which included the original resume and the
19 resume that she submitted to the panel, you in
20 fact uniquely did have access to the information
21 that would answer that question?
22 MR. MARKS: Objection to form.
23 A. If I still had the E-mail in my E-mail
24 box.
25 Q. There is no question, Ms. Mazza, that
69
1 Mazza
2 as of the time of the interview which was only a
3 brief period after you received the E-mail from
4 Browne that you still had the Baksh-related
5 E-mails, right? Isn't that right?
6 A. I may have.
7 Q. The date of Exhibit 22 to the DeFreitas
8 deposition is dated January 28, 2004. This is
9 from Baksh to Browne which gets forwarded to you,
10 right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. This E-mail existed at the time that
13 Baksh was, in fact, interviewed, isn't that
14 correct? You didn't delete the E-mails between
15 January of 2004 and the date of the interviews?
16 A. I don't know when I deleted the
17 E-mails.
18 Q. You have no recollection that it
19 postdated the actual interview by Baksh?
20 A. I don't know when I deleted the
21 E-mails.
22 Q. Did you talk to the NYCERS trustees or
23 anybody else at NYCERS about these tapes, the
24 back-up tapes for the E-mails?
25 A. No.
70
1 Mazza
2 Q. You said Jodi Nagel resigned.
3 Was she on maternity leave?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Did she have to resign because she was
6 on maternity leave?
7 A. It was just something Ms. Nagel, now
8 Mrs. Rodman, decided to stay home and be a
9 stay-at-home mom.
10 Q. Subsequent to your interview at DOI,
11 did you have any contact with any of the trustees
12 regarding the investigation? And I include
13 Bratcher in this question.
14 A. I don't remember.
15 Q. Did you speak with Ms. Stark regarding
16 the matter?
17 A. I don't remember.
18 Q. Did you send any E-mails to anyone
19 additional to DeFreitas regarding the
20 investigation of the allegations in the anonymous
21 letter?
22 A. I don't remember.
23 Q. In addition to the E-mails concerning
24 the Baksh resume, did you delete other E-mails?
25 A. I am sorry. Say that again.
71
1 Mazza
2 MS. CARROLL: Read it back.
3 (Record read.)
4 A. Oh, yes.
5 Q. Did you ever speak with Musaraca
6 subsequent to the time that you testified at DOI?
7 A. I speak to Mr. Musaraca frequently.
8 Q. That is a silly question. Sorry.
9 Prior to the DOI report coming out and
10 subsequent to your testimony, did you speak to
11 Musaraca?
12 A. Mr. Musaraca, yes. He is one of my
13 trustees.
14 Q. Did you speak to him about the
15 investigation of the anonymous letter at any time
16 between July 13, 2004 and March 1, 2005 when the
17 DOI report came out?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. Did you ever have any conversation with
20 him about the allegations against you subsequent
21 to testifying and prior to the DOI report?
22 A. I really don't remember.
23 Q. What about E-mails?
24 A. I really don't remember.
25 Q. Would you have your E-mails from that
72
1 Mazza
2 period?
3 A. No.
4 Q. You destroyed all the E-mails?
5 MR. MARKS: Objection.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is there any back-up name for them?
8 A. I don't know.
9 Q. When did you first see the DOI report
10 on the allegations raised in the June 1 anonymous
11 letter?
12 A. The day of the trustees meeting.
13 Q. At the trustees meeting?
14 A. No.
15 Q. What were the circumstances?
16 A. A copy of it was left in my office.
17 Q. By whom?
18 A. I have no idea.
19 Q. When?
20 A. The morning of the trustees meeting.
21 Q. Prior to the meeting?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Without any indication as to who left
24 it there?
25 A. It was on my chair.
73
1 Mazza
2 Q. I want to make sure I have this exactly
3 correct.
4 On March 1, 2005, there is a DOI
5 report. The records in this case indicate that
6 there was a meeting on March 10, 2005 on that
7 report. It is your testimony that on the morning
8 of March 10, 2005, there is a copy of the DOI
9 report on your chair?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you have any conversation with any
12 of the trustees prior to March 10, 2005 regarding
13 the fact that that there was a DOI report?
14 A. I don't remember.
15 Q. When you saw this DOI report on your
16 chair on March 10, did you know prior to that that
17 there had been a determination by DOI?
18 A. I think so.
19 Q. How did you first find out there was a
20 DOI determination on the allegations raised in the
21 June 1 anonymous letter?
22 A. I know I spoke to Vinnie Green that
23 week, in that time period. He told me they were
24 coming out with a report, but I don't remember
25 when it was.
74
1 Mazza
2 Q. Did he tell you what the conclusion
3 was?
4 A. He told me they were referring the
5 allegation regarding me to COIB.
6 Q. Vinnie Green is Vincent Green?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. He called you or you called him?
9 A. He called me.
10 Q. You were a subject of the
11 investigation.
12 Why was he speaking to you?
13 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
14 Q. Before the report was issued.
15 A. I don't know.
16 Q. Do you have a personal relationship
17 with him?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Well, you're a subject. He is
20 investigating you.
21 Why did he tell you he was calling you
22 about it?
23 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
24 A. I don't know why he called me.
25 Q. Did he tell you that there were
75
1 Mazza
2 findings against Mr. Murphy in this conversation?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Was it one phone call or more?
5 A. One.
6 Q. When you got this phone call, what did
7 you do with that information?
8 A. Nothing.
9 Q. You didn't tell Mr. Murphy?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you speak to any of the trustees
12 about this?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Prior to the meeting on March 10, 2005
15 in which the DOI findings are discussed, you know
16 there is a letter. You know that they are
17 referring your part to COIB and you have no
18 conversation with any trustees; is that right?
19 A. I don't -- no, I don't.
20 Q. Not with Bratcher, not with Stark?
21 A. No.
22 MS. CARROLL: Let's take a break.
23 (Recess taken.)
24 Q. On the date of the March 10, 2005
25 trustees meeting which considers, among other
76
1 Mazza
2 things, the DOI report, were you there when DOI
3 made its presentation?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Were you subsequently called in to the
6 trustees meeting after DOI made its presentation?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Were you advised by the trustees then
9 that DOI had made a finding regarding the
10 allegations against you?
11 A. I don't think so.
12 Q. What were you told?
13 A. I don't think I was told anything --
14 no.
15 Q. You weren't told anything one way or
16 the other?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Was there any discussion with you by
19 the trustees of the DOI report?
20 A. I don't remember, no.
21 Q. When you received on your chair the DOI
22 letter, did you notify the trustees or Green or
23 anybody of that fact?
24 A. No.
25 Q. You have been involved as counsel for
77
1 Mazza
2 NYCERS with any prior DOI investigations?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Are the reports of the DOI confidential
5 when they come to a final report?
6 A. I would think so.
7 Q. When you saw the DOI report on your
8 chair, you knew that you should not have had a
9 copy of that since it was a confidential report,
10 right?
11 MR. MARKS: Objection.
12 A. No.
13 Q. Should you have had a copy?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. Isn't it a confidential report?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. It is confidential and should have been
18 provided solely to the trustees, right?
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. You had no business getting a copy of
21 the report since you were a subject, right?
22 A. I don't know that.
23 Q. Did you tell anybody about the content
24 of the report that was left on your chair prior to
25 the time of the March -- prior to the time it was
78
1 Mazza
2 disclosed in the press?
3 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
4 A. Did I tell anybody?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Who?
8 A. My husband.
9 Q. Anybody else? Did you discuss it with
10 Baksh or Browne or any employees or Mr. Aron?
11 A. I don't remember. I can tell you I
12 didn't discuss it with Ms. Browne.
13 Q. Once the DOI has made its presentation
14 to the trustees, did any of the trustees discuss
15 with you that the report was confidential?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Did they discuss anything about the
18 report with you?
19 A. Not that I recall.
20 Q. Not Bratcher, not Musaraca?
21 A. Not that I recall.
22 Q. You have a copy of the DOI report on
23 your chair. Did you have any discussion with Mike
24 Musaraca about what action the trustees would take
25 on the DOI report?
79
1 Mazza
2 A. No.
3 Q. After the DOI made its presentation,
4 when did you first become aware of any action that
5 would be taken by the trustees on the findings
6 made by DOI?
7 A. The next morning.
8 Q. How did that occur?
9 A. I was told by Ms. Browne in the
10 executive pantry.
11 Q. You were told what?
12 A. I was told that they had asked Mr. --
13 that Mr. Murphy had resigned.
14 Q. They had asked Mr. Murphy to resign?
15 A. I believe what she told me was that
16 Mr. Murphy was resigning -- I don't remember what
17 she told me, but essentially what she told me was
18 that Mr. Murphy was leaving.
19 Q. The essence of this is critical to this
20 case. Do you have an exact sense of what
21 Ms. Browne told you other than Murphy was leaving?
22 Is there anything more that you specifically
23 recall?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Murphy is leaving, but you don't know
80
1 Mazza
2 from Browne why he is leaving; you don't know
3 whether he is resigning or they are terminating
4 him?
5 A. I don't recall what she said.
6 Q. It is correct that you don't know the
7 circumstances?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. With respect to yourself, did you ever
10 get advised by the trustees that action would be
11 taken against you because of the finding that you
12 revised the Baksh memo?
13 A. That action would be taken by the
14 trustees?
15 Q. Yes. Against you.
16 A. I don't work directly for the trustees.
17 Q. My question obtains notwithstanding.
18 A. No.
19 Q. Were you advised by Mr. Aron or any
20 other person that action would be taken against
21 you by reason of the findings that DOI made that
22 you had revised or participated in the revision of
23 the Baksh memo?
24 A. Action would be taken by Mr. Aron?
25 Q. Or anyone at NYCERS against you for
81
1 Mazza
2 your role in that matter.
3 A. I don't believe so.
4 Q. No action was ever taken against you,
5 correct?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Did you discuss the DOI findings
8 regarding your role in the Baksh resume revision
9 with Mr. Aron?
10 A. I am sure I did.
11 Q. Mr. Aron became the acting director of
12 NYCERS at some point in March of 2005 subsequent
13 to the meeting of the trustees on the DOI letter,
14 right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Did you have a discussion with Mr. Aron
17 subsequent to the DOI meeting regarding the
18 findings against you in the DOI letter?
19 A. I am sure I must have.
20 Q. What did you say to him and what did he
21 say to you?
22 A. I don't recall a specific meeting with
23 him, but I am sure in his role as an acting
24 executive director that we probably met on it.
25 Q. What is your recollection of what
82
1 Mazza
2 occurred?
3 A. I really don't remember.
4 Q. Did Mr. Aron know about the deleted
5 E-mails?
6 A. I don't know.
7 Q. Did you give Mr. Aron a copy of the DOI
8 report?
9 A. No.
10 Q. You had a copy on your desk chair prior
11 to the meeting. You never gave a copy to
12 Mr. Aron?
13 A. No.
14 Q. When you discussed with Mr. Aron the
15 DOI finding subsequent to Aron becoming the
16 executive director, did you indicate to him your
17 deletion of the E-mails?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. Do you have any calendar that you
20 maintain as the department NYCERS lawyer?
21 A. I have a calendar, yes.
22 Q. In this calendar, do you record
23 meetings?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Would the matter of your discussion of
83
1 Mazza
2 the DOI report with Aron be in your calendar?
3 A. No.
4 Q. When you discussed the DOI report with
5 Aron whenever that was, was he aware that there
6 was a finding against you regarding the resume?
7 A. He was aware that DOI had referred the
8 matter to COIB.
9 Q. Say that again.
10 A. He was aware that the matter had been
11 referred to COIB.
12 Q. The matter that you had revised the
13 Baksh resume?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. But you don't know whether or not he
16 had seen the DOI report?
17 A. No.
18 MS. CARROLL: Let's have marked for
19 identification as Mazza Exhibit 4, a document
20 Bates number D 0483 through 85.
21 (Mazza Exhibit 4, Bates number D 0483
22 through 85, marked for identification, as of
23 this date.)
24 Q. Have you ever seen this document
25 before?
84
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you have any role in its
4 preparation and writing?
5 A. I don't remember.
6 Q. Isn't it a fact that Mr. Aron consulted
7 with you in preparing that letter?
8 MR. MARKS: You can answer that
9 question.
10 A. Most likely in my role as general
11 counsel he did.
12 Q. When you were speaking with Mr. Aron
13 and became aware that he knew that the DOI finding
14 against you was referred to COIB, did you come to
15 any agreement with him regarding your continued
16 status as counsel for NYCERS?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Did the matter come up of your losing
19 your job because of the finding?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Mr. Aron knows that there is a finding
22 against you; it is referred to COIB and there is
23 in discussion between you and he about your
24 removal as counsel?
25 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
85
1 Mazza
2 A. I don't think there was a finding. I
3 think it was referred to COIB to see if I had
4 violated anything.
5 Q. There was a finding in the DOI letter
6 that there had been a revision of the Baksh resume
7 and that you were involved in that.
8 A. And it was referred to COIB to see if I
9 had violated any -- whatever.
10 Q. It was additionally referred to COIB,
11 that is correct, but there was a finding about
12 your role with respect to the revision of the
13 Baksh resume.
14 My question is, did Aron ever indicate
15 to you that he had reservations, concerns,
16 anything in that regard as to your staying on
17 board as counsel?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Do you have any knowledge that the
20 reference to "these factual errors" on page 2 by
21 Mr. Aron is incorrect?
22 Do you understand the question?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Mr. Aron says that there are factual
25 errors in the DOI report and specifies them in
86
1 Mazza
2 paragraphs 1 through 4. Do you see that?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you have any knowledge to dispute
5 Mr. Aron's assertions in this letter?
6 A. Number one, I wasn't privy to because
7 it is about his appearance at DOI.
8 Q. It is a yes or no question.
9 A. I guess I don't understand your
10 question.
11 Q. Mr. Aron states that there are factual
12 errors in the DOI report?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. He specifies what those factual errors
15 are?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In paragraphs 1 through 4?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. My question to you is, do you have any
20 knowledge or information that Aron's assertion
21 regarding the factual errors is incorrect? Can
22 you dispute what Mr. Aron is saying?
23 A. No.
24 Q. At any time during the year 2000, did
25 you become aware of any drop in productivity by
87
1 Mazza
2 Mr. Murphy?
3 A. In the year 200?
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. I wouldn't know -- Mr. Murphy was my
6 boss. I wouldn't know what his productivity was
7 or was not.
8 Q. You have no knowledge of any change in
9 productivity of Mr. Murphy at any time between
10 2000 and the time when he no longer serves as
11 director of NYCERS; that is not something you know
12 one way or the other?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Do you have any knowledge that there
15 was any change in productivity by Browne at any
16 time during the same period?
17 A. Again, she doesn't report to me. I
18 have no idea what she did or didn't do.
19 Q. Did you ever hear anything during that
20 time period that would indicate that there was any
21 reduction in productivity by either Browne or
22 Murphy?
23 A. Between 2000 and 2004?
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. I don't remember.
88
1 Mazza
2 Q. If something was said to you, Murphy is
3 not doing his job or Browne is not doing her job,
4 you have no recollection of that?
5 A. I have no recollection.
6 MS. CARROLL: Off the record.
7 (Discussion off the record.)
8 Q. At any time in the year 2000 to 2004
9 prior to the June 1 letter, did any person
10 specifically complain to you regarding the
11 Browne/Murphy relationship?
12 A. Complain?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. Complain to me?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. No.
17 Q. Did anybody say anything to you that
18 Browne was getting promotions or raises because of
19 her relationship with Murphy? I am talking about
20 200 to 2004.
21 A. No one complained to me directly. Did
22 I hear talk and rumors? Yes.
23 Q. Who did you hear talk and rumors from?
24 A. Different people in the agency.
25 Q. People have names. Who did you hear
89
1 Mazza
2 from?
3 A. Natalia Rivera.
4 Q. What did you hear from Natalia Rivera?
5 A. That Mr. Murphy and Ms. Browne were
6 having an affair, that she was being pushed up
7 through the ranks because of that. I was told by
8 Sonia Grant, my paralegal, that people were
9 talking about that also, that Browne was being
10 pushed up because of the relationship.
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. When did Natalia Rivera tell you this?
14 Was this 2004 or 2001?
15 A. I don't remember.
16 Q. She wasn't there in 2000, right,
17 Rivera?
18 A. I don't know when she came.
19 Q. Did you ever take any steps to find out
20 whether there was any truth to that statement?
21 A. That they were having an affair?
22 Q. No. That Browne was pushed up, to use
23 your term, in positions because of the
24 relationship.
25 A. Since both Mr. Murphy and Ms. Browne
90
1 Mazza
2 denied there was a relationship, there was nothing
3 else to look into or to question.
4 Q. Did you have any basis, either by
5 reference to her evaluations or any observation of
6 her job performance, to credit the allegation that
7 Browne was getting promotions other than on the
8 merits of her job performance?
9 A. I had nothing to -- I didn't have
10 access to her performance evaluations and I dealt
11 with her most -- I dealt with her in all of her
12 roles and she was fine -- I never had a problem
13 with her work.
14 Q. Didn't you regularly have lunch after
15 the NYCERS' offices moved to Brooklyn with Murphy,
16 Browne, yourself and others?
17 A. No.
18 Q. You never sat in the lunch room
19 together?
20 A. You asked me if I regularly have lunch
21 with them? No. Did I ever have lunch with them
22 once or twice? Yes.
23 Q. In the whole time, once or twice?
24 A. In the whole time, once or twice. I
25 didn't sit in the lunch room.
91
1 Mazza
2 Q. Who is Sonia Grant?
3 A. My paralegal.
4 Q. What did she say to you?
5 A. Whenever she heard a rumor, she would
6 tell me that people were talking about Mr. Murphy
7 and Ms. Browne.
8 Q. But I am talking about in connection
9 with Browne receiving raises and promotions other
10 than on the merits.
11 Sonia Grant never said anything about
12 that to you, right?
13 A. Not about raises because we don't know
14 necessarily what people are getting about raises,
15 but when Niki was promoted and moved to membership
16 and then promoted to director of administration,
17 people felt she got it because of her relationship
18 with Mr. Murphy. That is what Ms. Grant told you.
19 Q. When she was promoted to membership,
20 you had no knowledge that that was done; that
21 transfer was done at the direction of Mr. Vallee?
22 MR. MARKS: Objection to the form.
23 A. I wasn't involved in it, no.
24 Q. You had no knowledge one way or the
25 other?
92
1 Mazza
2 A. No.
3 Q. Other than these two people, do you
4 have any other information regarding any
5 allegations amongst staff regarding Browne's
6 getting promotions and raises other than on the
7 merits?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Aron
10 made the decision to select Ms. Browne as the
11 director of administration? Do you know anything
12 about that one way or the other?
13 A. I know what I read. I will back up.
14 No. I didn't know at the time who picked her for
15 that job.
16 Q. But you know from the Exhibit 4 that
17 Mr. Aron made clear that he was involved with the
18 selection of Ms. Browne, right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And that it was his decision?
21 A. That is what I read -- do I know it
22 directly? No. Do I know it from reading
23 something? Yes.
24 Q. You know that Mr. Aron made that
25 information available to DOI?
93
1 Mazza
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Was there any change at NYCERS with
4 respect to moneys available for raises in or about
5 the time that Mr. Aron becomes the deputy director
6 at NYCERS till 2004, to your knowledge?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. Did you ever personally observe any
9 change in morale at NYCERS incidental to these
10 rumors about Browne and Murphy?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What did you observe other than what
13 you have testified that Rivera and Grant said?
14 A. What did I observe?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. People were not happy. People felt
17 that there was not a legitimate process for
18 getting promoted.
19 Q. There wasn't a legitimate process for
20 getting promoted throughout the agency?
21 A. In this case, in the director of
22 administration case.
23 Q. What people are you talking about? I
24 mean not everybody was a candidate to be a
25 director of administration.
94
1 Mazza
2 A. There was a general malaise in the
3 agency.
4 Q. I was asking you with respect to
5 promotions. I thought we were talking about the
6 director of administration position, right?
7 My question is, did anybody
8 specifically speak with you regarding any claim
9 that that selection by Aron or Browne was not on
10 the merits?
11 A. Did anybody make a complaint to me?
12 Q. Say anything to you at all about it.
13 A. I don't remember. I mean yes, people
14 -- yes, I heard that, but I can't tell you who
15 said it to me.
16 Q. Did you ever bring that matter to
17 either Mr. Aron or Mr. Murphy's attention?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Were you interviewed for the position
20 of executive director subsequent to Mr. Murphy's
21 no longer having that position?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Who were you interviewed by?
24 A. Diane Bratcher, Joe Haslip, Mike
25 Musaraca, Horatio Sparks and somebody from human
95
1 Mazza
2 resources at the department of finance.
3 MS. CARROLL: Mark this document for
4 identification as Mazza Exhibit 5. It is a
5 position description.
6 (Mazza Exhibit 5, position description,
7 marked for identification, as of this date.)
8 Q. Can you identify this document?
9 A. It says it is Executive Director New
10 York City Employees Retirement System General
11 Statement of Duties and Responsibilities.
12 Q. These are the minimum qualifications
13 for the position?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. When you were interviewed regarding the
16 position at NYCERS, were you asked any questions
17 about your role in the Baksh resume revision?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Were you asked any questions during
20 your interview for the executive position about
21 the findings that the DOI made regarding your role
22 in the Baksh resume revision?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Did you have any role in assisting
25 Mr. Aron when he worked at NYCERS as the acting
96
1 Mazza
2 director in the preparation of evaluations of
3 persons who report to him?
4 A. In general, no.
5 Q. What about in specific?
6 A. There was one in specific where I did.
7 Q. What was that?
8 A. Niki Browne.
9 Q. What was her role?
10 A. He asked me to review the evaluation he
11 prepared.
12 Q. What did you do?
13 A. I reviewed the evaluation he prepared.
14 Q. Did you make any revisions?
15 A. I don't believe so.
16 Q. Did you write any part of it?
17 A. No, I don't think so, no.
18 Q. It is a pretty important question.
19 Did you write any part, any single word
20 in any evaluation of Browne that was prepared by
21 Aron?
22 A. If you're asking me did I write
23 anything? No. Did I correct his grammar -- did I
24 correct his grammar or spelling? Yes.
25 Q. Corrections of spelling would not
97
1 Mazza
2 change substance but corrections of grammar might.
3 Did you make any corrections of the
4 substance of the Aron evaluation of Browne which
5 is N 0023 to N 0027?
6 MR. MARKS: I will object to the form.
7 What does that have to do with this case?
8 MS. CARROLL: This is the last
9 question.
10 MR. MARKS: I understand the desire
11 your client has to gain information --
12 MS. CARROLL: Don't make speeches.
13 Q. What is the answer?
14 A. I don't remember.
15 MS. CARROLL: I need a short break. I
16 think we are done.
17 (Recess taken.)
18 Q. What is Mr. Aron's status vis-a-vis
19 NYCERS now, if any?
20 A. He is a volunteer.
21 Q. He has no paid position with NYCERS?
22 A. No.
23 Q. What about Sparks; does he have any
24 paid position with NYCERS or as a consultant or
25 anything?
98
1 Mazza
2 A. With NYCERS?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. No.
5 Q. Aron has no consultantship with NYCERS
6 now?
7 A. As of today?
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. No.
10 Q. Did he at any time subsequent to his
11 being replaced as director and prior to today?
12 A. Subsequent to his retirement? Yes.
13 Q. When did he have a position and what
14 was it?
15 A. He was a consultant to NYCERS from when
16 he retired until maybe October, November.
17 Q. Of what?
18 A. This year, 2006.
19 Q. Did you have any role in that contract?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What was your role?
22 A. I wrote it.
23 Q. Did you have any role in having it
24 approved by the trustees?
25 A. No.
99
1
2 Q. Was it approved by the trustees?
3 A. The trustees don't approve contracts.
4 Q. Who approved it, D'Alassandro?
5 A. I don't know what you mean --
6 Q. Who would have to approve the
7 consultant contract for Aron?
8 A. The executive director signs all NYCERS
9 contracts.
10 MS. CARROLL: I am finished.
11 MR. MARKS: I have no questions.
12 (Time noted: 1:45 p.m.)
13
14
15 KAREN MAZZA
16
17 Subscribed and sworn to before me
18 this day of , 2006.
19
20
21 (Notary Public).
22 My Commission Expires:
23
24
25
100
1
2 C E R T I F I C A T E
3 STATE OF NEW YORK )
ss:
4 COUNTY OF NEW YORK )
5
6 I, BARBARA DRISCOLL, a Shorthand
7 Reporter and a Notary Public within and for the
8 State of New York, do hereby certify that the
9 foregoing deposition of KAREN MAZZA was taken
10 before me on the 21st day of November, 2006;
11 That the said witness was duly sworn
12 before the commencement of her testimony; that the
13 said testimony was taken stenographically by me and
14 then transcribed.
15 I further certify that I am not related
16 by blood or marriage to any of the parties to this
17 action or interested directly or indirectly in the
18 matter in controversy; nor am I in the employ of
19 any of the counsel in this action.
20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set
21 my hand this 6th day of December, 2006.
22
23
24 BARBARA DRISCOLL
25
101
1
2 I N D E X
3
4 Examinations Page
5 KAREN MAZZA MS. CARROLL 4
6
7
8 E X H I B I T S
9 No. Description Page
10
11 1 document 13
12 2 memorandum dated December 9, 2002 35
13 3 E-mail dated 7/29/04 60
14 4 Bates number D 0483 through 85 83
15 5 position description 95
16
17 INFORMATION REQUESTED
18 Page Line
19
20 29 9
21
22 Page Line
23 None
24
25
1 comment:
This from the same woman who decided to change the rules when it comes to pensioners getting their pensions suspended after 20 years. Her judgement and interpretative skills are obviously much better than her predecessors... not! Nice to know a person of such intelligence and high moral character has put my family on food stamps.
Post a Comment