Rally Against Homelessness 2pm November 7 2020 at 75 Main Street, Hartford, CT

MEDIA ALERT

ACTIVIST EVICTED FROM HOMELESS SHELTER WHILE UNDERGOING MEDICAL TESTS, CALLS FOR COMMUNITY TO RALLY AGAINST HOMELESSNESS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:   PETER C. FRANK
                        (914) 417-9579
                        PCFRANK73@GMAIL.COM

South Park Inn
75 Main Street, Hartford, CT 06106

HARTFORD, CT—Earlier today, I was evicted from South Park Inn (SPI), which is the homeless shelter I've been staying in, for doing nothing other than receiving healthcare that I was forced to postpone from last month due to not having the funds for medical transportation. I am now, literally, on the streets.

Specifically, during my annual wellness examination the day before my birthday last month, my doctor ordered a series of diagnostic tests to be performed. Among them was a sleep study, which takes 2-3 days to perform. Or more accurately stated, it takes 2-3 nights. My PCP (primary care physician) wished to have these tests performed as soon as possible but when I got to the checkout to schedule them, I embarrassedly had to inform my doctor's office that I could not afford to return to the office due to insufficient funds to transportation. I then scheduled all of the testings for the beginning of November 2020.

I even had to borrow money from a few different friends to pay for my Lyft (an Uber competitor) ride back to the shelter, that's how broke I was.

When I returned to the shelter I made a huge fuss about the entire situation and the fact that SPI was not providing medical transportation for me. The reason they've given is that I have a "significant income."

The only income I receive is Social Security Disability Income. I have extremely poor credit due to significant personal debts that I owe. In fact, my credit and debt are so bad that I was turned down on a housing application due to "significant personal debt." Yet somehow, SPI has this image of me that I earn thousands of dollars per month when nothing could be further from the truth.

Me, with the halter monitor that was
installed at today's appointment.
I have to wear it for the next 30 days.

To make matters worse, my case manager SPI claims that I never told them about my medical appointments, even though the scene I made upon my return was witnessed by many of the other residents at the shelter, and I continued to raise the issue with staff, in front of other residents, for the remainder of the week. This is the excuse they are using to kick me out of the shelter. They claim that I never told them about the appointments, which simply isn't true.

SPI further claims that I should have called to let them know that I would be staying out overnight. But why should I do that if I already told them about my appointments? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that a sleep study would be conducted at night (the sleep study was to determine whether or not I have sleep apnea).

I have attempted to reach my doctor to get a "doctor's sick note" but my doc is an extremely busy, and successful woman—the sort of doctor who has a nine-month waiting list for annual wellness examinations and a three-month waiting list for follow-up exams. I'm hoping that she'll return my phone call on Monday and will then be able to send such a letter to me but in the interim, I'm literally on the streets.

This isn't the first time I've had issues with SPI, though. I've been very vocal about the inhumane living conditions we've been forced to live under, and I feel that this action is retribution for me speaking up and advocating not only for myself but for all of the residents living at SPI. For example, the 50 some-odd med living at the shelter are forced to share one toilet and one shower. The women are roused from their beds before 7am and cannot return to them, at times, until 8pm--and many of the women have health conditions that make it extremely difficult for them to be on their feet for such an extended period of time.

There have been numerous other issues with SPI I have encountered in the eight or so months I've been staying with them, and that doesn't even get into the systemic issues of homelessness.

SPI touts itself as a caring, safe space organization. However, in my experience and the experience of many of my friends and fellow homeless here, it has been anything but that. I invite other members of the media to come and listen to our stories as human beings. We demand to be treated with respect and not mollycoddled or demeaned in other ways.

I am thus calling upon the entire homeless community in the Greater Hartford Regions to rally with me in front of SPI tomorrow, Saturday, November 7, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. to raise awareness about the issues we face as we struggle to find housing and survive from day to day in the homelessness system, which is controlled by corrupt individuals.

I have started a GoFundMe to help with all of my expenses, including paying down my significant personal debts. With all of the personal health issues I have, my bills only continue to grow and right now, I really need to get glasses. I'll need three pairs of glasses and with the examinations and testing, that will come to about $2,000 alone.

To contribute to my GoFundMe, visit https://gofundme.com/f/pcfstartlife20.

If you'd like to help out and don't wish to use GoFundMe, here are some other ways you can provide assistance:

• I could use gift cards, especially to Amazon, BJ's Wholesale Club, Starbucks, Lyft, and CVS Pharmacy (use my email address)
• Support me on Patreon to help me continue my journalistic work and personal writing experiences on my blog
• I need help getting to my medical appointments so if you can help provide transportation I would be very, very grateful for that.
• You can send money to me via Zelle (bank-to-bank transfer using my email address), CashApp ($petercfrank), Venmo, or PayPal, BitCoin (ask me for my Bitcoin wallet address or use my email address, which you can also use for PayPal)
• I have an Amazon Wish List that you can order items I need and send directly to me but bear in mind that I currently stay in a shelter and have no space to keep or store items beyond bare essentials.
• I love being able to give gifts. So even though I may not be able to do so now, please share your Amazon Wish Lists with me, or just leave a comment and let me know what sort of things make you happy and brighten your day!
• If you're in or passing through the greater Hartford, CT area, I'd love to meet up with you for a cuppa (especially a Chai latte at SBUX) or some other tea house. Perhaps a short stroll through Elizabeth Park or Westfarms Mall. Something to just get out, stretch my legs, mind, and be with positive people. If you can provide transportation, I can provide some great company and conversation. Contact me to arrange an adult play date. It would mean the world to me (and yes, of course, I'll wear a mask!).

Hartford Registrar of Voters Colluding to Suppress Republican Votes?

Voters going to the polls for tomorrow's elections should be aware of a story of great importance regarding potential corruption and unethical practices in the Registrar of Voters office that city officials such as Mayor Bronin and the council would rather be kept quiet.

Vanessa Garay-Jackson
(fmr) Deputy Republican Registrar of Voters
City of Hartford, CT

Early last month, the Deputy Republican Registrar of Voters, Vanessa Garay-Jackson, was terminated from her position by the Republican Registrar of Voters, Sheila N. Hall, for no discernable reason other than what appears to be retribution for Garay-Jackson's successful bid against Hall to become the Republican Registrar of Voters.

Upon reviewing documents I obtained regarding the termination, Garay-Jackson was initially dismissed from her position by Hall without notice on Friday, September 25, 2020 "effective the close of business today." No reason was provided in the termination notice, signed by Hall.

A subsequent letter was given to Garay-Jackson dated Friday, October 2 stating, "As we discussed, your service as Deputy Registrar of Voters for the City of Hartford is terminated, effected October 2, 2020." The letter further states that Garay-Jackson is not entitled to any sort of termination compensation other than accrued vacation time, and advises her to contact human resources regarding health insurance and other benefits.

When reached for comment Garay-Jackson expressed her shock at the termination and lack of notice, "I was taken completely aback, especially given that I was the one who did most of the grunt work in the office to prepare for the elections. Sheila [Hall] always saw herself as being above that sort of work and preferred to remain in her office rather than get her hands dirty. What she did in her office, I can't comment on. I was busy preparing for the elections and doing the actual work of the Registrar, which is one of the reasons why I ran in the first place."

Earlier this year, Garay-Jackson ran against Hall in the Republican primary election to become the Republican Registrar of Voters and handily defeated Hall in the primary election, which was held in September. "After the election, Sheila took a few weeks off. When she returned, I was fired," Garay-Jackson related.

"After I was given the initial notice on the 25th I met with Sheila and she told me the reason for my termination was lack of work. In other words, she's saying that there isn't any work in the office that can justify my position, which is ridiculous because I've always been the one to do pretty much everything. Seriously, what has she done, the budget? She always says she's working on the budget and paying the bills but how long can that take, a week, at most? What does she do with the rest of her time? She doesn't even show up to the office most days."

Indeed, other sources inside City Hall, who asked not to be named for fear of retribution, confirmed that Hall does not usually appear in her office. This leaves open the question as to what, exactly, taxpayers in the City of Hartford have been shelling out over $60,000 per year for her to be doing. The exact amount of Hall's salary could not be confirmed, despite numerous requests to City Hall, including the offices of certain city council members. Garay-Jackson advised that she believed the current salary was $62,000.

To further complicate matters, however, Hall is running on a third party (that has herself as the sole member of this third party) to become a third party registrar of voters. According to the by-laws of Registrar of Voters by the Secretary of State's office, which governs all city and town registrar of voters offices, the City of Hartford could end up with three Registrar of Voters (and three deputies), adding an additional $111,000 in salaries to the Registrar of Voters's budget, putting a further dent in the City's failing finances.

None of the members of the city council whom I contacted were aware of this situation. Joshua Michtom was shocked by the situation and promised to look into it but in over two weeks was unable to uncover any additional information, including the actual salary of the Registrar of Voters. According to Garay-Jackson, the Deputy Registrar of Voters made $49,000 per year and the Registrars themselves make $62,000, although the Registrars used to make more in the past but their salaries were drastically reduced, and only recently were they granted a raise. Exactly salary information could not be found online or through the City's website, and numerous requests for this information have gone unanswered.

It took nearly three weeks of constant phone calls to reach Hall, adding fuel to the fire of questions regarding her whereabouts and what she is being paid to do. Additional, unconfirmed rumors arose that Hall has campaigned from her office at City Hall for her third-party candidacy (I did speak with a number of individuals who confirmed the rumors but none who were willing to go on the record, even if their names were withheld).

When finally reached on the phone, Hall was gruff and short, responding that the reason she's running as a third party candidate Registrar of Voters is that she's been a Registrar of Voters for the past ten years--public records show Hall has been elected as Registrar twice for a total of 8 years--and then quickly had to hang up before any additional questions could be asked of her. Hall's response to follow-up email attempts to schedule an interview with her was, "We are in the middle of a very contentious election for many reasons and for that reason I feel that at this time I am unable to set up interviews with Freelance Journalist such as yourself."

This response directly contradicts Hall's reasons for terminating Garay-Jackson, further supporting the notion that Garay-Jackson's termination is nothing other than direct retaliation for Garay-Jackson exercising her First Amendment rights to run for political office. In response to how Garay-Jackson was forced in a primary election, Hall qualified by gathering enough signatures on petitions to enter the primary race. Garay-Jackson explained further why she ran to become the Republican Registrar of Voters:

This is a dream, a goal that I've had and I was determined to accomplish it with or without [Hall's] help. This is not the route I wanted to take. I've been doing my best to work with her but the conditions have become untenable, especially over the last year. Why does she want to stay on, because of the money? What exactly has she been doing for the people in this City? She's never around, never reachable. She takes forever to respond to anyone, and she always leaves the work to me to do. So if I'm doing most of the work, why not run for the full position? She's refused to teach me anything about the office. Rather than growing and learning I just feel as though I've been languishing here in my position and being used. It's not the most conducive environment to conduct business and engage with citizens.

Asked what changes Garay-Jackson will implement when installed in January, she responded "Greater technological automation would greatly help maintain the voter rolls but the main system is run by the Secretary of State so we can't do anything to it without their permission." Garay-Jackson suggested increasing connectivity among various government agencies to help maintain voter registration records as an example of this, for example linking their system with the post office when people submit mail forwarding requests due to moving. "Of course, we'd have to get their permission but perhaps it could be done like the DMV, where there would be a box and people could check the box to have their new info sent to us so their records could be updated," she explained.

"We need to abolish the annual canvas. It's too costly and doesn't really help. As such, it only adds to the problem, creating more work. People either don't respond or respond too late. Another problem is that people think if they respond they're going to be summoned for jury duty, and that simply isn't true. There is no connection between registering to vote or updating your voter registration information and being polled for jury duty," Garay-Jackson informed.

She further advised, "Perhaps switching to an online canvassing system would be a solution, although getting and maintaining people's accurate email addresses or SMS phone numbers could be onerous, and there are privacy issues. But it would take far fewer resources--especially human resources--to do it electronically."

Ken Lerman, Hartford Republican Town Chairman, added, "Vanessa Garay-Jackson is running for Registrar on the Republican line. Vanessa served as the deputy registrar for a number of years and has been a significant help to the Republican party. Her experience, outlook, and proactive efforts will greatly assist Hartford’s voters in the fair and efficient election process. Voting for Vanessa will defeat third-party candidates which will save Hartford taxpayer dollars of over $110,000 per year in registrar office costs."

Due to the by-laws of the Registrar of Voters, Garay-Jackson will be serving at least one term. The only question is whether Hall will be elected as a third-party registrar. That will happen if Hall receives more votes than either the Republican or the Democratic Registrar, in which case a third registrar will be added to the city's Registrar of Voters office, with the additional expenses associated with it. Given the questions already surrounding Hall's performance and current actions, which could have opened the City to exposure of immense financial liability due to Hall's potentially unethical and/or illegal termination of Garay-Jackson, one must question the wisdom of voting in and creating such a new office in the City's government.

Attempts to reach the Secretary of State and State Attorney General's offices for comment on the ethical and legal questions regarding Hall's actions went unanswered. The numerous unanswered questions by elected officials raise further questions regarding the appropriateness and ethicality of this situation.

Even more alarming is the potential impact on Hartford's Republican voters, who are in the minority. One might wonder what impact Hall's actions may have on the Republican vote, either intentionally or unintentionally, perhaps to the extent that it may even result in a suppression of votes. The timing of Garay-Jackson's termination could not have been worse. Dismissing the Deputy Republican Registrar of Voters without cause, especially without appointing a replacement, leaves the office at a severe disadvantage in an election where accusations of voter manipulation, fraud, and other acts of malfeasance are frequent flyers in the news. 

How Hall intends to deal with all of these issues is unknown, especially as she is refusing to be interviewed. And as Garay-Jackson has stated, Hall never got her hands dirty doing any of the real work of the Registrar's office. This leaves open even more questions as to the ability of the office of the Registrar of Voters to effectively carry out its mission and ensure that all votes are counted accurately.

Given the level of obfuscation and obstruction encountered by this reporter in attempting to obtain basic, publicly-available information from the City in assembling this report, such a theory may not be far from the truth.

When reached for additional comment, Garay-Jackson responded that she was in discussions with legal counsel and advised to refrain from providing any further comment to the press in light of potential action she may be taking against the City for wrongful termination.