PLEA AND COOPERATION AGR"EEMENT

1.

This is the plea and cooperation agteement between the Office of the Attorney
General of the State of New York ("OAG") and John Maggio, hereinafter referred to as "the
defendant."

2.

This.memorandum constitutes the entire agreement between the defendant and

OAG. This agreement supersedes any prior promises, agreements or conditions between the
parties. No promises, agreements or conditions have been entered into other than those set forth
in this agreement. No modification, deletion or addition to this agreement will be valid or
binding on either party unless put into writing and signed by both parties. This agreement will
become effective immediately when signed by all the signatories listed below.

3.

The defendant's attorney is David Rothenberg, who is present in court with the
defendant today. The defendant is satisfied with the representation provided to him by his
attorney. The defendant understands that he has a right to have an attomey throughout the
prosecution and trial ofthese charges and ifthe defendant cannot afford an attorneyo one would
be appointed for him.

4.

The Plea and Related Terms:

a.

The defendant agrees to plead guilty to the crime(s) of

Combination in Restraint of Trade and Competition in violation of
General Business Law $$ 340 and 341, also known as a violation of New
York State's Donnelly Act. Specifically, the defendant will plead guilty to
Count four of Indictment Number l007AG/2013.

b.

The defendanthas been advisedof, and understands, the natureofthe

charges against him, the elements of the offenses with which he is charged,
and the range of permissible sentence(s).

c.

By pleading guilty, the defendant is giving up the following rights,

which he has discussed with his attorney.

(l) The defendant understands that by pleading guilty he

is giving up his right to a trial by a l2-person jury drawn from a
broad cross-section of the community.
(2)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty he

is giving up his right to have the People produce witnesses to testify
against him.

(3)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty he

is giving up his right to have his attorney cross-examine any

witnesses who may testify against him.

(4)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty

he is giving up his right to have his attorney produce witnesses to

testify for him.

(5)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty

he is giving up his right to remain silent and his right to either
testify or not testify at trial.

(6)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty

he is giving up his right to have the People prove his guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt by a unanimous verdict of l2 jurors at trial.

(7)
plea

will

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty his

operate

just like

conviction of guilty after a jury trial.

(8)

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty, if

he has a defense to this charge, he is giving up his right to present that
defense at trial in this criminal case.

(9) The defendant understands that by pleading guilty he

giving
is
up his right to claim that the police did anything illegal in
regard to this charge, and his right to a hearing to determine if that
police conduct was, in fact, illegal.
(10)

The defendant has been advised ofand understands

that he is pleading guilty to a felony, and if he is found guilty of a
second felony within ten years, he will be sentenced to a State
Correctional Facility as a Second Felony Offender for a maximum
and minimum period of time.

(11) Further, in consideration for and as part of the plea

agreement in this matter, the defendant hereby withdraws any

pending motions in this criminal case, without waiving any right to
assert in other proceedings, any defenses or arguments raised in such
motions.

(12) Further, in consideration for and as part of the plea

agreement in this matter, the defendant hereby waives and
relinquishes his right to appeal from any judgment of conviction, and
from any proceedings herein that may result from this prosecution.
The defendant has been advised of his right to appeal, his right to be
represented by an attorney on appeal, and his right to have an
attomey assigned for him on appeal if he cannot afford one. It is the
defendant's understanding and intention that this agreement will be a
complete and final disposition of the matter. The defendant makes
this waiver knowingly and voluntarily after having been fully advised
of his rights by the Court and having had a full and fair opportunity to
discuss these matters with his attorney
(13) The defendant hereby agrees to enter a plea ofguilty
in accordance with the terms of the plea offer which has been made
to him, having consulted with his attorney and having been advised
of all of the rights listed above.

d.

The defendant has been advised and acknowledges that his failure to
appear at any required court appearance is a violation of this agreement, his case
will move forward in his absence and he will be sentenced up to the maximum
term of imprisonment authorized by law.

e.

Upon the defendant's guilty plea, he will allocute under oath and admit
that the facts contained in Exhibit A to this agreement are true. In addition, the
defendant shall admit that the facts contained in Exhibit B are also true.

f.

The defendant represents that he has engaged in no criminal conduct other

than that which he has specifically revealed to the OAG.

g.

It is a violation of this agreement if the defendant has engaged in criminal

conduct other than that specified in this paragraph.

5.

The defendant's cooperation shall be as set forth in this paragraph.

Failure to comply with this paragraph in any respect shall be a violation of this
agreement. The defendant will provide truthful, complete and accurate
information and will cooperate fully with OAG. This cooperation will include,
but is not limited to:

a.

The defendant shall attend all meetings at which OAG requests the
defendant's presence. The defendant agrees that the Attorney General may
meet with and debrief him without the presence of counsel, unless the
defendant specifically requests counsel's presence at such debriefings and
meetings. Matters occuning at any meeting or debriefing may be considered

by OAG in determining whether the defendant has complied with this

agreement and may be considered by the Court in imposing sentenOe
regardless of whether counsel was present at the meeting or debriefing.

b.

The defendant shall keep OAG informed of his whereabouts at all times. The
defendant shall not leave New York State without informing OAG and
providing contaat information and an itinerary.

c.

The defendant shall furnish to OAG all documents, records and other material
that may be relevant to all inquiries made by OAG concerning any criminal
conduct about which he has any knowledge or information and that are in the
defendant's possession or control.

d.

The defendant shall participate in the investigation by OAG of any matter

requested by the OAG, including, but not limited to, participating in
undercover activities, but only pursuant to the specific instructions and
approval of law enforcement agents.

e.

The defendant shall fully, fairly and truthfully testif, before the grand jury, at
any trial, and at any other proceeding that OAG may direct. In the event that
the defendant should testiff before the grand jury, he shall waive immunity
pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law section 190.45. In the event that the
defendant should testify at any other proceeding, he shall not assert any

privilege against self-incrimination.

f.

The defendant shall commit no further crimes.

g.

The defendant shall consent to any adjoumments and agrees to waive any
rights he may have to be sentenced without unreasonable delay.

h.

The defendant shall pay $350,000.00 (three hundred fifty thousand dollars) to
the Office of the Attorney General as reimbursement for costs of prosecution.

i.

The defendant agrees to pay the above-referenced sum as follows: the

defendant will pay $175,000.00 (one hundred seventy five thousand dollars) at
the time of his plea and the remaining $175,000.00 (one hundred seventy five
thousand dollars) at the time of his sentencing.

If the defendant fully

6.

complies with this agreement:

a.

At the time of his sentencing, if the defendant complies with the terms of
this agreement, as determined solely by OAG', OAG will inform the Court of the
nature and extent of the defendant's cooperation and, subject to the Court's
approval, consent to the defendant's withdrawal of his guilty plea to the "E"
felony crime of Combination in Restraint of Trade and Competition, also known
as a violation of New York State's Donnelly Act, in violation of General Business
Law $$ 340 and 341, so that he may enter a plea of guilty to the "A"
misdemeanor crime of Attempted Combination in Restraint of Trade and
Competition in violation of GeneralBusiness Law $$ ll0l340 and I l0/341. The
People and the defendant will then jointly make a sentencing recommendation to
the Court. The recommendation will be a sentence of a one year conditional
discharge, a condition being 200 (two hundred) hours of community service in the
form ofvoluntary accounting services provided to a charity or nonprofit approved
by OAG and the payment of the cost of prosecution as set forth in paragraph 5.
The defendant understands that the Court has the authority to impose any lawful
sentence, including a prison sentence, pursuant to the defendant's plea of guilty.
The maximum permissible sentence[s] for the crime[s] of Combination in
Restraint of Trade and Competition in violation of General Business Law $$ 340
and341, is a state prison sentence of one-and-a-third to four years.
7.

If the defendant violates this agreement in any respect,

as determined solely by

OAG2:

a.

The defendant will not be released from his plea of guilty but OAG
released from its obligations under this agreement.

b.

will

be

OAG will fully inform the Court, in detail, regarding the defendant's
failure to comply with the terms of this agreement. OAG reseives the right to
recommend any lawful sentence to the Court, up to and including the maximum
sentence authorized by law for the crimes to which the defendant has pled guilty.
OAG will request, if necessary, that sentence be imposed in the defendant's
absence. The defendant understands that the Court has the authority to impose
any lawful sentence.

' But reviewable by the Court for

abuse of discretion.

'But reviewable by the Court for abuse of discretion.

c.

OAG may prosecute the defendant for any crime he has committed, as
authorized by law, and is not limited by any term of this agreement.

d.

As to any prosecution brought by OAG pursuant to this paragraph, the

defendant waives any claim that (l) any statement or testimony he has made or
given to OAG on or after September 18,2013, (2\ any testimony given by him
before any grand jury or other tribunal, whether before or after the date this
agreement is signed by the defendant, (3) any property, documents, records or
other materialthat OAG has obtained from him, and (4) any evidence derived
from such statements, testimony, property, documents, or other material is
inadmissible against him. Moreover, the defendant waives any claim under any
provision of law that statements made on or after September 18, 2013 or any leads
or evidence derived therefrom should be suppressed.

e.

As to any prosecution brought by OAG pursuant to this paragraph for any

offense committed within five years prior to the date of this agreement or for any
offense committed on or after the date of this agreement, the defendant waives
any claim that such prosecution is barred either on grounds ofspeedy trial, speedy
arraignment, the statute of limitations, the New York State Constitution, or Article
30 or Article 40 of the New York State Criminal Procedure Law.
8.

This Agreement is limited to the Office of the New York State Attorney General
and cannot bind other government agencies. However, OAG will bring the cooperation
of the defendant to the attention of other prosecuting offices, if so requested.

9.

OAG agrees to communicate or to provide a letter, upon request of the

defendant's attorney, describing the nature and extent of his cooperation with OAG,
pursuant to paragraph 5 of this agreement.

10.

The defendant understands these rights, and the terms and conditions of this'plea
and cooperation agreement, which the defendant has read completely. The defendant's
plea of guilty is given freely, voluntarily, knowingly, and without coercion of any kind.
No threats.or promises have been made to the defendant to induce him to plead guilty.
The defendant is not under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or medication, nor is there any
other mental or physical impairment, which prevents him from understanding these
proceedings here or from entering this plea knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. The
defendant's mind is clear and his judgment is sound.

Dated: Rochester, New York

Aib"

day

of

N)nac,*Ir,2015
ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
Attorney General of
the State

ofNew York

MarvlA.'Gorman
Assistant Attomey General
Public Integrity Bureau

I have read the entire agreement and discussed it with my attorney. I understand all of its
g into it knowingly and voluntarily, and have signed it in the presence of
terms, am
my

David Rothenberg, Esq.

Attorney for the
ant John Maggio

EXHIBIT A
JOHN MAGGIO FACTUAL STATEMENT

l.

From approximately 1980 to the present, I have been the principal of John Maggio,
C.P.A., an accounting business located in Rochester, New York.

2.

From approximately December 2008 to approximately April 2014,1was the owner of

Navitech Services Corporation ("Navitech"). I served as the president of Navitech from
December 2008 until the date when Steve Gleason was hired as president of Navitech.

3.

I became the president and owner of Navitech under the following circumstances:
Starting in or around the summer or fall of 2008 I was approached by Daniel Lynch
("Lynch"), then a sales executive in the Rochester, New York office of Siemens Building
Technologies, Inc. ("Siemens") about forming an entity for the purposes of (a) accepting
the assignment of a contract that Siemens had with a Local Development Corporation or
"LDC" called Upstate Telecommunications Corporation ("UTC") and Monroe County
(the "County"), which I will refer to as the UTC contract and (b) obtaining another
potential contract from Monroe County through another LDC, related to the County's
safety and security systems, which I will refer to as the Public Safety contract.

4.

During the course of forming this entity, I, along with Lynch and Yesenia Davids, came
up with the name "Navitech."

5.

In general terms, I understood the UTC contract to be related to the County's upgrade of
its information technology ("IT") systems. The County contracted with UTC which
contracted with Siemens to upgrade and maintain its IT systems. I understood Navitech's
role in accepting the assignment of the UTC contract from Siemens to be mostly related
to the maintenance of the upgrades which had already been completed, and the
administration of the contract.

6.

ln general terms, I understood the Public Safety contract to be related to the County's
upgrade of its safety and security systems. I understood that similar to the UTC contract,
the idea was for the County to contract with an LDC to finance the Public Safety project
and for Navitech to contract with the LDC to manage the project. I understood the Public
Safety contract to be additional business for Navitech in addition to Navitech's
management of the UTC contract. I came to understand that the entire cost of the Public
Safety contract, including the initial construction of all infrastructure, and the operation
of the new security system over 20 years, would be approximately two hundred million
dollars.

7.

Navitech was incorporated on or about December

8.

Lynch and I opened a Navitech bank account with M & T Bank on or about January 14,
2009.

l,

2008.

9.

Both Lynch and I had signatory authority on that account.

of Navitech on all documents related to
Navitech, including but not limited to the incorporation papers and documents related to
Navitech's bank accounts. Eventually, Steve Gleason was hired by Navitech and given
the title of president of the corporation.

10. I was

initially listed

as the president and owner

L Aside from signature cards for Navitech's bank account, Lynch was not listed as having
any ownership interest in or title with Navitech. Lynch's company, Treadstone, was
involved with Navitech and had the responsibility of selling or attempting to sell potential
contracts on behalf of Navitech. Lynch was involved in strategic decision making at
Navitech, and had input into its day+o-day operations.

12.

At or around the time Lynch approached me about forming Navitech in the summer or
fall of 2008, and prior to the release of the County's Request For Proposal ("RFP")
related to the Public Safety contract in February 2009,lknew from conversations with
Lynch, that Lynch intended for Navitech to obtain the Public Safety contract from the
County.

13.

At or around the time Lynch approached me about forming Navitech in the summer or
fall of 2008, and prior to the release of the RFP related to the Public Safety contract, I
also knew from conversations with Lynch that Lynch intended to utilize a Local
Development Corporation or "LDC" to finance the project, similar to what he had done
with the UTC project.

14, Lynch made clear at the time that he approached me to form Navitech in the summer or
fall of 2008 and prior to the release of the RFP related to Public Safety contract, that he

intended Navitech to successfully obtain the Public Safety contract from the County, by
utilizing an LDC that he would form later for the purpose of financing the project.
15. I was not involved in the development or creation of the County's RFP for the Public

Safety contract, or in Navitech's response to the Public Safety RFP. Lynch handled the
devOlopment and creation of the RFP with County officials and others as well as
Navitech's response to the Public Safety RFP. I primarily relied on Lynch with respect to
Navitech's response to the Counfy's RFP for the Public Safety contract.
16. In fact, although as owner of Navitech I had to and did sign Navitech's RFP response on

or about April 2, 2009, for its submission to the County, I did not read the entire contents.
I primarily relied on and trusted Lynch with respect to Navitech's response to the

County's RFP for the Public Safety contract because he handled everything related to
Navitech's RFP response from start to finish.
17.

I believed from conversations with Lynch and based on Lynch's work in developing the
RFP, his work in forming Navitech, his financial stake in Navitech, and his work in
responding to the RFP on behalf of Navitech, that the County was likely to award the
Public Safety Contract to Navitech.

a letter from the County addressed to me in my

president
Navitech
informing me that Navitech was awarded the
and
of
capacity as owner
Public Safety contract from the County.

18. On or about

April 28, 2009,lreceived

19. As planned from before Navitech was incorporated and as proposed in Navitech's RFP

response, Lynch and others later formed the Monroe Security and Safety Systems Local
Development Corporation, also known as the M3S LDC as a way to finance the Public

Safety project.
20. Following the award of the Public Safety contract to Navitech on April 28,2009,the
contract had to be approved by the County Legislature before being finalized.
21. Although Lynch played a role in founding Navitech, was involved in the decision-making
at Navitech, and handled the entirety of Navitech's response to the County's RFP for the
public safety contract, to my knowledge, his actual role was not disclosed to the
legislature which ultimately approved the contract between M3S, the County and
Navitech, despite the legislature asking specifically about Lynch's role at Navitech.

22.ln

an August 26,2009 email to me, Lynch sent me a draft of what to send to the County

in response to any questions about his role with Navitech and asked that I, as president
and owner of Navitech, send that specific text to Nelson Rivera, the Chief Information
Officer of the County.
23. I sent the text, word for word, at Lynch's request, to Rivera. To my knowledge, Rivera
forwarded my email to the legislature. I knew that Rivera was going to forward the text
to the legislature.

24.The text that Lynch wrote and I adopted and sent to Rivera by email, minimized Lynch's
role in Navitech, claiming in sum and substance that Lynch owned a consulting company,
Treadstone, which offered to provide consulting services to Navitech for the public safety
and security project.
25. I knew that Lynch's role in Navitech was being minimized to the legislature when I sent
that emailto Rivera.

26.The contract between the County and M3S and M3S and Navitech was ultimatelv
approved by the legislature.
27. At the time Lynch approached me to form Navitech in or around the fall of 2008. I knew
that Lynch had previously formed a company called "Treadstone Development
corporation" ("Treadstone'o) in or around July 2008. I advised Lynch regarding the
formation of Treadstone. I was never an officer or employee of Treadstone, although I
did serve in the role of outsource CFO for Treadstone.

28. Although Lynch was technically paid through Treadstone for his work on the Public
Safety project, to my knowledge all of the funds he was paid came directly from
Navitech.
29. Eventually, Lynch and I agreed that we would split the profits of Navitech equally.
30. For accounting purposes, because Lynch was not an employee or officer of Navitech,

Lynch received payment from Navitech as follows: I, as the listed owner of Navitech
would issue a check to Treadstone. Lynch, the sole Treadstone employee, would then
pay himself through Treadstone.
31. Moreover, on several occasions, even though Lynch was not an employee or officer of
Navitech, I, as owner of Navitech would issue a check directly from Navitech to Lynch
personally, at Lynch's request, for reimbursement of expenses.
32. Although Lynch and I agreed to share the profits of Navitech equally, I never reconciled
the actual disbursements of Navitech's profits to ensure that the money was distributed

fifty-fifty.
33. For tax purposes, Navitech had no profits, and any profit from the UTC and Public Safety
contracts was split between me and Lynch pursuant to our agreement.
34. During the course of my tenure as owner of Navitech, I received over 1.3 million dollars
through Navitech, pursuant to this agreement with Lynch.
35. During the course of Navitech's existence, Lynch was paid over 2 million dollars by

Navitech.
36. To my knowledge, after Navitech was awarded the M3S contract, Robert Wiesner
attempted to.gain employment with Navitech and its subcontractors. In or around

October 20ll I reviewed a Navitech budget worksheet that included Wiesner's

corporation as a subcontractor. Ultimately, because Wiesner was so intricately involved
in the development of the Public Safety project, the creation of the RFP for the public
Safety contract, as well as other facets of the project, his requests for employment were
declined.

37. Navitech's business from the time of its creation through its end consisted solely of the
UTC and Public Safetv contracts.

EXHIBIT B
JOHN MAGGIO FACTUAL STATEMENT

From approximately 1980 to the present, I have been the principal of John Maggio,
C.P.A,, an accounting business located in Rochester, New York.

2.

From approximately December 2008 to approximately April 2014,1 was the owner of
Navitech Services Corporation ("Navitech"). I served as the president of Navitech from
December 2008 until the date when Steve Gleason was hired as president of Navitech.

3.

In or around the spring of 2008, I advised Daniel Lynch ("Lynch") regarding the
formation of an entity he was creating called Treadstone Development Corporation
("Treadstone").

4.

Around this time, I also prepared Lynch's personal tax returns for 2007.

5.

In or around the fall of 2008, I told Lynch I needed to be paid for the work I was doing
for him, for Treadstone, and for other projects we had been discussing.

6.

In response to my request for payment for services, Lynch told me that he would have an
employee of Catalog and Commerce Solutions ("CCS") ("CCS employee") write me a
check for $ 1 5,000.00 (fifteen thousand dollars).

On or about November 10, 2008, I accepted a check from CCS to me in the amount
$15,000.00. The memo line of the check said,,Treadstone."

8'

I created an invoice for the $ 15,000.00 payment which stated that the work was for
"Retainer for accounting and consulting services with respect to review of current
accounting procedures, current software as well as tax and financial planning".

9.

John Maggio, C.P.A. has never done any work for CCS.

10.

I have never personally done any work for CCS.

I 1 ' As I discussed

of

with Lynch

at the time, it was understood that the $15,000.00 payment

from the CCS employee was for work I did for Lynch personally in advising
him
regarding the formation of Treadstone, for work on his personuitu* returns,lnd
for other
projects I had been discussing with Lynch

12.

I deposited the $15,000.00 check from CCS into my bank account at HSBC
bank on or
about November 12, 2009.

l3' In or around January

2009, when Navitech was in its early stages and before receiving
checks from its UTC contract, Navitech needed funds to cover various
startup costs.

14. Lynch told me that he would have CCS issue Navitech a check for $10,000.00 to cover
those

costs

I 5. On or about January 27 , 2009,1 accepted a check

from CCS for

$I

0,000,00. The memo

line of the check said "lnvoice 1002."

16. I created an invoice ("lnvoice 1002") for the
that the work was for "consulting services".

10,000.00 payment from CCS which stated

17, I had a few meetings with Lynch and the CCS employee, and we gave the CCS employee
general business advice regarding the formation and/or operation of his business.
However, the CCS employee never formally engaged me to perform any accounting
services and the $10,000.00 payment from CCS was not for consulting services or work
done for the CCS employee or CCS
18. John Maggio, C,P.A. has never done any

work for CCS.

19. I have never personally done any work for CCS.

20. Navitech has never done any work for CCS.

2I.

As I discussed with Lynch at the time, it was understood that the $ 10,000.00 payment
from CCS was to cover Navitech's startup costs, which included funds I had advanced
for some of Navitech's start-up costs.

22. I deposited the $10,000.00 check in Navitech's bank account.

23. I wrote a check from the Navitech's bank account to John Maggio, C.P.A. for $5,000.00.

'