By: Maria Moore
Fortunately for NewHartfordPlus, our reporter was sick on Monday, April 27, so she wasn’t able to go to her work. With the help of a couple of Tylenols, she was able to attend the Board of Selectmen Special meeting. The following are her notes from that meeting:
Those In Attendance
Despite it being mid-Monday morning, about 20 townspeople had assembled for the Board of Selectmen Special Meeting. Those sitting at the table (that’s to say, in an official capacity), were: Earl MacInnes, First Selectman; Chip Roraback, Town Attorney; Phyllis Webb, Selectwoman; Tom Klebart, Board of Finance Chairman; Blake Hall, Town Treasurer; Jim Fitzgerald, Board of Finance member; Bill Marchand, Selectman; Christine Hayward, Recording Secretary.
Seated around the perimeter of the Sessions Conference Room were, among other members of the public, Reggie Smith Jr., Former First Selectman; Jack Moore, Republican Town Committee member; Donna LaPlante, Town Clerk; Linda Huppelsberg, town resident; Daria Hart, one of the town’s two Registrar of Voters. Reporters included: Gina Sartirana, Winsted Journal; David Hutter, Register Citizen; Kari Banach, Republican American; and Maria Moore, NewHartfordPlus.
Focus Kept on Two Contracts
Selectwoman Phyllis Webb opened the meeting at 10 a.m. and introduced the agenda item as the two contracts signed by Earl. These had been signed without the knowledge of the other Board of Selectmen, nor that of the Board of Finance or any other individual at Town Hall. Phyllis said that they were waiting to find out how the contracts came to be, where we are today and how to move forward in a positive way.
Selectman Bill Marchand said that the morning’s special meeting stemmed from the joint Board of Finance and Board of Selectmen’s meeting last week. Two questions from last week were: what’s the general authority of the First Selectman, the Board of Selectmen and the town body to enter into contracts? and 2) Who has jurisdiction over Brodie House?
Earl said that Chip’s (Attorney Roraback’s) opinion had been that the jurisdiction of all leases rests with the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the approval of them wasn’t sure [?]. Earl then went on to say that under this interpretation that all the town’s leases are invalid. He said it would even embrace the renting of Berkshire Hall.
“We’ve got to go back to square one for all of them,” he concluded.
Phyllis said: We want to stay focused on the Brodie House.” The questions were regarding the contract he had made with a town employee, and also as far as New Hartford as a landlord, she asked him to clarify the actions with the previous tenant, and what had led up to his leaving.
Jim Fitzgerald agreed, saying that they were going to run out of time and that they should stick to the agenda items. It must be noted that both Tom Klebart and Jim Fitzgerald needed to get back to work immediately after the conclusion of the meeting.
First Selectman Refuses To Answer Questions
Tom restated the problem as:” We have two contracts that are null and void.”
Earl said that they had received a call from Dan LeGeyt’s attorney last Friday. Earl then went on to say that he had been to two meetings, had given 3 interviews, that he had made a mistake in judgement and that he had apologized for it.
Earl did not respond.
Phyllis said: Let’s go back to the Brodie House. There are concerns [that] were not addressed at the public meeting.”
Jim said: “The people, the public deserve, have the right, to know why a single individual signed a contract when it [the house] was the focus of tremendous discussion as to what happened with the property. The Board of Finance were in agreement that they money [from the rental] should go right back into the house to rehab it…. You had town employees working on the house and one of them is living in it now. Yet on the very day that subject was brought up, that lease was signed. The people have been misled and lied to.”
Jim asked: “We’d like to know who drew it up, who approved it to get it drawn up and present it to the individual. It’s unacceptable. There was a comment that you have to keep the town crews busy. Why are we paying overtime to one of those individuals? In the end the money comes from the taxpayers, we need to know how it occurred.”
Earl just sat there, and again did not respond.
Finally Phyllis said: “Let’s take a different tactic - we’re not going to get those answers.”
Phyllis questioned the condition of the Brodie House before and during the time it was rented by the previous tenant. She said that Paul Volovski, the Town’s Building Inspector, had done a walk-through of the house and she asked: “Should the roof have been repaired?” She then asked about the work that had been done at the house immediately prior to Don Birden moving in. She asked: “While the DPW (Department of Public Works) worked on it, there must have been costs. Was an audit done? The materials purchased, were they from this year [budget]? Were they taken out of another line item?”
The only response from Earl was: “No comment!”
At which point Jim remarked: “I’d love to see a motion made to remove this gentleman. it’s and embarrassment to the town.”
Matter of Forensic Investigation Raised By Earl
The discussion then turned to Earl’s assertion that there is a need for a forensic investigation.
Blake Hall, Town Treasurer, said that there had been a mistake made in a newspaper report questioning that money had been misappropriated by the the first selectman. Blake said that no-one has accused the First Selectman of having misappropriated funds. “A forensic investigation would be very expensive. We don’t need to go back 5 years.” [An amount of $60-100,000 wsa mentioned at another point in the meeting as being how much it would cost for such a detailed investigation of the town's books..]‘
“The problem is more credibility and evasiveness.” Our reporter’s notes continue, without having a name noted to attribute these remarks to. “There is a lack of willingness to be forthcoming that leads people to question your credibility. You are not helping yourself here. What other things might be there that we don’t know about?… It leaves the door open to “What does he have to hide?” That’s not the issue…”
“It may not be the issue to you but it is to me.” Earl responded. “It’s [a forensic investigation] the way to assure people of this town that I have not misappropriated funds.”
Question Raised of Who Is Responsible For Drawing Up The Brodie House Lease
“Who drew up the Brodie House lease?” Jim asked Earl.
“It doesn’t matter who drew it up, it’s my responsibility.” Earl came back.
“Did you write it? Did Chip write it?” Jim persisted.
“I prefer not to comment.” Was Earl’s comeback.
Jim then said: “Let’s turn to the First Selectman’s assistant [Christine Hayward, who was taking the notes for the meeting.]. Christine, do you know?”
Christine turned to Earl and asked him: “Am I allowed to answer?” Earl said she could, and Christine said to Jim:
“I was asked to write up the lease agreement with those terms… I’m a secretary, I type things up. The terms were made by Mr. Birden.”
“Did he have legal representation?” Jim asked. This obviously went beyond Christine’s first-hand knowledge, and Earl did not provide an answer.
“OK.” Jim responded and then turned his questioning to the other selectmen.
“OK.” Jim responded and then turned his questioning to the other selectmen.
“Phyllis and Bill, did either one of you see it[the lease to the Brodie House]? Did you approve it before it was signed?” Phyllis said “No.” and Bill Marchand said again, as he has in the past, that he became aware of it just before the Board of Selectmen’s meeting, where it had surfaced.
Town Attorney Questioned On What To Do With The Contract
“How do we move forward?” Phyllis asked the town’s attorney, Chip Roraback.
“The agreement was made by the First Selectman without the proper approvals. You can go through the steps to approve the lease or decide as a Board you don’t want to do that.” Chip said, and then he laid out the following options, or steps:
- Initiate the process to approve or disapprove [the agreement]; and
- Having done that, put the parties on notice that the agreements are invalid.
Chip asked whether the party {[on Birden] had been notified. “I spoke with him,” Phyllis responded. Blake clarified: “Chip means a legal notice.”
Phyllis continued: “We apologise his name has been mentioned. It is not our intention to displace him and his family but there has to be some renegotiation.”
Bill added: We can argue about the validity [but] we have people’s lives that are affected.”
Tom Klebart and Jim Fitzgerald, the two members of the Board of Finance present at the meeting, said that they would like to see the matter come before the Board of Finance.
Jim asked: “Is there any revenue coming in to cover the cost of the repairs? Where did the money come from for the house?”
To which Earl responded: “There’s a capital account for Brodie Park - that’s where the money came from. Brodie House is on the park.”
Earl’s Leaves Meeting For A Few Minutes, Personal Opinions Expressed By Those Waiting For His Return
At this point of the meeting, Earl got up and left without excusing himself, at least not within the hearing of our reporter. Jim stopped speaking and asked the meeting be stopped until Earl’s return, about 4-5 minutes later.
Our reporter took the opportunity to ask Phyllis for a clarification: “Phyllis, when you talked to the tenant and told him that it was not our intention to displace him, were you communicating your own personal feeling, or was that a decision reached by the Board [of Selectmen]?”
Our reporter, Maria Moore, then expressed for everyone one of the aspects that troubles her most about the contract: the actions of the tenant, an employee of the town, who was not a town resident until he moved into the Brodie House on April 1 on the basis of an invalid agreement:
“Speaking as a taxpayer in town: I asked specifically, and Dan Birden [she was quickly corrected to "Don"], who works at the park every day didn’t once mention to the Recreation Director that he was going to be renting the Brodie House or anything else about it. This tells me that he knew there was something wrong about the contract. If there is concern about his not having to disrupt his family, take his daughter out of school, then consider giving him a temporary contract until the end of the school year and then he can move. I don’t want to have to go home and tell my kid that he did something wrong, but that we said to him it was OK.” Or reporter concluded. As an ex-teacher, our reporter always has her eye on the message our actions are sending to the young in our town. For the record, our reporter is a long-time resident of New Hartford, having lived in town for 23 years.
Donna LaPlante, also took the opportunity to have her personal say. “My understanding is that years ago, we developed a relationship between Brodie and the crew. This individual has been responsible for Brodie Park. Brodie Park is defined as the whole park and the structures. He is a town employee on town time making improvements [to the house.] But he didn’t know it was going to be him [who would subsequently be living there.]…Put it in perspective, as a small town we don’t go out to bid. To expect the individual to mention it to anyone else, he didn’t have the authority to do that. [Historically] it’s been between the Rec. Department and the selectmen; when they found the right person they moved him in…. Rec. likes to weigh in on this issue, on security [at the park]. Speaking as the wife of someone who was once a caretaker for a building… I don’t know if I have a problem with this amount [the $400 rent], there is value to that [the work the tenant does as an employee of the town at the park or as a caretaker of the park, it was unclear from our reporter's notes.]” For the record, Donna LaPlante is a long-time employee of the town, an elected official, and a long-time [40 years +/- correct us if we are wrong in our assumption] resident of New Hartford. Donna is a tried and true resource on town matters for our reporter.
We at NewHartfordPlus have made a note to write a follow-up article on who has lived at the Brodie House and under what terms since the town acquired the property in the 1980s.
Earl now having come back to the meeting and taken up his seat at the head of the table, the meeting resumed.
Blake Clarifies How Improvements at Brodie Were Paid For
Jim took up where he had left off, namely questioning how the improvements made at the Brodie House had been paid for. Jim ended by asking: “Why would we need a line item now for $35,000? [The line item in the budget to be brought to the voters at the May 5 referendum.] Now all of a sudden it’s in there.”
“I can clarify that,” Blake Hall, Town Treasurer, said. “The electricity and the oil have been paid for by Rec. The building materials were purchased with a town credit card at Home Depot and run through the town’s Highway Department. We need to go back through the bills. Someone needs to go through and allocate those costs of materials used for Brodie.”
The concern was expressed that we have to segregate income and expense for the house and not pass it off as a Highway Department expense. [No name noted next to quote in our reporter's notes.]
Daria again mentioned that the tenant needs to know that the difference between the market rent [$950 paid by previous tenant?] and the rent the tenant was paying [$400] was considered income by the IRS and that he needs to report it as income on his taxes. Chip, the town attorney, did not express an opinion on this, saying that he was not a tax attorney. Blake added that he’d hate to see the tenant get into a problem [with the IRS].
Town Attorney Clarifies When Lease Agreement Needs Planning & Zoning Approval
Daria asked her question directly to the Town Attorney regarding when leases need the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said: “I have a question for Chip: When I was Chairman of the Rec. Commission and the WPCA, anytime there was a change in use of land we had to go before P&Z (Planning and Zoning), and then P&Z signs off on it. Do we have to do this every time before a lease is signed?”
Chip answered: “Only when there’s a lease involved with a third party. If the town intends to use the property in a different manner than it has been, it has to go before P&Z.”
Daria: “Every time, even if it’s been leased before, have to take it before P&Z?”
Chip: “Yes.”
“If [he] intends to use the property differently from the way it had been used?” Earl asked.
“It’s a new lease, a different transaction.” Chip clarified.
Earl continued with his line of questioning: “When changing from Jones to Smith, it’s a new lease subject to approval. Do you use lease and rented interchangeably?”
“Semantics!” A young woman next to our reporter was heard to comment impatiently.
Tom Klebart, said: “I can’t believe renting out Berkshire Hall for 3 hours needs to go before the Board. [But] I don’t think that’s an issue today.”
Linda Huppelsberg, a town resident voiced her opinion that, historically, the house has been rented by the town to an employee. She said: “We did rent it to the foreman of the Highway Department [not the present superintendent of that department]. For me as a taxpayer, I don’t have a problem with the way it’s used. It’s politics as usual. It’s an employer/employee issue.”
“It’s not an [employer/employee] issue.” One of the meeting participants commented [no name attributed by our reporter]. “We’re talking about a process. It has to do with transparency, being above board with all the members of [the Board of] Selectmen.”
Tom said: “We want to get away from whether it’s fair or not… Get back to who has the authority [to sign a lease for the house].”
Former First Selectman Shares His Knowledge of Who Has Authority
Former First Selectman Reggie Smith Jr., who had sat in the back of the meeting and had observed everything that had transpired, now added his view on who has authority to negotiate leases.
Then turning to the Town Attorney, Reggie said: “A town ordinance created the Rec. Commission as being the ones who had authority [over the park and all structures on it]. Is anyone here from the Rec. Commission?” “No,” came the answer. Turning back to the Town Attorney, Reggie said:
Chip said he hadn’t looked at that ordinance.
Reggie ended by saying: “I recommend [you] get the Rec. Commission involved.”
Tom asked to get some opinion of who has authority to negotiate contracts.
It was noted [we believe by Reggie, but no definitive attribution was made in our reporter's notes]that in most instances the Board of Selectmen would have that authority. Typically the Board of Finance is not involved.
Everything a Board of Selectmen Does Is Subject To A Town Meeting, Case Law Establishes
It was stated that there was case law from 2006 that everything a Board of Selectmen does is subject to a town meeting, if the people so choose. Obviously, one doesn’t have a town meeting for every little thing, it was added.
“Is any contract they sign subject to this?” It was specifically asked of the town attorney.
“It’s subject to the petition process.” Chip confirmed. “20 people can call a town meeting, or the Board of Selectmen [can] to be sure on an issue.”
Tom again asked if there were any other contracts [that had not surfaced] and Earl said: “No!” A few minutes later, Reggie asked Earl the very same question, and Earl again said: “No.”
Tenant To Be Informed Lease Agreement To Be Renogotiated
Phyllis then asked Chip to define what the next steps are, before going into executive session.
Daria interjected here a comment about executive sessions. “People throw things into executive session. They need to make sure, check with the Town Clerk [our reporter made a note to check with Donna]. There are 3 instances you need to go into executive session. People are not putting why they go into executive session and what they approve after.”
Phyllis returned to what the next steps are: “To go forward, we need to give a formal notification.”
To which Chip added: “Initiate a process to approve a lease in its present form or renegotiate one.”
To which two of the three selectmen responded:
Phyllis said: “I prefer to renegotiate.”
Bill said: “At this point it’s renegotiation.”
Earl did not respond.
The tenant will be informed that the terms and conditions of the rental agreement will be renegotiated.
“Will you be drafting that letter for us?” Phyllis asked Chip, to which he agreed, saying that it was not unusual for him to do so.
Highway Superintendent Retains Attorney, Removing Overtime Contract From Public Discussion
Earl informed those at the meeting that they had received a phone call last Friday, April 24, from Attorney Gary Attmore in Hartford who is representing Dan LeGeyt. The attorney had said that he hoped things could be worked in a fair and friendly way. For the record, Attorney Attmore’s firm specialized in employment law, as well as other areas of law.
Phyllis asked if there were any other questions or comments, obviously intending to go into executive session.
Jim asked: “Are we done with the second item [the second contract]?”
Jim then asked Earl: “Are you willing to comment?” to which Earl answered:
“Not if he’s represented by counsel.”
Phyllis asked Earl: “Maybe you an answer this: we have a legal written opinion from Dave Ryan [Ryan and Ryan, specializing in municipal labor law ] saying that there is no pay for back pay for a salaried employee and they are exempt from overtime. How can we have gone on to create the contract?”
Earl answered: “Not sure what you’re asking me? I recall he’s an exempt employee. Can’t speak to how.”
“No other contracts.” Earl answered him. ”Thanks.” Reggie said.
First Selectman Yells At BOF Member: “Will You Shut Up?!”
“He said he did not have to bring the Board of Selectmen’s contract to the Board of Finance because it was a courtesy.”
Jim said: “Now you’ve got me started.”
Our reporter took a much-needed lunch break at this point, not only to eat but also to ponder on the event she was in the middle of reporting:
Jim Fitzgerald: a Republican [Earl is also a Republican]; a member of the Republican Town Committee; a volunteer who had rarely missed a Board of Finance meeting, other than for work-related purposes; and who that morning was having to take time off work, like others present, to attend the special Board of Selectmen meeting in order to have the opportunity to question Earl, a paid town employee, who had skipped out of the recent special joint meeting of the Board of Finance and the Board of Selectmen, at which the full BOF and the assembled town residents, would have had the opportunity to question Earl on the very same points; Jim had just been yelled at and told: “Will you shut up?!” by Earl, the town’s First Selectman.
Our reporter made a note to research and write an article on “The Other Kind of PDAs” [not Public Displays of Affection, but rather Public Displays of Anger] in New England rural town government. Perhaps they are more common-place than she believes, and first selectmen yelling at volunteers to “Shut Up” may not be as unacceptable at Town Halls as she first believed.
“You don’t get it!” someone commented. Our reporter’s notes are not complete at this point of the meeting. She will however include the following, even without specific attribution:
The question was asked, [possibly by Daria?]: “As an elected official, there is a statute to exempt my actions taken in good faith. If I knew that there existed [a ruling against an action] and still came to you [and said I'd performed that action], am I still indemnified for my actions?”
The Town Attorney said: “I want to look at the specific contract.”
The matter of the forensic investigation was again revisited. Daria said that she is still reading that a forensic investigation has been called for, and that’s $66-100,000.
“That has a broad, financial impact on our town.” Daria continued. “I want the Board of Finance and the Town Treasurer to ask “Is this a prudent way to spend money?”"
Jack Moore addressed Earl on the same matter.
“To you, Earl. You’re the only one that’s mentioned a forensic audit, nobody else has.”
Earl said it was to allay the fears of town taxpayers. “It’s necessary to give taxpayers confidence that nothing has happened.”
“That’s not quite the answer….” Jack pressed on.
“The accusation was at the town meeting. That’s my answer.” Earl said.
“My recollection is of newspaper articles in the Torrington, Waterbury papers. I don’t understand why you should bring that [the forensic investigation] up.” Jack insisted.
Meeting Moved Into Executive Session, Despite Public’s Reservations
It was now time to move the meeting to an executive session. Phyllis said that the executive session was up to Earl. Its purpose, Phyllis said, was “Understanding the actions, it’s performance based. It’s fair to go into executive session if Earl’s comfortable with that… working to correct actions, see that they don’t happen again.”
Tom said: “One comment: How can we prevent this happening in the future? We need to set up policy, need to know what went before, have to go ahead and develop policy.”
Reggie questioned what the topic of the executive session was. Reggie asked if they’d be talking about the actions that Earl took.
“We are not talking about that.” Came the answer. “Then it’s not clear [why you are going into executive session].”
Chip said: “It’s to discuss the performance of a public employee and official.”
“Earl does have a choice to go into executive session,” Phyllis said.
“It’s a factor that there may or not be legal proceedings from this, [although] not the stated intention.” Bill added.
Before the public left the meeting room, Kari Banach of the Waterbury paper, asked: “Will the selectmen recognize Mr. LeGeyt’s contract? [I'm] curious where you’re going with it.”
Earl said: “I’m interested in pursuing with that.”
Phyllis said: “I don’t feel comfortable… have to review [it].”
The Board of Selectmen voted by a majority (Phyllis and Bill) to go into executive session, and then they had to decide who would be there, in addition to the Board of Selectmen.
“The Board of Finance - a rep. from both parties,” it was suggested.
To which Earl said: “I can’t agree.”
Daria asked what the plan was for the general public to have their concerns answered, to which Earl said: “I’ll give it some thought.”
Gina Sartirana, the reporter from the Winsted Journal asked: “The tenant from Brodie House: is he going to stay in the house, and what will he pay? Without a contract in place?”
Phyllis again said: “It is not our intention to displace his family. We will move quickly.”
They returned again to who would be included in the executive session from the Board of Finance.
“One representative from each side.” Phyllis said.
She then enumerated: “[We are] inviting the Board of Selectmen, Chip [the Town Attorney], Tom from the Board of Finance, and Jim from the Board of Finance,and Blake [Town Treasurer].”
Bill put forward a second motion for discussion: “Need to keep the group as small as possible.” he said.
Tom said: “I don’t agree.”
Jim said: “The concern is that it was becoming political. It’s not a political witch-hunt.”
Reggie said: “In all my years in public office, I’ve never seen going into executive session [for a discussion such as this]. Again, I say it’s unusual… will trust everyone will act appropriately.”
Earl said: “I’m uncomfortable with it. Don’t need to have everyone there.”
“You don’t need Chip or Blake?” was the answer Earl received [unattributed in our reporter's notes]. Everyone that Phyllis had enumerated earlier was included in the meeting, which began at 11:18 a.m.
Earl Walks Out Of Executive Session
The public left the meeting room, and most dispersed from the hallway outside the meeting room as well. Our reporter waited there at her post, and within 3-5 minutes of the beginning of the executive session, she saw Earl get up and leave the meeting room. She waited a little while to see whether it was another momentary absence on Earl’s part. When he didn’t return, our reporter went to the First Selectman’s Office to enquire about his specific movements. She was told that Earl had closed the door of his office, had left the building, walked to his vehicle, and had driven off. This was at approximately 11:40 a.m.
Executive Session Ends, Participants Disband
Shortly after, at 12:05 p.m., according to Bill Marchand’s wristwatch, the meeting room door opened and some of those inside started to leave. Our reporter, with Daria’s words still in her ears about the need to follow proper procedure, walked up to Phyllis and Chip who were talking with a couple of participants in the executive session, and said:
“Attorney Roraback, I thought you were supposed to call the public back into the meeting and tell us what decisions were reached before ending the meeting?” No one appeared to take our reporter’s question seriously, telling her “The meeting’s over. Nothing was decided.”
Joining a small group that had congregated outside the meeting room, our reporter grumbled: “Everyone seems to be very casual around here!” Referring to the way the meeting had disbanded, without calling the public back into the meeting room. And then she noticed that one of those in the group, Blake Hall, was in his summer shorts. “Well, all except for you, Blake - you’re probably headed for a round of golf.” Which is as it should be, our reporter thought, suddenly in a good mood again, since Blake and everyone else congregating after the meeting were all unpaid volunteers.
Addendum: At about 4 p.m. on Monday afternoon, our reporter telephoned Christine Hayward in the First Selectman’s Office and asked whether Earl had given any reason for leaving the executive session earlier that day. Christine connected our reporter directly to Earl, who said:
“I was unhappy with some of the people in that room. The agenda appeared to be exactly the same as we’d just spent 1 1/2 hours going over.” Our reporter thanked Earl and promised to include his statement at the end of her report.
In reply to Tom,
I agree. There should be complete accountability as this is town owned property and funded by taxpayers.
I was just suggesting that there be an historical documentation to the events with this property since it was acquired by the town from the Scout’s organization.
In all honesty, as a resident of New Hartford for over 20 years in Bakerville, I was surprised to hear of even these lease agreements. Maybe it was part of the budget all along. My only reflection is that as town owned property, the tax payers all along maybe could have generated more income from that property. Who has lived there and how did they get their lease? Was that property advertised or listed for rent to get the maximum funds for the town?
I hope I am wrong and that the town officials have done the “right thing”. I am sure they have.
What is the past practice with regard to contracts and leases? Can newhartfordplus find out from our most recent First Selectmen (Bill Baxter, Kate Rieger) how contracts have been written, signed and notarized? Historically, what has been the relationship between town employees and the selectmen? What light can Town Hall employees shed on past practices?
You do this town a great service, Maria…much appreciated !!!
Nice meeting you at the Earth Day cleanup too !!
Dear Maria:
Excellent piece!
Probably could’ve cut the tension with a knife in that room.
thank you for your precise reporting, it is appreciated from those
of us that can not attend a mid day meeting.
Best regards!
Sorry I disagree, the larger issue is the skeevy way these contracts were created off the books, and concealed and lied about, and the stonewalling that has ensued.
Second to that is standstill that has now gridlocked Town Hall. We should be competing for stimulus grants, for road work and school energy saving improvements - like new windows at Antolini. Instead, the First Selectman keeps walking out of meetings.
Moving forward we should have a gentleperson’s agreement that all contracts go before BOF until an ordinance is written codifying that. And we should consider increasing the BOS to 5 or 7 so that the workload can be divided; more constituencies (such as independents and Greens) could be represented, and we could be less subject to the vagaries of any one selectperson’s mental health or misdeeds.
In watching this story unfold, I think the larger issue is ,what was the market value rent for the Brodie House and the repairs in lieu. It was inappropiate for a town official to negotiate a rent without putting it out there for “bid” and taxpayer’s approval.
What is the history of the Brodie House? Could your reporter find out thru the town hall records the history of the house and its rent roll? It would be very helpful and put it into perspective for the residents and readers of your wonderful news website.
Thanks!