Monday, September 09, 2013
I haven't been to recent selectboard meetings, but I went tonight. I can report that, sadly, things have only changed for the worse.
First, Turner announced at the start of the meeting that he was banning any recording of it because the recording people hadn't indicated they were going to do so BEFORE the meeting, as opposed to at the outset of the meeting. They read outloud the wording in the open meeting law, which does say "before," and by God we selectmen are going to enforce it against these disrespectful citizens who only want to trap us with our own words!
There followed a rather bizarre discussion about Robert's Rules of Order, with the selectmen at first indicating they were going to follow it, but, well, not all the time. When Weigle asked which edition of Robert's Rules they were going to follow, they admitted they didn't know there were several editions. Pollard tried to bail them out with a rambling speech about how meetings should be (must be?) conducted, but was not terribly persuasive. How can you be persuasive when the real purpose of the selectboard's actions is to shut the citizenry up (at least those citizens who the selectboard doesn't like)?
Cumsky presented a letter outlining a conversation he'd had with an Assistant AG indicating that the open meeting law required that members of the public be able to hear the proceedings and that the selectboard must provide a room with adequate seating for the expected audience. Here it is:
That prompted Pollard to do a song and dance about how his prior contrary advice wasn't really to the contrary. I can't wait to compare the transcripts.
What's so really, really bad about all this? The selectmen have moved completely into the bunker, so the usual useful interplay between the citizens and the board - known as democracy - has been eliminated. And pity poor Mr. Pollard, who has to defend the selectboard in implementing these attacks on the way democracy should work.
Then Brazie announced that one of the selectboard's ploys - to raid unused community policing grant money to pay for an extension of the temporary chief's tenure so they wouldn't have to ask the taxpayers to pony up at the special town meeting - probably wasn't going to work. The finance committee had made inquiries at the state level and was told that that unused money couldn't be used in that way because it probably had to be paid back to the state. That really upset Flynn, who demanded to know if the nosy finance committee had put discussing that matter on their agenda! Flynn apparently thinks it's okay to spend money illegally if you can just slip it by.
Flynn then used that problem to launch into a tirade about Reena, and demanded to meet on what to do about her - i.e., let's fire her - by the end of this week. He found it damnable that Reena hadn't spent the grant money and therefore put us into this terrible situation. Of course, he overlooks that if she had spent the money it wouldn't be available, now would it? (And he thinks a town employee should be criticized for NOT spending money?) It's the selectboard that applies for grants and is supposed to monitor them, not town employees; that's called accountability. And there were several specific discussions with THIS selectboard about using that grant money for radio upgrades at the new police station, so they can't plead ignorance. How wrong headed can you get?
A bit of sad news is that Jim Fountain, the long time dump attendant, is quitting. Much sadder is the selectboard's reaction. Brazie announced that there was no need to advertise the position because a number of people had already indicated they were interested. The fact that someone who is an outsider might be a better choice seems to be of no concern to this selectboard. Cronyism reigns. Indeed, when Cumsky asked what the board's policy was about advertising open positions, the response was that advertising was done only when there weren't people on the inside who were interested in the job. I admire the honesty, but this is a really stupid way to do business, and the result is predictable. It just worsens the "us against them" mentality that permeates town hall. And there's no reason to hope that it's going to get better. There's only one way to accomplish that.
Bucknell Matter Resolved? Redux
The answer to the question in the title to this posting is obvious. Not on your bippy. But here's a little twist on the subject: At tonight's selectboard meeting I handed the reporter from the Record a note saying the Record had reported that a deal had been struck between the selectboard and Reena, quoting Brazie and Turner to that effect, and yet people who have talked to Reena report that it's news to her. Where's the truth, I asked the reporter. I expected him to bite into that tidbit like a bulldog. What was his response? "Call the paper," he said; "I didn't write the story." I guess the reporters don't talk to each other.
Friday, August 16, 2013
Bucknell Matter Resolved?
The Berkshire Record reported this week that an agreement had been reached between the selectboard and Reena Bucknell, citing statements from both Bruce Turner and Mary Brazie. Don't believe it. There's no agreement. Why are Turner and Brazie saying so?
Sunday, July 21, 2013
Recalls
Recalls of elected officials are permitted in Massachusetts. Many years ago, Egremont went from a system of electing all three selectmen for one year to a system with rolling three-year terms. Since that meant the town could be stuck with a bad choice for three years, David Campbell proposed adding a recall provision to the town bylaws. It generated insufficient interest and did not get the required two-thirds vote at the town meeting at which it was proposed. (I voted for it.)
Recall provisions in town bylaws often result from special statutes adopted by the legislature that expressly permit a town to adopt such provisions, which are often set forth in detail in the special statute itself. That process normally occurs when a town asks its elected state representatives to introduce legislation and shepherd it through the legislature. Some people believe that procedure is necessary for a recall provision to be valid. Others believe that the "home rule" provisions of state law empower a town to adopt a recall bylaw without specific state authorization. I'm not certain what the state attorney general's position is. A town could always adopt a recall bylaw and then see if the attorney general approves it. I think that's the approach David Campbell was taking.
Saturday, July 06, 2013
A Conversation Between A and Z (Richard Allen and Kevin Zurrin) About the Police
RICHARD: Are you going to Reena's hearing on
Monday, Kevin?
KEVIN: I’d only miss it if there were tire tracks across my
chest. It'll be entertaining to say the least, and we'll finally hear Reena's
side of the story. I’m pretty sure she’ll want the hearing be open.
RICHARD: That’s what I hear. And I think there'll be
lots of fireworks, maybe more than at Tanglewood on the fourth of July.
KEVIN: I’ve heard that Charlie and perhaps the BoS has
been out to get Reena for quite awhile.
RICHARD: At least two of
the members have been. Maybe Turner
not as much.
KEVIN: The more I look into this matter, the stranger it
looks. For instance, the story that the BoS wasn’t aware of the February 19th “mutiny” until the officers showed up in full
regalia is nonsense.
RICHARD: I agree. If you read the transcripts of that
meeting and a later one – both posted on my blog – there are some glaring
inconsistencies. And there are too
many other things that just don’t add up.
KEVIN: YA THINK? I remember Charlie saying to me at a BoS meeting, when I quoted what he had said; “Do you have
those notes written down somewhere?” and “I mean, if you can give me the
exact recording of what I said I’m happy to stand up to it.” What isn’t heard
on the recording, for whatever reason, is my saying I would testify to it in
a court of law, which prompted Turner to say “that’s a no.”
RICHARD: He’s not the only one whose
stories have changed. I can’t wait til Monday.
There may be lots of juicy revelations.
KEVIN: I don’t know what you think will happen at
the hearing on Monday; but don’t get your hopes up.
The BoS has been running this game for a long time.
RICHARD: I’m not sure what procedure they’ll try to use.
KEVIN: Neither are they, but be assured that they’ll make it up
as they go.
RICHARD: I think there may be lots of folks there, but
remember, at your “lynching” they weren’t allowed to speak.
KEVIN: To be fair Richard, some people were allowed to speak;
including you, right after you were verbally assaulted by Charlie. But
seriously, aren’t the views of townspeople important, especially in a small
town where the police are supposed to be neighborly?
RICHARD: I think so. And Charlie has said “We’re
still willing to have a public meeting with the chief. If the chief
chooses to do that, we will be more than happy to have that public meeting so
that she can address each and every one of those charges. We want this
to be, and what we have tried to do, is keep this whole process as open and
honest as we possibly could.”
KEVIN: That means people will be allowed to speak if Reena
allows it, doesn’t it?
RICHARD: Yes, if you believe Charlie means what he says.
KEVIN: REALLY RICHARD! Did you not see my tongue firmly planted in my cheek? What people have to understand about Charlie
is that the operative phrase is “as we possibly could,” not “open and
honest”. Charlie thinks my lynching was as honest and open as he possibly
could. Eye witnesses are quoted as saying “That pathetic excuse for
a purported hearing was pre ordained - It was a mockery of a hoax of a sham
of a hoax cloaked in a tissue of lies”
RICHARD: Do you
know anything more about the Pilone firing?
KEVIN: A bit. Jeremy and I have spoken a few times since
the “hearing.” But I’m not talking
much about it until I see what happens on Monday. I’ve
heard rumors that the chief and Jeremy may join forces. You know the old
saying, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Wouldn’t that be a hoot?
RICHARD: I’d like to know what standards the selectboard
is applying. They fired Pilone but didn’t fire Carlson, even though the
acting chief said to fire both. What was the difference? How do
they decide? And how are they going to apply whatever standard it is to
Reena?
KEVIN: Richard, you are making the mistake of applying logic.
The BoS acts arbitrarily and capriciously. I don’t think they know or
care about logic. If they applied logic they would be a little more
consistent in their inconsistencies.
RICHARD: Yeah, you got that right. By the way, have
you found out anything about the evidence locker story?
KEVIN: Yes Richard, and contrary to Mary’s claim, my sources say
it did in fact happen and there is a lot going on that we will not hear about
from the BoS or the EPD. However, baseless claims are not fact. Evidence is
fact and when the facts come out the BoS may have a lot to answer for. I
asked for the police report and was told I can’t have it because it falls
within the exemption clause of the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
RICHARD: Another glaring example of our selectboard’s
“transparency.”
KEVIN: So the really big question here is this: If
the BoS lets Reena go, what will she do?
RICHARD: I’m pretty sure she’ll sue.
KEVIN: With my best deer in the headlight look I say, I’m
shocked to hear you say that Richard.
Richard: Yes and when she does it’s going to cost the town a
pretty penny.
KEVIN: The Selectmen are probably thinking, so what. The
insurance will pay for it; and whatever isn’t covered, the taxpayers will
just have to pay.
RICHARD: Our town insurance is “experience rated.” That means the insurance may pay it today
but our premiums will go up – maybe way up – to pay for it later. There’s no free lunch. I think that folks
who go to the hearing should remind the selectmen that there’s likely to be a
BIG cost to letting Reena go.
KEVIN: Yes, but that’s only if they’re allowed to speak. Face
it, once the BoS embarked on this journey they were committed. Handling the
thing correctly would have been dicey enough; the way the BoS handled the
situation they have no way to even save face.
RICHARD: Probably not.
KEVIN: So correct me if I’m wrong, Richard, but this is
the pattern: the selectmen create a big mess, they mishandle it from the get
go and expect the taxpayers to bail them out?
RICHARD: Unless they do the right thing and pay it
themselves. Fat chance. And when they don’t volunteer, I’ll be
thinking tar and feathers.
KEVIN: You may be thinking tar and feathers, but like Jack
Muskrat, I think the BoS will get off without any consequences. The town has
not yet been sufficiently horrified by the BoS’s behavior.
RICHARD: Time will tell.
|
Wednesday, July 03, 2013
Officer Pilone and the Selectboard
Monday, July 01, 2013
More on the Selectboard's Mishandling of the Police Situation
Many of us have had suspicions about the explanations from members of the selectboard about how the police debacle unfolded. Here's the transcript of a meeting that came after the suspension of the chief in which various citizens questioned what had happened. There are discrepancies between what's said at this meeting and what was said at the suspension meeting.
Also interesting is Selectman Flynn's attempt to elevate policeman Pilone to the chief's position by, among other things, saying how great he is. How quickly things can change. Would you like to explain Mr. Flynn? I won't hold my breath.
Here's the transcript:
Also interesting is Selectman Flynn's attempt to elevate policeman Pilone to the chief's position by, among other things, saying how great he is. How quickly things can change. Would you like to explain Mr. Flynn? I won't hold my breath.
Here's the transcript:
Mr. Swanson: The
complaint that was a petition that was filed with the Select Board that lead to
the removal of Reena Bucknell, will that be made public?
Selectman
Turner: Well, there wasn’t
really a petition, that was a vote of no confidence by the police officer.
Mr. Swanson: So,
it’s an oral—
Selectman Brazie: No,
it was written. And it’s already been
made public. It was attached to the
minutes that, so, would you like a copy?
Mr. Swanson: And
the second question is, once this petition was submitted, what was the process
that the select board went through that led to the decision to suspend
Ms. Bucknell, Chief Bucknell, with pay?
Was there a review, a discussion with Bucknell, was there, are there
files or documents?
Selectman
Turner: She wasn’t attending
at, present at, that meeting.
Selectman Brazie: Right.
Mr. Swanson: Did
you decide in the meeting?
Selectman
Turner: Yes, we did.
Selectman Flynn: Yes,
we did.
Mr. Swanson: Okay. Why did you not go through a more formal
process that would be [Inaudible].
Selectman
Turner: What would have been
the formal process?
Mr. Swanson: Pardon
me?
Selectman
Turner: What would have been
the formal process?
Mr. Swanson: Well,
normally, in, in—
Selectman
Turner: We initiated an
investigation at that time.
Mr. Swanson: After
suspending her.
Selectman
Turner: Yes, and that’s the
formal process that—
Mr. Swanson: Why
did you decide to suspend her based on a complaint from her employees rather
than discuss it with her?
Selectman Brazie: ’Cause
it wasn’t a single complaint, actually.
There were several complaints.
Mr. Swanson: Presented
simultaneously?
Selectman Brazie: Yes.
Speaker: Mm hm.
Speaker: Yeah.
Selectman Brazie: Along
with the vote of no confidence.
Selectman
Turner: I think we had the full
there—
Mr. Swanson: She
thought that was the full story [Inaudible].
Selectman
Turner: With a full group of
officers it was, it was either we had a police department or we had a
chief. I don’t think there was a, and I
think it was a—
Mr. Swanson: So,
the people, the officers who presented the petition, the vote of no confidence
were ready to resign their positions?
Selectman
Turner: I think they were.
Mr. Swanson: They
made that clear? Explicit?
Selectman
Turner: Explicit.
Mr. Swanson: Explicit.
Selectman
Turner: They were here that
night in force. Every member of the
police department.
Mr. Swanson: So,
it was a simple, “If you don’t suspend her immediately, we’re resigning our
positions”?
Selectman Flynn: What
we did is we took the information that the officer provided to us. We had some information already that we
thought was pertinent including a most current eval and we had also consulted
with our attorney to determine if—
Mr. Swanson: Before
you suspended her?
Selectman Flynn: Yes.
Mr. Swanson: Okay.
Selectman Flynn: We
consulted with our attorney and determined that the best process to follow was
to suspend her with pay pending an investigation. Which is exactly what we did.
Mary had spoken with counsel during the day or maybe it was me that
spoke with counsel.
Selectman Brazie: I
think it was you. I was—
Selectman Flynn: It
was me. Because I had heard that
something like this would take place, and I asked counsel as to the best
process to follow and that’s what counsel suggested. And that’s the process that we followed.
Mr. Swanson: From
a business perspective, it’s an extremely peculiar process.
Selectman Flynn: This
is not New York State. This is the
State of Massachusetts. This is the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Mr. Swanson: My
experience is not in New York State.
Selectman Flynn: Let
me finish.
Mr. Swanson: Yeah.
Selectman Flynn: You’ve
had your chance to talk.
Mr. Swanson: I
don’t know why you say that.
Selectman Flynn: Let
me finish. This is the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, and what we try to do is afford her every opportunity, including
the opportunity to be at that meeting.
She chose not to be at that meeting.
For whatever reason, we do not know.
Mr. Swanson: I’m
wondering why you assume that my business experience was in the State of New
York.
Selectman
Turner: Okay, this is not a
conversation—
Selectman Flynn: We’re
not having a conversation about this.
Selectman
Turner: This is between us and
the board, and the board made a decision.
Selectman Flynn: I
realize you like to carp about things, as you have accused me in the past,
okay? But we’ll talk about it
afterwards, okay?
Mr. Swanson: Okay.
Selectman
Turner: It was a decision the
board—
Selectman Flynn: We
made it as a board.
Selectman
Turner: The board made it based
on issues that culminated that night with a vote of no confidence. There have been some issues prior to that,
it was, there was—
Mr. Swanson: Just
to be clear, I’ve never met Reena Bucknell.
I don’t know anything about her.
Selectman
Turner: Okay, well, there was a
lot of behind the scenes stuff that not a lot of people are aware of that we
were, that culminated that night with that.
It wasn’t just that night that we decided to do it. There was, there was—
Selectman Flynn: Fourteen
years and sixty officers.
Selectman
Turner: Not only that, but we
had—
Mr. Swanson: Compared
to what?
Selectman
Turner: We had just hired two
new officers that were extremely qualified or had been on the job for three or
four months and we’d had a meeting prior to that night in which we tried to
iron out some of the issues and found it kind of tense, at best.
Mr. Swanson: Yes.
Selectman
Turner: And then a lot of
things fell into place after that, that resulted in what we did. I think there’s a lot more to it than just
the vote of no confidence that night. There
were some other things that were happening behind the scenes.
Selectman Flynn: When
we tried to get close to particular facts and particular situations, there was
a tendency of the chief to want to change the subject or move on to something
else. And we got close to some issues
that really should have been discussed and she was more anxious in closing the
meeting and moving on to a training session.
I think every effort was made to give the chief an opportunity to
discuss it, and we’re still willing to have a public meeting with the
chief. If the chief chooses to do that,
we will be more than happy to have that public meeting so that she can address
each and every one of those charges. We
want this to be, and what we have tried to do, is keep this whole process as
open and honest as we possibly could.
It’s a tough thing to do, but I think one of the things that this board
has done is we made that report available as soon as we possibly could. We went through to three counsels in order
to ensure it got done. We went to the
district attorney, we went to our own attorney, and also we went to the
attorney general to ensure it was something that we could release because we
felt it was something that the town and the community needed to know. Now we’re going on to the next step.
Selectman
Turner: So, anybody else? Yes.
Male Speaker 4: I
was there at that meeting where all the officers were there and the complaints
were issued and Charlie himself made statements that you could not get in
contact with the chief so she was not available for being there. Where’s the inconsistency there?
Selectman Flynn: Do
you have those notes written down somewhere?
Selectman
Turner: That’s, no. It was an open meeting and she could have
attended that night. We did not know
exactly what was going to happen that night, nor did we orchestrate what
happened that night, but that’s, you know, that’s—
Male Speaker 4: Charlie
did know, he said.
Selectman
Turner: Maybe Charlie knew but—
Selectman Flynn: [Inaudible]
to be at the meeting. That’s the only
thing I can tell you.
[SEVERAL PEOPLE TALKING AT ONCE.]
Male Speaker 4: After
everybody else went away, you were here [Inaudible].
Selectman
Turner: Yeah, okay, we’re not
here to discuss that.
Selectman Flynn: We’re
not here to discuss it. I mean, if you
can give me the exact recording of what I said.
Selectman
Turner: I mean, this is, this
is—
Selectman Flynn: I’m
happy to stand up to it.
Selectman
Turner: This is an issue that
we dealt with.
Speaker: You want evidence.
Speaker: You got it.
Selectman
Turner: We dealt with that
night the best we thought we could and, and we’re, and we’ll—
Speaker: Otherwise [Inaudible] will be okay.
Speaker: You do that pretty well,
Mr. Zorick.
Speaker: We’re not here to discuss it, fair
enough, but you are here to answer citizens’ questions.
Selectman
Turner: Yes, we are. And we are working our way through the
process here, and we made a determination that night that that was the best
interest of the community to do what we did and I think that it will bear out
that that was, in fact, the case. And
that’s what we get elected to do. You
guys have anything, town officials? No
town officials? I’ve moved on to town
officials.
Selectman Brazie: Oh,
you did?
Selectman
Turner: He didn’t raise his
hand on time. Are you a town official?
Male Speaker 5: I
just have one question, though, and that’s how long a process is this going be,
take until it’s finished?
Selectman
Turner: It’s going to take
until it’s finished. I don’t know how
long the pro—
Male Speaker 5: We
retain the acting chief and keep going on and paying—
Selectman
Turner: We are going through
due process, and due process sometimes takes time. And it’s not a cheap deal.
But we’re going to come out of this with the proper result in the best interest
of the community. And that’s all I can
say right now. We’ve released the
report and we’re moving forward. You
guys have nothing?
Speaker: I don’t have anything.
Selectman
Turner: Don’t have nothing.
Speaker: For once.
Selectman
Turner: Okay. Part-time officers. We have a couple of guys you’ve brought
before us to appoint.
Selectman Brazie: We
did. Bill Tighe asked me today, though,
if we would hold off on this. He has
been unable to verify some references.
Selectman Flynn: I
move to defer the appointments.
Selectman
Turner: Until our next
meeting. Are we meeting next week?
Selectman Brazie: We
are scheduled to meet next week, yes.
Selectman
Turner: Okay. Let’s meet next week.
Speaker: Sorry.
Selectman
Turner: Police department
issues. We already discussed them.
Selectman Brazie: Well,
yes and no.
Selectman
Turner: What have we got, Mary?
Selectman Brazie: Well,
as you know, Bill Tighe and myself and a full time officer interviewed a couple
of possible candidates for an interim part-time administrative acting police
chief and somewhere, did he send you, did Bill Tighe send you an email?
Selectman
Turner: Yes, he did.
Selectman Brazie: So,
I interviewed the two, and, and I guess, you know, one question is, does the
board feel that two are enough? More
than two people, these two people, actually, were not contacted by the
town. They contacted the town and
expressed their interest, but people that have been contacted by the town for
various reasons are walking away. So,
now we’ve done these interviews and we have these two candidates and the first
question that I would ask is, is the board ready to act on this, or do you want
more follow-up on it?
Selectman Flynn: Okay,
I put my foot in my mouth all night long so I might as well not stop, huh?
Selectman Brazie: Sure,
why not, Charlie?
Selectman Flynn: My
feeling is that when we suspended the chief we appointed an officer in charge
and then we engaged in a management study.
What we’ve gotten for the first time in about 14 years is some real, we’ve
got some morale. We look like we have a
police department that’s working together and currently the officer in charge,
acting chief, whatever he is, is making patrolman’s pay, he’s getting paid
patrolman’s pay to do the job. Of the
two people that were interviewed, I’ve seen the evaluation based on that and
Bill Tighe sent to me, and I find, you know, I like Brian Shaw. You know he’s local, and I think he’s
good. But again we’re talking 20 hours
a week at $20 an hour. And what are we
going to ask that person to do? Are we
going to ask that person to run the department? Are we going to ask that person to follow through on the
management study? What is a role that
person’s going to fill? We have an
officer in charge already who is taking steps, I think, to correct some of the
issues that have been cited as problems in the management study.
So, the question I think we have to ask ourselves, if
we’re going to hire somebody new, or somebody that’s not currently on the
police department, what is the specific guidance that we’re going to provide to
that particular person? Are they going
to be an acting chief? If they’re going
to be an acting chief, what are they going to do? And then the next question is, who or what or how do we address
this management study that we paid $10,000 for but gave us additional work to
do? Who’s going to take care of
that? And then who’s going to report to
the select board and then ultimately to the town? Because I really believe that we owe it to the town to tell them
not only what the issue was, but then how we’re going to address that
issue. And then I think the third
process down the line is, what is our plan for the future police
department? We were, in a sense, told
one thing in November by our current chief, Bucknell, about the cost of hiring
additional officers. And it turns out
that that may not be the case.
So, we have to ask ourselves, what are we going to
present to the town, to the people of the town, in terms of what is the makeup
of our department going to be, and then how much is it going to cost the
taxpayers to have that particular type of makeup. So, I think we’ve got a couple of issues that we really have to
address, because just appointing somebody and not giving that person any
guidance as to how we want to proceed we really have not done anything.
Selectman Brazie: I
agree that we need to come up with some clear delineation of the roles, but do
we agree that we need to have some sort of an acting chief here?
Selectman Flynn: Oh,
I agree.
Selectman Brazie: Oh,
okay, because I thought I might have been hearing—
Selectman Flynn: No.
Selectman Brazie: —hearing
something different.
Selectman
Turner: So, it sounds to me
like we’re not really ready to do anything tonight.
Selectman Brazie: So,
when are we going to be ready, because here we are now, you know, two months
out from making this move and—
Selectman
Turner: Let’s take a time this
week to come up with what we think is a job description, a description of
duties that we’d like this person to perform.
Selectman Brazie: And
do we do that on our own, or do we get together and meet and do that.
Selectman
Turner: Well, I would recommend
that you and Bill get together and, [Inaudible] to delegate. And then fire it off to us and then we can
[Inaudible], because I think we really need to do, you know, let them do the
upper level stuff. I’m not sure, you
know. Maybe manage the investigation
but not necessarily have to do all the day-to-day management of the
department. I think we have people
capable of doing that right now.
Selectman Brazie: I
agree.
Selectman
Turner: And I really don’t want
to interfere with that too much with what’s going on there right now. That’s my thought. I don’t know, what you think, Charlie?
Selectman Flynn: Well,
let me just throw this out, okay, because I really agonized over this, I’ve
thought about this a lot. That I may be
the lone wolf of the group. There’s
been a lot of misinformation that’s circulated through town about what the
current police department is doing.
I’ve had comments made about the humvees, the assault rifles and
everything [Inaudible]. And let me
clarify that a little bit. We were
offered an opportunity to partner with the state police that has access to
certain military surplus items which the town can choose to take advantage of
or not take advantage of. And that
ultimately is a decision that’s make by the select board in an open
meeting. It’s not made by the police
department, but it’s made by the board of select and that’s part of the whole
process. It is something where
military-issue items are made available to the state police, and the state
police then screen them out to the various police agencies throughout the
state. Those police agencies then go
through their boards of select and the select members either say yea or nay and
then if they go back in and it’s on a first-come-first-serve basis. What I’ve seen since this whole situation
started is that each and every one of our police officers act with the utmost,
utmost professionalism and courtesies towards everybody in town, and if they
haven’t, I would like to know about it.
We have Officer Palone, who’s been acting as the officer
in charge, and, essentially, been functioning as the interim chief and what I
would like to propose before the selectmen and I don’t think we need to decide
upon this but I’m going to throw this in tonight, is that we consider
appointing Officer Palone as the Interim Chief at his current salary and then
appointing Officer Carlson, in addition to his normal duties, as Chief
Investigation Officer of the management report, because he is a certified
detective, and also a certified trainer in the State of Massachusetts, to
investigate and report to the board of selectmen on a weekly basis or at each
and every one of our meetings until such time as we have been able to resolve
the issues that have been identified within the management report. Again, it’s not a motion, it’s just a
suggestion.
Selectman
Turner: Yes, sir.
Speaker: I recall that this issue of
appointing an interim chief came up at a select board meeting, and the
impression I got, and I didn’t take notes, was that this was the suggestion or
request of one or more of the outside agencies that had been consulted, the
District Attorney, or the Attorney General, or somebody of that ilk. Now, I, I’ve just, if that’s the case, then
wouldn’t their reasons for making that suggestion constitute the heart of a job
description for such a person and, if that’s not the case, I’ve got it all
wrong, then I wonder why, then, you should consider an outside person at
all. I mean, I can see why the state
might make such a recommendation, but I’m not 100% sure in my own mind that
they did. I may have misheard them.
Selectman Brazie: No,
actually a state office did make that recommendation as well as the consulting
firm that did our management study and our legal counsel. All three of them made the same
recommendations for very valid reasons, I feel. So, we’ll go from here, I guess, and—
Selectman
Turner: I think we’ll—
Selectman Brazie: —pull
together—
Selectman
Turner: I hate to say it, but
let’s put together some job descriptions and duties and responsibilities and be
ready to do things. And if we can find
nothing against the two that we interviewed but if somebody else pops up, I’d
like to interview them, too. Okay?
Selectman Brazie: Mm
hm.
Selectman
Turner: Okay, with you,
Charlie?
Selectman Flynn: Works
for me.
Selectman
Turner: Then we’ll do, deal
with that next Monday.
Selectman Brazie: Okay.
Selectman
Turner: Do we have any
selectmen’s items?
Selectman Brazie: I do. May meetings, as you
know it’s town meeting, it’s the first week of May, right?Thursday, June 13, 2013
Is There a Limit to Arrogance?
Some recent developments that you may not be aware of:
1. Reappointments to town boards and committees are usually routine. If you're on a board and indicate you'd like to continue, it's rare for the selectboard to say no, unless you've been arrested or moved out of town or have been declared insane. But you might not get reappointed if the people on the selectboard don't like you, as evidenced by Laura's reappointment to the finance committee. She was reappointed by a vote of 3 to 2. The two "no" votes were Turner and Brazie. Neither gave any explanation of their vote, and I am not aware of even the slightest serious criticism of her performance by those two or anyone else. So why did they vote no? You decide. I can think of two possibilities: Childlike retribution for my incessant criticism of the selectboard's performance; and fear of the upcoming water department audit and what it might lead to.
2. Amy Lane, the town accountant, gave notice some time ago that she was not going to continue. The selectboard has supposedly been looking for a replacement. I think you or I could find multiple applicants in less than a week, but of course we'd actually have to try by, say, looking in the yellow pages or making a few phone calls. The selectboard's "search" didn't turn up anyone, so they decided - wait for it - wait for it - THEY HIRED BRUCE TURNER AS TOWN ACCOUNTANT!
3. With Bob Climo's unexpected resignation from the finance committee, and Kevin Zurrin's removal, there were two vacancies to fill. Now you might think that the selectboard would turn to the members of the finance committee and ask them who they would support for those vacancies. You would be wrong. The selectboard engineered the two appointments without ever consulting the finance committee. That's why the two finance committee members on the appointing committee voted against one of the selectboard's choices. Do you think that bothers the selectboard? Yeah, right.
1. Reappointments to town boards and committees are usually routine. If you're on a board and indicate you'd like to continue, it's rare for the selectboard to say no, unless you've been arrested or moved out of town or have been declared insane. But you might not get reappointed if the people on the selectboard don't like you, as evidenced by Laura's reappointment to the finance committee. She was reappointed by a vote of 3 to 2. The two "no" votes were Turner and Brazie. Neither gave any explanation of their vote, and I am not aware of even the slightest serious criticism of her performance by those two or anyone else. So why did they vote no? You decide. I can think of two possibilities: Childlike retribution for my incessant criticism of the selectboard's performance; and fear of the upcoming water department audit and what it might lead to.
2. Amy Lane, the town accountant, gave notice some time ago that she was not going to continue. The selectboard has supposedly been looking for a replacement. I think you or I could find multiple applicants in less than a week, but of course we'd actually have to try by, say, looking in the yellow pages or making a few phone calls. The selectboard's "search" didn't turn up anyone, so they decided - wait for it - wait for it - THEY HIRED BRUCE TURNER AS TOWN ACCOUNTANT!
3. With Bob Climo's unexpected resignation from the finance committee, and Kevin Zurrin's removal, there were two vacancies to fill. Now you might think that the selectboard would turn to the members of the finance committee and ask them who they would support for those vacancies. You would be wrong. The selectboard engineered the two appointments without ever consulting the finance committee. That's why the two finance committee members on the appointing committee voted against one of the selectboard's choices. Do you think that bothers the selectboard? Yeah, right.
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Police?
Be certain to read Kevin's most recent blog posting (eyeonegremont.blogspot.com) on the chaos surrounding the police department and the selectboard's mishandling of it. The comments to his posting are even more revealing.
Thursday, June 06, 2013
Setting the Record Straight
My letter to the editor of the Record about Charlie Flynn's accusations against me and Laura was published in today's paper. It's set forth below. Mary Brazie didn't like the implication in the letter that she was the one "burying" the anonymous letter about Pilone. She says she did make copies of the letter, gave copies to the selectmen and left copies on the table for the Finance Committee meeting that took place later that day. But she was told that Flynn took them off the table after she had left the building!
Charlie, want to respond?
Charlie, want to respond?
"To the editor-
"The Record of two weeks ago quoted
Egremont Selectman Charlie Flynn castigating me for “imposing” on the Egremont
town hall staff and castigating my wife Laura for not “having good judgment,”
presumably because she married me. The
quotes were so off the wall that I thought your reporter had misquoted Flynn,
but he didn’t respond to an email inquiry from me asking what he really said,
so I assume the quotes were accurate.
"The Egremont Finance Committee,
chaired by my wife, prepares a detailed report and recommendations on the
financial items in the warrant for each town meeting (and this year a separate
report on the water department) and tries to get it into the hands of the
voters at least a week before the meeting.
This year the Selectboard kept
changing its numbers after the warrant had been issued, so the report had to be
changed to keep up with that, and it therefore was going to be late. During the last week before the town
meeting, almost all the Finance Committee members – including Laura - were out
of town, so I was enlisted as essentially a secretary – not something I was
terribly happy about - to put the reports together and get them to town hall
for copying, which I dutifully did.
Flynn characterized this as “the husband of the chairman of the Finance
Committee going to Town Hall to make copies of the 47-page report for the
Finance Committee,” which was “not fair” to the staff because it was “an
inordinate amount of paper.” I guess he
thinks the citizenry should do with shorter, less informative reports.
"Either Flynn or your reporter are
confused about another document, a multi-page anonymous letter to Egremont
Police Officer Jeremy Pilone, a copy of which was attached to an April 30 email
from an Egremont voter addressed to the Selectboard, the Finance Committee and
two members of the organizing committee of One Egremont. Sending it to the town
makes it a public document, of course, but someone at town hall apparently
decided to bury it (and somebody ought to ask why) because Mary Brazie never
made a copy for the Finance Committee, whether or not she distributed it to
anyone else. Flynn somehow thinks I
included the letter in the reports I delivered to town hall for copying, which,
if true, would make me really, really stupid, but even Flynn can’t go that far
in his wild and misguided accusations.
"Your reporter told me after the
Kevin Zurrin removal proceeding that he thought Kevin should have checked his
sources. The Record should start
following its own advice."
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Your Property Values in Egremont
I got the following email today. The citizens and taxpayers of Egremont should know that the value of their properties is adversely affected by the complete breakdown of good government at town hall.
"It seems to me that somehow the people of Egremont should do something to regain control of the management responsibilities of the town. As you know, we have sold our property and are searching for a new residence. We have seen several attractive options in Egremont, but are not considering them because of this nonsense. A miserable performance for a lovely community. Good luck and regards, Herb."
"It seems to me that somehow the people of Egremont should do something to regain control of the management responsibilities of the town. As you know, we have sold our property and are searching for a new residence. We have seen several attractive options in Egremont, but are not considering them because of this nonsense. A miserable performance for a lovely community. Good luck and regards, Herb."
Friday, May 10, 2013
Transcript of Selectboard Meeting that Ousted Bucknell
Here's the transcript. Note how quickly they acted to suspend Bucknell, and only then tried to figure out what to do next. Also note all the indications that this didn't come as a surprise to the selectboard. There's something rotten in Denmark.
Officer
Pilone: Jeremy Pilone
Police Officer Town of Egremont presenting each of you with signed affidavits
and some evidence to support the whole reason that we are here tonight, and if
you would I would like to read some documents that we have prepared. Last week we met as the Police Officer’s
Union for this town to hold a vote of no-confidence in Chief Bucknell. This is based on several months, and which I
found out to be years, of dwelling issues within the police department that
have resulted in a lot of discord, failure to act, many issues that we are now
dealing with. There’s been a serious
divide that has been occurring between all of us as police officers and the
Chief, which I believe was mostly to her own doing. After all the meetings and complaints and issues that we had, we
met to discuss this vote of no-confidence.
This was last week on February the 14th. It passed unanimously with all officers casting their vote. Based on that, we all submitted information
documents, if you will, to Mr. Tighe, the personnel director, stating all of
our claims individually. If you don’t
mind I’d like to read the majority of mine just to give you an idea of what the
back story is here. Since I became
employed by Egremont Police Department in November of 2012, I have noticed
several serious issues that have become extremely problematic over the last few
months. Originally I was promised the
world and led to believe that if I accepted the police officer position that “I
would become the next Chief of Police in Egremont.” Knowing that this was my career path goal, Chief Bucknell sold
me this vision only to change it shortly thereafter. Once employed I was told, “I will be the new supervisor to help
define a rank structure for this agency.”
I later found out that this too was a farce. This all began during the hiring process when Chief Bucknell
would call me several times during the day and night to chat, if you will. These chats were filled with disparaging
remarks about the current Egremont police officers, select Board members and
other applicants for the position. I
found it odd that Chief Bucknell was so candid with me being that she had never
met me and had only spoken to me briefly over the telephone. I felt that this was a sign of things to
come. The issues began once I arrived
at Egremont for my interview. I was
sequestered from my only competition─who happened to be Officer Carlson who was
later hired─and only allowed to meet the only other full time officer, Officer
Reise, for a brief second because she “didn’t want him to get bent out of shape
because I was more experienced than him.”
Once appointed and working, I was given very odd shifts and told that it
was result of “being plugged into the preexisting schedule.” I was assured that this would change in December
and the following months. The pattern
continued for every month and has not yet normalized. Additionally, Chief Bucknell went to great lengths to keep me
away from other members of the agency.
I was routinely told to either leave early or report late, because she
“had it covered” or “had someone coming in for an interview or appointment,”
which never happened. This ultimately
left the town without police presence for an undetermined amount of time on a routine
basis. When I inquired as to when I
would meet the other officers in the department she jokingly replied “I don’t
want you to become like them and gang up on me.” I pressed the issue and was finally allowed to start meeting the
others but only under her watchful eye and supervision. During any downtime, I was routinely given
information on the other officers and town employees and told not to trust
them. All of this information was
negative and usually personal in nature.
Considering the fact that I was new, on probation and had no reason not
to trust Chief Bucknell, I believed everything that I was told and began to
resent the other officers and majority of the town employees. It was only after speaking to officers
Carlson and Reise about the bounty of innuendo and rumors that I realized that
this was an effort of Chief Bucknell to put the members of these agencies
against each other. Never in my 20
years of law enforcement experience have I seen a supervisor go through such
great lengths to divide and conquer an agency.
Additionally, I had never been made to feel so disrespected and
demoralized because of the chief’s poor and non-existent leadership style and
extreme micro-management. Once I
started my own investigation into the Chief’s odd behavior and inconsistent
statements, I uncovered some very interesting information. It helped me understand why these issues
were occurring. First, I was lead to
believe that Officer Reise was to blame for the inconsistent schedule. When in fact it was due to the Chief basing
her own schedule around a teaching job at Berkshire Community College, which
she vehemently denies having, even though she is listed as the criminal justice
program director and we also discovered that there has been many pay issues as
well through mass general loss. I’m sorry,
through the mass public records law websites.
Secondly, she had been also telling Officer Carlson and Officer Reise
the same things about this new supervisory position, thus setting us up for an
altercation and hostility towards one another.
Lastly, she forced my hand to act when I did not want to by way of fear,
intimidation and a false sense of entitlement, i.e., speaking in her defense
during town meetings and other settings.
Also, I’m going to interject here, through speaking with other officers
and also into some other investigations that came to light, there have been
numerous allegations of misappropriation of town funds and services as
well. All that information is included
in the documents that I had provided to you.
Based on this, the Chief has effectively created a hostile working
environment for all the officers in which the unity and brotherhood that are
commonly found and encouraged in all law enforcement agencies has been
completely destroyed. I routinely feel
ill reporting for duty because of the constant barrage of lies, misinformation
and drama I may face while walking through the door. It is disheartening to be a member of this agency that is the
brunt of jokes from other law enforcement agencies in the area which view the
Egremont police as the laughing stock and an unprofessional department. This is largely attributed to the actions of
the Chief and the extremely high turnover rate once again attributed to her
lack of leadership. I made this
commitment to the town and to the citizens to protect and serve here. Thus far, I have performed my duties with
integrity and pride only to be lied to and made feel like a second class
citizen. I believe that we as the
Egremont police officers owe it to the town to ensure that the agency receives
a much needed overhaul so that our job can be performed without interference,
micro-management and hostility. This is
why I voted in favor of the vote of no-confidence in Chief Bucknell last week. I feel that this agency is on the verge of a
major breakthrough and could be a great place to work as opposed to a breeding
ground for other agencies and the black sheep of Berkshire County law
enforcement. I will gladly do my part
to make sure that this effort is not in vain.
Just to let you know, I have been appointed, if you will, to speak for
the members of the agency, so I know I have all their support and if we can do
anything to provide any documentation or any other statements, I will gladly do
that for you.
Selectman Flynn: Just to give the people in the audience a little bit of background,
Officer Pilone retired after 19 years, 20 years on the Miami-Dade police
force. Officer Carlson came to us after
15 years on several other departments full-time serving as detective,
lieutenant and in other supervisory roles.
Two very, very experienced police officers. We were able to hire both of these gentlemen with the assistance
of the finance committee back in November.
And what they did is they really, they rounded out what was already a
very good, but sometimes overtaxed, part-time force. And now gives us in Egremont full-time protection. 24/7 protection. I’ve also read each and every one of the memos from the other
officers including Officer Pilone’s, and I find the charges that they make to
be quite serious. And I don’t take
those charges lightly. And they warrant
further investigation.
Selectman
Brazie: Some of this
information is coming to me new tonight because I’ve been involved in an issue
for about a week and a half that kept me out of the office. I would like to apologize for any part that
this Board has had and the difficulties that the officers of this town have
had. I would like to make a motion, at
this time, that we suspend our police chief, with pay, remove her from her duties
while an investigation takes place and that the investigation take place no
longer than two weeks from tonight.
And, as well, I think she should be asked to turn in her keys for that
two-week time period.
Selectman
Flynn: I second that
motion.
Chairman Turner: Approving this motion. I’m
just gonna say, this puts us all in an awkward and very uncomfortable situation
here guys.
Officer
Pilone: Agreed.
Chairman Turner: And I know this is, I’m sure, difficult for you because effectively we
have mutiny. If you want to call it
that. A difficult situation for us
because we have to investigate our long-serving Police Chief. However, we have to do the difficult
things. And I’m not sure how this is
gonna fall out into place here because obviously the Chief’s not here and she’s
entitled to due process and we will have to go through that due process and I
hope you’re able to assist us in that due process.
Officer
Pilone: Most definitely.
Chairman Turner: I’m looking at all of you guys because this is not gonna be fun for any
of us.
Officer
Pilone: Well I would like
to say that I think for the first time in many years, in the history of this
agency, we have effectively become a united effort here. We are, I think as close as any other squad
or unit that has been through this agency and I think that’s due on behalf of
everybody here from police department that this has given a new spark of life
into the agency. And I hope it’s a sign
of good things to come.
Chairman Turner: Do you guys have any more discussion?
I don’t know how we are going to make this play out, but all those in
favor?
All: Aye.
Selectman
Flynn: Mr. Chairman, I
think the one thing I’m gonna need to do is we’re gonna need to appoint a
temporary chief.
Chairman
Turner: Do we do an officer in
charge?
Selectman
Flynn: Or an officer in charge,
which may be better, appoint a temporary officer in charge, we’re going to have
to draft a letter and deliver that letter to the Chief identifying what we have
done and the vote that was taken and the reason for the vote.
Chairman Turner: I think it’s gonna have to be more than a letter.
Selectman
Flynn: Probably will.
Chairman Turner: Somebody’s gonna have to go face-to-face.
Selectman
Brazie: And how could you
do?
Selectman
Flynn: The Chairman does
that.
All: Laughter
Chairman Turner: I’ll do it, if you want me to.
Selectman
Brazie: And how quickly, I
mean is that something that gets done tonight?
Chairman Turner: Well hopefully. The vote is in
tonight, then it really should happen immediately if not sooner but quicker.
Selectman
Brazie: I have a couple of
questions I want to ask the officers actually.
Do you have any fear that there’s going to be retaliation from this
move?
Officer Pilone: Most definitely.
Selectman
Brazie: Okay. And do you have a recommendation on who is
appointed acting in charge of whatever name it is that we would like to give
it.
Officer: Yes, I think we’ve all
effectively come together and appointed Officer Pilone as our spokesperson and
our chosen leader.
Selectman
Brazie: Thank you.
Chairman Turner: So I guess somebody ought to make a motion to that effect too.
Selectman
Flynn: I move to appoint
Officer Pilone, temporary officer-in-charge of the Egremont Police Department
during the suspension of Chief Bucknell.
Selectman
Brazie: Second.
Chairman Turner: All those in favor?
All: Aye.
Selectman Flynn: Thank you. You now got the
responsibility. You now have the
headache and you don’t get any pay for it either.
Officer
Pilone: I understand, thank
you very much.
Chairman Turner: We got to let things play out here.
But we have to, we being the Board, have to hold a hearing. There’s due process. So we have to figure out how we’re gonna do
this.
Female
Speaker: Also, we should
probably generate something for the media so things don’t get misconstrued.
Chairman Turner: Things are gonna get misconstrued.
Female
Speaker: I know.
Chairman Turner: This is not gonna be good. This
is gonna be, this is going to turn the town inside out. This is not gonna be pretty.
Selectman Flynn: This is
not gonna be fun.
Kevin
Zurrin: Takes the heat off
of me.
All: Laughter
Selectman
Brazie: All right. So to get back to this seriously. Action needs to be taken tonight. What is that action going to be?
Chairman Turner: I think when we get done with this meeting we’re gonna have to make a
phone call. At the conclusion of our
meeting tonight.
Male Speaker: Mr. Chairman
Chairman Turner: Yes. But I think it might not
have any effect.
Male
Speaker: I have to make a
serious suggestion that you get in touch with the Town Council very quickly.
Selectman
Brazie: We’ve actually
tried to do that. Unfortunately our
Town Council is away on vacation.
[All
speaking at the same time.]
Chairman Turner: We have got a lot of work to do.
We have to do, I think, a notification.
Selectman
Brazie: So how do you
accomplish that with someone who lives out of the area, quite frankly? She lives in Otis.
Chairman Turner: We’ll call her at home. Say
something. You’ve got your hand up.
Male speaker: Well, you didn’t say
nothing. I see you have an executive
session police union contracts there.
Why don’t you . . .
Male Speaker: Not everybody has to know all this stuff.
Selectman
Brazie: Because?
Selectman Flynn: We can’t do it.
Male
Speaker: It’s got to be
public.
Officer Pilone: I just want to reiterate to the
Board that all of us, me and the police officers, we’re definitely able and
willing to assist in any way possible regardless of whether it’s, I mean . .
. I understand that you wanted to make
the face-to-face and I appreciate that and I think that would make a nice
statement. Regardless, we are here to
assist the Board in any way possible.
Selectman Flynn: I think what we have to do is draft a notification on what is actually
required by the law. That she has been
suspended with pay.
Selectman
Brazie: Bill is that
something that you could be working on while we’re finishing up our meeting?
Bill: Yes.
Selectman
Brazie: Okay.
Selectman Flynn: And I think it needs to be drafted, signed tonight and delivered to
her.
Selectman
Brazie: I agree.
Chairman Turner: Okay. I’ll give them a draft
and we are going to continue on with our meeting. Would you guys hang around for a little bit?
Officer: We’ll be here, all of
us.
Chairman Turner: Okay.
Selectman
Brazie: Hans and Ed
wanted to say something.
Chairman Turner: Okay, yeah.
Officer Ed: Just so we’re all clear,
maybe someone else covered this, but as officers, now clearly she’s been
suspended, without [sic] pay. Is there
something if she tries to make contact, that we should be saying or doing
[INAUDIBLE] if she calls? Is there any
statement you want us to make? How do
you want us to handle it?
Chairman Turner: Any calls should be directed to . . . or me.
Officer Ed: So if she calls the station,
just say please call ______________.
Chairman Turner: Yes.
Officer Ed: Or if she comes here, on the
off chance, so we just . . . not coming in . . . I just want to make sure we’re
all clear on what she can and cannot do from here on out.
Selectman Flynn: She should not, she should not be allowed within the police facility
without an escort, and she should make arrangements ahead of time to get into
the police facility and state specifically why she wants to come. And she should not be allowed to leave with
anything, cause we have, as of this moment, we have an ongoing investigation.
Male
Speaker: And that could be
part of the draft letter to make sure that the point is very clear?
Selectman Flynn: Yeah. That has to be in the
letter.
Male
Speaker: Okay.
Selectman Flynn: We need her keys, the combinations to any of the cipher locks need to
be changed.
Officer Hans: My concern is we all know how
the network of police chiefs work, in law enforcement, small town law
enforcement especially in Berkshire County.
She’s very familiar with a lot of the people, other police chiefs, a lot
of people and positions of powers, she’s demonstrated by bringing District,
Assistant District Attorneys to meetings and things like that. My concern is that if she’s still in
possession of town property, identification badges, fire arms, things like
that, that she could still be viewed as, during this time-frame when the
investigation is occurring, as a police official, because a lot of times, a
citizen or a layman who is presented with an ID or a badge or whatever, you
know, somebody saying they’re police chief, they just believe it and take that
as gospel, especially someone who’s been around as long as Ms. Bucknell has and
I think I can effectively speak for everybody, there is a significant amount of
fear that she will attempt to, you know, try to tarnish our reputations, or
attempt to strike back or, you know, have some sort of retribution against
us. And I second what you said where,
you know, her coming into the facility, she needs an escort and things like
that, but there is, there’s a lot of things I think that—I’ve been through
something similar to this before, where we need to account for, you know,
things that are in the building, go through the evidence room, you know, and
really take a very extensive inventory of things that are here, so that things
do not disappear.
Selectman
Flynn: I don’t want to
speak too much tonight, but I could add to Hans as well. I mean what could potentially be in her
personal possession in her home or wherever that is, that belongs to the town
or is significantly _______ to the investigation.
Chairman Turner: At this point in time, that’s the least of our concerns. Because she’s just being investigated,
nobody’s—there hasn’t been any charges brought, she hasn’t been relieved of her
job, so there’s an investigation. We
have to do our due diligence. On the
other hand, Hanz’s thing, that’s something you signed up for, when you’ve came
here tonight it’s gonna get ugly and she has a lot of power. State, locally and it’s gonna get ugly. We’ll stand behind as much as we can,
everybody, because our job is to be as partial—impartial and fair as we can. We’re doing this in the best interest of
Egremont, but you got to understand that it’s gonna be ugly, and you may
lose. I hope, I hope we all come out
winners in this, but it’s gonna be, you know, you signed up for this, you’re
gonna have to expect some tough times in the next couple of days, weeks. And I’m just being honest with you.
Officer: I certainly didn’t sign
up for any of this. I didn’t sign up
for this type of harassment.
Chairman Turner: No, I know.
Officer: I didn’t sign up for
any of that but …
Chairman Turner: We’ll do everything we can, beginning tonight, to help mitigate as much
as we can, but this is, you know, dealing with a police chief, a long-time
police chief, and any—is bad.
Female
Speaker: But you know
what? Excuse me for speaking. Thank you all for coming and bringing this
forward. I respect everyone of you, you
have a lot of—what’s the word I’m looking for, I’d hate to be in your shoes,
and test and fortitude.
[Too many
voices]
Female
Speaker: You guys really
brought it to the forefront, but it had to have been coming for quite sometime,
so I really appreciate it. Do we ask
for the badge while she is being investigated?
Selectman
Brazie: I think we have to
ask for the badge.
Chairman Turner: I think that’s pretty much what we’ve done here tonight. The badge and the gun.
Selectman
Flynn: Badge, gun and
keys.
Officer: Let me just make a
suggestion too, as none of us part-timers have an ID, and as police officer a
badge means absolutely nothing without an ID, so I think that it should be,
just a suggestion, one of the things as well, because it doesn’t matter if you
have a badge in your hand you just show your police ID and that’s who you are.
Male Speaker: You don’t have ID?
Officer: No we told you we don’t
have ID.
Officer: I don’t have an ID
either.
Officer: Some full-timers don’t
either, one does.
Chairman Turner: You got to be kidding me.
Officer: If somebody asks me for
my ID I by law have to show them my police ID.
Officer
Pilone: I’m still carrying
my retired ID from Miami.
Chairman Turner: Your first job as officer-in-charge is to get them IDs.
Officer
Pilone: Yes, sir.
Selectman Flynn: Could I just say something?
I’ve been through this once before.
Nobody’s gonna come through this unscathed. I will tell you that right now.
We are all gonna come out of this with a few black and blue marks. And there may be a time during this whole
process where you may ask yourself “What did I do this for?” There will be light at the end of the
tunnel. You’re gonna come out of this,
you may have a couple of black and blue marks, this will be a better police
force and you will be better people for it.
There is no way in the world she has the power or the influence to
disparage your reputations or your careers within the State of Massachusetts. There are people that she is connected
with. There is also a very large group
of people that she has become disconnected with. So let’s go into this with our eyes open, deal only with the
facts. There can be zero innuendo. There can be zero motion. I know we’re proud to have you guys as our
police officers, but we’re gonna go through a tough time for the next several
weeks and maybe the next several months.
We don’t know, we don’t know how this person is gonna respond. Please understand, deal with the truth, deal
with the facts, take the emotion out of it, just be objective with everything
we do. Ultimately, we will get through
this and it will be behind us. But it’s
gonna be a little while to get there.
Officer
Pilone: Thank you sir, we
appreciate that.
Selectman
Brazie: Bill, as well as
drafting the letter, could you work up a media press release for us to look
at? Thank you.
Bill: All right.
Chairman Turner: That’s what you’re getting paid the big bucks for!
Bill: That’s right! [Laughter]
Chairman Turner: We have—what else do we need to do?
Selectman
Brazie: What we need to do?
Chairman
Turner: _____________________
contacting people. This is not gonna go
well.
Selectman
Brazie: No it’s not gonna
go well.
[All speaking
together.]
Chairman Turner: And he’s smiling?
Selectman
Brazie: Ed before you leave
if you don’t go out on a call, Charlie and I would like to speak to you about a
different matter after the meeting.?
Chairman Turner: Oh, I don’t get involved?
Selectman
Brazie: You’re welcome to
listen.
Selectman
Flynn: You’re welcome to
listen, you’ll like this one.
Chairman Turner: Thank you, gentlemen.
Selectman
Flynn: Watch your back
Male
Speaker: That’s why I wear a
vest.
Chairman Turner: So do we have any other town officials who think we ________ bad-mouth
_______? New business. I’d like to call aggregation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





