This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
08/27/2019 02:55 PMFollowing a heated Board of Selectmen meeting in which one selectman refused to leave the room for an executive session she believed she had a right to attend, an opinion rendered by the town’s labor attorney states that the first selectman does have the right to ask another selectman to recuse him- or herself from an executive session if there could be a potential conflict of interest.
Tempers and voices rose at the end of the Aug. 7 Board of Selectmen (BOS) meeting before the board was scheduled to go into executive session to discuss a collective bargaining agreement with a town union. At that time, First Selectman Christine Goupil (D) began to read a letter emailed to the town’s legal counsel by Selectman Carol Walter (R), who is employed as a clerk in the Building Department.
Walter’s letter asked for a legal opinion on whether or not she must be forced to recuse herself from executive sessions when union negotiations are discussed, if she must physically leave the room during the discussions, and if the meetings could legally continue if she did not recuse.
Walter said she would recuse herself when the clerical union, of which she is a member, was discussed but did not believe she should have to recuse herself from discussions about unions of which she is not a member. The issue had cropped up several times in recent months, which led to Walter asking for the opinion.
With Walter refusing to leave the room, the BOS ended the Aug. 7 meeting without entering executive session; some BOS members had heated verbal confrontations with each other after the meeting ended. Walter told the Harbor News that she would not recuse herself from executive sessions unless she saw an opinion in writing from the town’s labor attorney stating that she must do so.
On Aug. 15, Gabriel Jiran, the town’s labor attorney sent a letter to Goupil that upheld Goupil’s earlier stance. The letter states in part: “The language of the charter and ordinances prohibits participation and voting by a board member who is a member of a town union in any matter involving a collective bargaining issue” and “This conclusion would apply not only to participation in discussions about the board member’s own union, but would also apply to any discussions about general negotiation strategy or about another union contract where those discussions may influence or pertain to the board member’s own union contract.”
Walter said she received the opinion the next day and will respect the decision.
“The letter says I shall not attend so I won’t. I’ll totally abide by it, I just wanted to see what the lawyer said in writing for myself,” said Walter.
News of the fracas at the Aug. 7 meeting had some questioning the behavior of the town’s elected officials in public, however the subsequent weekly BOS meetings have been cordial.