SOUTHWICK – A discussion of conflicts and ethics at Monday night’s Board of Selectmen meeting turned heated, once again.
Selectwoman Tracy Cesan took exception to Chairman Arthur Pinell’s request for Cesan to allow the state Ethics Commission to release to the board documents she provided to the commission.
The request from Pinell came a week after Ethics Commissioner Deidre Roney rendered an opinion for the third time that Cesan had no conflict with Chief Administrator Karl Stinehart.
Pinell maintained that the commission did not address some specific concerns.
“They failed to address other issues not relevant to financials,” said Pinell. “There are very real live issues related to you and the CAO.”
Pinell said if Cesan was not willing to allow them to release the information, he would ask for a motion for Attorney Demitrios Moschos to file a Freedom of Information Act request.
Cesan said she would do so only if Moschos released several emails she requested to see and that his bills were no longer redacted.
She did say she would tell them what she gave them, which she said was “all paperwork that has at some point crossed your hands.”
Pinell said he wanted to see the documents and Selectman Russell Fox made the motion in order to “resolve this.”
Cesan said not only is it resolved, it is a dead issue.
“I’m looking at this as ongoing harassment,” said Cesan. “You’ve gotten three rulings and hired one of the best labor attorneys in the state and I think you’ve got to let this go. I think you’re embarrassing yourselves.”
Pinell said he did not feel embarrassment at trying to understand how the board should operate. Pinell said the issues right now revolve around Cesan and her dual role on the board and as a full-time employee of the fire department, are not about her because a similar situation could arise in the future.
Cesan called Pinell a liar and interrupted him, prompting Pinell to tell her not to be “rude.”
“It’s hard when I have a little higher morals,” she retorted.
Rodney’s May 2 letter was written to Moschos in response to his April 17 opinion states that she disagreed in part with his conclusions. Roney wrote that while Stinehart, as stated in a Board of Selectmen Executive Order No. 1, has administrative oversight over all town departments, he “is not Ms. Cesan’s direct supervisor.”
“Therefore, under the precedents just noted, Ms. Cesan is prohibited under Section 19 from participating in Mr. Stinehart’s performance evaluation and re-appointment if – but only if – there are pending matters in which Ms. Cesan has a financial interest that Mr. Stinehart has a direct, immediate power to decide, or participate in deciding,” Roney stated. “Since it does not appear from your letter and Executive Order No. 1 that there is any ongoing investigation or other live issue involving Ms. Cesan’s financial interests over which Mr. Stinehat has decisional power, Ms. Cesan is not required by Section 19 to abstain from participating in evaluation Mr. Stinehart’s performance and deciding whether to reappoint him, and your conclusion to the contrary is inconsistent with Commission practice,”
Pinell maintained that there are, in fact, live issues that create a conflict and he wanted the paperwork from Cesan in order to see where the Ethics Commission was coming from with their decision.
