AG finds Council violated state act

By John Howell
Posted 6/23/16

In a ruling issued June 9, Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin found the City Council violated the Open Meetings Act when seven members signed a letter more than a year ago addressed to members of …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

AG finds Council violated state act

Posted

In a ruling issued June 9, Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin found the City Council violated the Open Meetings Act when seven members signed a letter more than a year ago addressed to members of the General Assembly. The letter, also signed by Mayor Scott Avedisian, showed city support for passage of enabling legislation for the Warwick Sewer Authority.

Former Ward 1 Councilman Robert Cushman, who prior to being elected to the council served as School Committee chairman, brought the complaint on July 15, 2015, claiming the council met in an unannounced meeting to sign the letter. He also asserted that the mayor violated the Open Meetings Act.

“This looked like a resolution,” Cushman said in an interview Tuesday, pointing out the letter gave the appearance that the council had properly docketed its action and voted in an open session before it was signed by the mayor.

The finding, written by Special Assistant Attorney General Lisa Pinsonneault, concludes: “We find no evidence that the City Council knowingly or willfully violated the OMA.” It goes on to state that since Cushman brought the complaint more than month after the letter was signed, “injunctive relief would be inappropriate,” and it notes that the enabling legislation, which was the subject of the letter, was not enacted.

While finding a violation of the act, because the council had not knowingly or willfully violated the law, the attorney general is not applying a fine that could be as much as $5,000.

“They knew they didn’t follow procedure and yet they did it. They got a slap on the wrist and got away with it. No one is saying anything. I would have hoped someone would step up to the plate and admit they made a mistake,” Cushman said.

In response to the complaint, John Harrington, legal counsel for the city council, traced the history of the enabling legislation, citing how the council at its April 7, 2015 meeting – after about two hours of discussion – amended legislation as proposed by the Council Sewer Review Commission. The amended draft was approved by the council.

In defense of the letter to legislators, Harrington goes on to say the amended resolution was sent to members of the General Assembly. He said at this time, members of the General Assembly proposed additional amendments to the legislation and that the letter was in response to those proposals.

“The letter merely restated and reaffirmed the statements in Resolution NO. R-15-38 as adopted unanimously by the City Council that the form and substance of the proposed amendments to the Sewer Authority enabling act approved by the City Council were the only amendments that should be made to the enabling act,” Harrington writes.

Councilmen Joseph Solomon and Steve Merolla did not sign the letter.

In response, the attorney general cites the intent of the Open Meetings Act that citizens “be advised of and aware of the performance of public officials and the deliberations and decisions that go into the making of public policy.” It notes that while the letter was circulated among members of the council and there was no meeting of a group to collectively discuss the letter, the council violated the act by “passing around a correspondence concerning a matter over which the City Council had supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power…”

“The City Council violated the OMA by communicating amongst a quorum of members via written correspondence concerning public business.”

Cushman reasons the mayor “basically didn’t follow the law” by signing the letter and giving it the appearance of a resolution properly enacted by the council.

The attorney general said Cushman’s complaint includes “vague references regarding the Mayor of Warwick.” Further, the finding reads that the attorney general received a response from City Solicitor Peter Ruggiero representing the mayor and that they are in agreement that Cushman’s complaint was directed at the council, not the mayor.

“The mayor should have some responsibility on this because he signed it,” Cushman said. He contends the council actions are consistent with its failure to address the legacy costs of pensions and retiree health insurance.

“They have not put in any kind of reforms. They go along to get along,” he said.

“This council has done everything possible to shut people down,” he said.

Comments

1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • Thecaptain

    At the helm of the issue was Wilkinson. Once again in violation of the OMA. That's the second violation this year. Remember that the first violation incurred a fine of $2000 but instead of Wilkinson and the retirement board having to pay the fine out of their own pockets, the mayor paid the fine from tax payer monies. Where is the deterrent from poor behavior when if you violate the rules, you just make the taxpayer pay the fine? Nice going finance chair Wilkinson !

    Thursday, June 23, 2016 Report this