Jean Perry, Neighb News Correspondence
Fairhaven voters will have to wait until July 26 for a recall election after Selectboard member Keith Silvia insisted that the town clerk and her staff would be unable to manage an election in less time.
Selectboard Chairperson Daniel Freitas left the room during the 5/10 meeting while Mr. Silvia and board member Bob Espindola discussed setting the date for a special election for voters to decide if they will recall and replace Mr. Freitas. More than the required 20% of registered voters signed a petition in support of the recall. That petition was certified by the town clerk on 5/3, setting the clock in motion to hold a recall election between 60 and 90 days.
Mr. Espindola read a letter from Town Counsel Tom Crotty explaining that the earliest date for an election would be 7/2; however, that would mean prospective candidates would only have until 5/12 to submit nomination papers with 50 signatures.
“Probably not realistic in my view,” said Mr. Espindola. The last date to hold an election would be 7/30, a Sunday, with nomination papers due on 6/9. Town Clerk Carolyn Hurley’s preference to keep with tradition and hold the election on a Monday makes 7/26 the final Monday before the deadline.
Mr. Espindola motioned for Monday, 7/12, giving just about eight weeks for the town clerk to prepare, with the due date for nomination papers 5/21. Mr. Silvia would not second it.
“I spoke with the town clerk today because I didn’t know any of this, Bob,” said Mr. Silvia. “She had it all figured out, and she came up with July 26.”
Mr. Espindola argued that 7/26 was an informal suggestion and that candidates would have plenty of time to gather the required 50 signatures by 5/21. After all, the recall petition volunteers gathered over 2,500 signatures in under a fortnight.
“So, in my mind, that’s the parameter here,” said Mr. Espindola. “And, let’s face it; if you have been following this, and anybody … unless they’ve been living under a rock has been following this, [potential candidates] have had plenty of time to think about it — almost two full weeks — same as the recall signature collection.”
“We’ve had a lot of delays … and we owe it to the community to resolve this issue as soon as possible,” said Mr. Espindola.
“Yeah,” said Mr. Silvia. “I have no problem with the collecting the signatures, I only was — the way Carolyn was explaining it to me, she needs all these processes to go through, and that this was, I mean, I’d like to talk to Carolyn [because] she gave me that number.”
“We asked [Mr. Crotty] for all of the requirements, okay?” said Mr. Espindola. “We are the ones who make the decision … of when the election is going to be, and not the town clerk. If she can’t do it within that timeframe, then that timeframe should not have been described to us.”
“I just don’t know why [Ms. Hurley] came up firm with that date (7/26),” said Mr. Silvia looking to Interim Town Administrator Wendy Graves, which he repeatedly did whenever he gave reasons for rejecting an earlier recall election date. “I don’t want to put the screws to her (Ms. Hurley), you know what I mean?”
Mr. Espindola offered to change his motion to add a statement calling for 7/12 “or the soonest possible date after July 12.”
Mr. Silvia picked up his pen, moved it to another spot on the table in front of him, and looked again to Ms. Graves and wondered if someone could get Ms. Hurley on Zoom.
“I have no problem,” said Mr. Silvia. “I just wanted to see what she had to say … to make sure there’s no conflict.”
Ms. Graves said she could try to text Ms. Hurley while Mr. Espindola pressed Mr. Silvia to explain why he would not consider his motion with the amendment.
“I just don’t know why she’s so far out, Bob,” said Mr. Silvia, insisting on 7/26.
Mr. Espindola explained that, despite pushing the election to the farthest end of the timeframe, Ms. Hurley would nonetheless have 51 days to prepare for the election regardless of the election date. As Mr. Espindola spoke, Mr. Silvia called attention to Leon Correy, who had his virtual hand raised on Zoom.
“Carolyn has taken a real beating,” said Mr. Correy, who earlier that day announced his candidacy for the recall election. He said Ms. Hurley and her staff “worked harder than anyone else in the office” and advocated for a later election date.
Linda Fredette, the Assistant Town Clerks spoke via Zoom about why the office needs the longest amount of time possible.
“The reason is, it’s not really about the (nomination) papers … it’s really more about the logistics of getting the polling locations ready…” said Ms. Fredette, including coordinating the polling stations and poll workers. “There’s quite a lot involved that people don’t really understand behind the scenes,” which is why 7/26 was “chosen.”
“Suggested,” said Mr. Espindola, “not chosen.”
Right, said Ms. Fredette.
Mr. Espindola told Ms. Fredette that the minimum time to hold an election is 60 days, and he wondered what she thought about that.
“Oh, gosh! No!” she said.
Phil Washko, who was involved in the recall petition effort, commended Ms. Hurley and her staff for their work certifying the petition signatures so efficiently.
“Getting this done inside of the timeframe that Mr. Espindola has suggested is very doable. I commend his leadership in prioritizing the town, prioritizing candidates, and prioritizing getting that seat filled over potential logistical problems that I am sure the town clerk can overcome,” said Mr. Washko.
Mr. Espindola and Mr. Silvia went back and forth a bit, with both sticking to their preferred dates.
“I won’t second the 12th, Bob,” said Mr. Silvia.
Mr. Crotty said Mr. Espindola’s motion concerned him because it should have a specific date for the election, not left open for the town clerk to decide or for someone to contest. Mr. Silvia asked Mr. Crotty why he preferred 7/26, but Mr. Crotty clarified that it was Ms. Hurley who suggested 7/26 to give candidates the maximum time allowed to return papers, not because Ms. Hurley needed more time.
The two board members went back and forth again, then Mr. Espindola offered the compromise of 7/19.
“Oh — oh, uh,” Mr. Silvia fumbled over his words and let out a laugh of sorts. “I don’t know why she (Ms. Hurley) wanted the 26th,” he said, letting out another chuckle and looking again to Ms. Graves. “I don’t know if it’s workload or something, Bob. She actually told me … specifically today.”
“None of this is ideal for anybody,” said Mr. Espindola. He pointed to his compromises of an additional week.
Ann Richard addressed the board, saying she was upset that the election would be delayed at the town clerk’s request and lamented that Ms. Hurley was not present to explain why. She said regardless of the election date, the same tasks would have to be done in the same timeframe, such as printing ballots. Mr. Crotty immediately confirmed that.
“Her (Ms. Hurley’s) concern was for the candidates, not for herself,” said Mr. Crotty. He said the 51 days is built in no matter what day the election is held.
“Setting this date at the earliest possible time to get this over with as quickly as possible doesn’t take a single day away from the amount of time it takes Carolyn to get her part of the job done,” said Mr. Washko. “So that makes this decision easy and it should be the earliest date possible.”
Mr. Silvia said he wanted to hear from Ms. Fredette again. He asked her if 7/19 would be enough time.
“To be quite honest, it’s just — it’s very difficult, and it’s disheartening to hear people kind of disqualify our job,” said Ms. Fredette. “It’s very difficult to get this all done in that amount of time.”
She talked about printing ballots and reserving the poll stations.
Ms. Espindola said he was confused because, regardless of the date, the town clerk has 51 days for the process.
Ms. Fredette repeated the same reasons, citing the printing of ballots, and mail-in voting.
“So, you’ve heard from the woman that works there,” said Mr. Silvia. “I just feel they’ve expressed their opinion to me today,” he said, looking to Ms. Graves again.
Mr. Espindola finally motioned to hold the recall election on July 26, which Mr. Silvia seconded.
Mr. Freitas reentered the room. “You guys all set?” He smiled and let out a laugh of sorts.
Then Mr. Silvia left the room when the discussion started about quotes received from consultants to hire a permanent town administrator.
Ms. Graves presented four responses to her request for proposals, but Mr. Espindola noted that there was not one from Community Paradigm Associates, the firm that conducted first TA search. Ms. Graves said she did not solicit one from them, despite Mr. Espindola’s specific request to get one from them.
Mr. Espindola asked Mr. Freitas to put the TA search back on the agenda for the next meeting, prompting Mr. Freitas to announce his new laissez-faire stance on the TA search.
“I have no — I will not be doing any of this town search committee,” said Mr. Freitas. “There’s been a lot said about this. There will be somebody sitting in my seat, I would assume, very soon, and I’m gonna leave that to them to discuss. I will leave you to discuss it with whoever the new selectman is going to be whenever the date is set.”
Mr. Espindola pointed out, though, that Mr. Freitas will likely be the chairperson of the board for the next several meetings.
“Once everything’s settled, we’ll figure out more, but until then … you asked for this to be put on the agenda,” said Mr. Freitas. “I am not going to sit on this. I’m not going to discuss it. I’m not going to have anything to do with it since it seems to be a bone of contention for some people, so I’m not going to vote on this. I’m going to tell you right now.”
He asked about the date for the recall election, 7/26.
“If there’s another selectman sitting in this seat, then you can have this conversation with them,” said Mr. Freitas.
“You will not allow the process to move forward until that date?” asked Ms. Espindola.
“You can try to move forward,” Mr. Freitas said.
But as Mr. Crotty then pointed out, Mr. Silvia is already recused due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Freitas’s refusal to participate in the matter renders it impossible for Mr. Espindola to initiate the process.
“So, effectively, you’re ensuring that there will be further delay,” said Mr. Espindola. “Whatever happens on the 26th in that election, there will be further delay to start that process.”
“In my mind, I think you’ve delayed the process,” Mr. Freitas said to Mr. Espindola. “I haven’t delayed the process; you’ve delayed the process… We have somebody (Ms. Graves) who was chosen by two — even though Keith was not supposed to pick it — we didn’t know it at the time, but we did not know that. But there was two of us that decided in it. Since then we’ve had a recall election with that, and I don’t think that I should have anything to do with the town administrator search. I’m not going to get involved with it — I’m not going to do it.”
Mr. Freitas’s near incoherence continued as he started contradicting what he stated moments before.
“There could possibly be another election on the 26th — we don’t know that, but I would say that there’s probably going to be. I’m not going to get involved in it, Bob — I’m not going to get involved in it.
“People can say what they want about this, whatever conspiracies you want — this has been a bone of contention and I am going to stay out of it.”
In a related matter, Mr. Espindola during the last meeting pointed out that Mr. Crotty had advised the board and Ms. Graves that were she to involve herself in the process to solicit bids from hiring consultants for town administrator, Ms. Graves would be violating Conflict of Interest Law as expressed in the State Ethics Code due to her interest in obtaining the permanent TA position. Mr. Espindola, who since January opposed appointing Ms. Graves as the interim TA to avoid any personnel or work-related conflicts, suggested the board might have to appoint a co-interim TA of some kind to handle the TA hiring process. He again suggested it, although Mr. Freitas did not respond to the idea.
Ms. Graves was appointed interim TA by Mr. Freitas and Mr. Silvia, who should have recused himself from any participation in the TA search to avoid violating State Ethics Code as his wife is directly supervised by the TA. Mr. Silvia was also the one who motioned to grant Ms. Graves a special interview for TA after finalists were interviewed, despite the screening committee having rescinded its vote to advance her as a finalist when dubious employment history Ms. Graves omitted from her resume was revealed (See the Neighb News 1/14/21 edition).
According to Fairhaven’s Town Administrator Act, an interim TA cannot remain in the position past 180 days, which for Ms. Graves will be on 7/7.
•••
Support local journalism, donate to the Neighb News with PayPal.
Click here to download the entire 5/13/21 issue: 05-13-21 TreeWarden