Update and Summary of Dispute Between the Greenwich Board of Education and the First Selectman’s Office

As many may know too well, this dispute was not initially about education policy or the school budget. Rather, it arose from a disagreement over which municipal body had the legal authority to fill a vacancy on the Board of Education and whether the Board of Education acted lawfully in making its appointment.

Greenwich residents elect a Board of Education to improve our schools — not to generate endless lawsuits, ethics questions, and taxpayer-funded legal bills. Yet that is exactly what Democrat leadership has delivered.

A summary of the sequence of events follows:

• July — Board of Education (BOE) member Republican Karen Kowalski resigned, creating a vacancy. The vacancy remained unfilled for roughly three months. Connecticut state law allows the BOE one month to appoint a replacement who must belong to the same political party as the succeeded member. In the event the BOE fails to act, the Board of Selectmen has the right to appoint the replacement.

• October — First Selectman Fred Camillo had hoped that the BOE could come to an agreement on a replacement. But after three months had elapsed without the BOE naming a replacement, the First Selectman resolved to fill the vacancy, as is his right, and scheduled a public meeting of the Board of Selectmen to approve such. Immediately before the scheduled BOS meeting, however, the then 4-3 Democratic majority on the Board of Education called an ‘emergency’ virtual meeting on October 21 and appointed a replacement who was a ‘Republican’ in name only and was not acceptable to the BOE Republicans. The meeting was publicly noticed only minutes before it began, far less than the 24 hours prior public required by the Freedom of Information Act. Additionally, the 4-3 Democratic majority engaged outside counsel, without seeking prior approval, as required from the Town Law Dept. On the following day, First Selectman Fred Camillo and the Board of Selectmen took the position that the BOE lacked authority to fill the vacancy and appointed Republican Paul Cappiali instead. This resulted in two competing claims to the same BOE seat.

• Subsequently, the Town of Greenwich and the First Selectman filed a complaint with the state Freedom of Information Commission (“FOIC”), arguing that the BOE’s emergency meeting violated Connecticut’s open meeting laws because there was no true emergency.

• December — First Selectman Camillo also filed a lawsuit in State Superior Court in Stamford seeking a declaration that the BOE’s appointment was invalid and that actions taken by the BOE thereafter were unlawful.

• March — The FOIC held a formal hearing to determine whether the prior October emergency meeting complied with Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Act.

• May — During Greenwich budget deliberations, it was disclosed that the dispute’s legal fees had grown to an approximate aggregate of $200,000 in outside legal fees because both the Town and the BOE retained separate counsel after the Town Attorney recused the office.

• October — Believing that waiting 94 days to fill the BOE vacancy did not constitute an emergency under Connecticut law and characterizing the situation as a “self-made emergency,” the FOIC unanimously ruled that (a) the October 21 ‘emergency’ meeting was “null and void,” and (b) the October 21 ‘appointment’ of the replacement by the BOE and all of the actions taken by the BOE thereafter were unlawful. Importantly, the FOIC emphasized that it was not deciding who legally had appointment authority—only that the meeting violated FOIA. Any determination of the lawful appointee would have to come from the state Superior Court. In response to the FOIC ruling, a representative of the Democratic Town Committee (DTC) accused the First Selectman of “…attacking the volunteers serving on the Board of Education…” This is a deliberate mischaracterization by the Democrats. Members of the BOE are elected officials, who have taken an oath of office to uphold federal and state laws and are held to a higher standard of conduct than are volunteers.

• November — Republican Paul Cappiali was elected and subsequently sworn in as a member of the BOE.

• June — As reported here (and in the Greenwich Sentinel) last month, the First Selectman proposed settlement discussions with the BOE. The BOE, however, remained deadlocked after voting 4-4 (along party lines) and thus preventing further discussion.

• July — A new court filing asks a judge to disqualify the Democrat defendants’ own law firm from representing current Chairman Michael-Joseph Mercanti-Anthony and Board member Paul Cappiali, alleging conflicts so serious that the attorneys cannot continue representing them. The Court has not ruled on those allegations.

Preliminary Conclusion

We can only conjecture about the ultimate resolution. The Town has already won the important issue with the FOIC. If the case continues to trial, we expect that it is probable that the state Superior Court will confirm the FOIC ruling and find the emergency meeting to have been unlawful. Regardless of the outcome, this has been a sad saga that could, and should, have been avoidable. It besmirches the good reputations for the Town, the BOE and the First Selectman. We continue to wonder why the BOE Democrats took actions of questionable legality, and at a meaningful cost to the Town and to themselves.