From the Original Emergency Meeting to Section 235 of the Town Charter

How the Case Began

The lawsuit involving a vacancy appointment to the Greenwich Board of Education originally centered on the Board's October 21, 2024 "emergency" meeting, during which Democratic members voted to appoint Jennifer Behette to fill a Republican Board vacancy.

That meeting later became the subject of a Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission hearing. Following a full hearing, the FOIC unanimously ruled that no valid emergency existed and that the meeting violated the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act. As a result, the actions taken during the meeting were declared void. Most assumed this ended the case.

The Case Pivots

However, following the FOIC ruling, the defense litigation seemed to pivot to another question: whether First Selectman Fred Camillo had authority to appoint Paul Cappiali to the Board after the vacancy remained unfilled beyond the thirty-day statutory period.

Supporters of the appointment point to Connecticut General Statutes § 7-107, Board of Education Bylaw 9221, and prior Connecticut case law, including Pereira v. Ganim, as supporting the First Selectman’s authority under those circumstances. Critics, meanwhile, have identified little to no legal authority to the contrary, leading some observers to view the shift in focus as an effort to keep the litigation alive — albeit only on life support.

Section 235 of the Town Charter

The case has also drawn attention to broader questions regarding the retention of outside legal counsel and compliance with Section 235 of the Greenwich Town Charter. Section 235 addresses the authority to retain outside counsel and obligate the Town for legal services.

Questions have been raised regarding whether the retention of outside counsel by then–Acting Chair Karen Hirsh complied with the procedures contemplated under the Charter. Publicly reported disputes have also emerged regarding payment authorization for those legal services.

Where Things Stand

Current Board Chair Michael-Joseph Mercanti-Anthony has reportedly directed that the litigation and related billing cease. However, the litigation has continued while disagreements remain regarding the status of the firm's representation and the underlying Charter issues.

Why the Charter Matters

Supporters of the Town Charter argue that Section 235 exists to ensure that Town boards cannot independently retain counsel and engage in taxpayer-funded litigation against one another — the exact dysfunction the Charter was specifically designed to prevent.