HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-06-04 Select Board Minutes - Executive Session . � Town of Reading R c C E I V L G
3 ,�� Meeting Minutes r O W t•! C :_ � R 'C
Fa �o Rcc, ;; , ,. '�iF, .
a�.:,��..�� lLG
20?4 JUL � 0 PH 2 ��4
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Select Board
Date: 2024-06-04 Time: 6:30 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Select Board Meeting Room
Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Executive Session
Purpose: Generel8usiness Version: Final
Attendees: Members - Present:
Carlo 8acci, Karen Herrick via Zoom, Chris Haley, Mark Dockser, Melissa
Murphy
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Town Manager Mat[ Kraunelis, Town Counsel Ivria Fried and Emily Meehan,
Ezecutive Assistant Caitlin Nocella, resident Mark Delaney
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Caitlin Nocella
Topics of Discussion:
Haley moved to go into Executive Session under purpose 1 to discuss and potentially
respond to an Open Meeting Law Complaint filed by Daniel Dewar, dated May 17,
2024,to invite Ivria Fried and Emily Meehan from Town Counsel's office,Town Manager
Matt Kraunelis and Executive Assistant Caitlin Nocella and resident Mark Delaney, into
the Executive Session and to return to Open Session to continue discussion on this topic
and to continue on with the rest of the meeting.The motion was seconded by Dockser
and approved with the following roll call vote:
Dockser- no; Murphy-yes; Haley-yes; Herrick-abstained; Bacci-yes.
For the diswssion on going into Executive Session, please see the open session minutes.
After the vote to go into Executive Session, a resident shouted out three times, so much for
transparency and shame on all of you, shame on you Mark. She retumed moments later to
clarify she meant Mark Delaney not Dockser.
Ivria Fried and Caitlin Nocella indicated they were in a location thatthey could not be
overheard.
Draft Minutes
Fried explains the complaint filed by Daniel Dewar and how the board needs to proceed. She
noted the board needs to stick to what was mentioned in the complaint; the board needs to
understand and determine ifthey feel there was intent behind the conversation behveen
Herrick and Delaney that Herrick's comments would get back to Jackie McCarthy.
Herrick started by noting she had no idea Delaney would be invited into this executive
session and she plans to treat him like a hostile witness. She noted this is just going to be his
Page I 1
word against hers and thaYs it. She feels Delaney has no standing here and should not be in
this executive session.
Delaney explained his side of the story noting that he talked to Herrick the Saturday before
the Town Manager candidate vote. He noted he is not going to speak about his conversation
with his wife. He noted he discussed with Herrick where he stood and where he thought the
board was but he doesn't think he told her which candidate McCarthy was leaning towards.
In reference to Delaney's comment about not disdosing his conversations with his wife,
Haley's only comments to Delaney were he would do the same thing to protect his own wife.
Bacci asked Delaney if at any time he or McCarthy felt threatened by Herricks comments.
Delaney responded, no.
Delaney was asked whether Herrick directed him to relay her comments back to McCarthy
and he responded no.
Delaney lek the executive session at 7:11 PM.
Herrick then made a statement. She explained she knew Delaney and McCarthy before
McCarthy was on the board. She noted she spoke with Delaney about a number of items
during the conversation in question. Delaney noted consensus of the board was voting Matt
Kraunelis for Town Manager. Herrick asked how he knew that information and he noted Bacci
called McCarthy and said he and Haley were voting for Kraunelis and he believes his wife is
leaning that way as well.
Murphy asked Herrick why she would not read her statement in front of Delaney.
Haley disagreed with Herrick's prepared statement that he told Bacci who he was voting for.
Fried ezplained the board's options. Option 1 would be to say this complaint is similar to the
prior Open Meeting Law violation and the board already responded to that. Option 2 would
be to say that Herrick never intended for her conversation to get back to McCarthy so there is
no violation. Option 3 would be there was a violation because Herrick should have
reasonably known her mnversation would get back to McCarthy.
Bacci and Haley feel Herrick knew talking to Delaney, McCarthy's husband,that the
conversation would get back to McCarthy.
Herrick noted she did not initiate this conversation with Delaney or told him to relay any
information back to McCarthy.
The board could not fully agree on how to answer the complaint because Herrick did not
believe her conversation would get back to McCarthy; however, Bacci, Haley and Murphy felt
it should have been assumed McCarthy's husband would report back to her. Dockser and
Herrick did not believe the conversation would get back to McCarthy.
Haley noted for the record that he was not indined to agree with Dewar's request to remove
Herrick from Vice Chair.
The board discussed allowing Herrick to send a letter with the response with her side of the
story.
Haley moved to authorize Fried to draft and submit a response to the complaint that
concluded the board could not agree on a set of facts but that a violation occurred and
allow Herrick to attach a letter to the official response.The motion was seconded by
Va9e I 2
Murphy and approved with the following vote: Herrick- no; Dockser- no; Haley-yes;
Murphy-yes; Bacci -yes.
Haley moved to go back into Open Session at 8:16 PM,with a second from Dockser the
motion passed with a unanimous roll call vote.
Documents Used:
• Daniel Dewars Open Meeting Law Complaint
• Herrick'spersonalstatement
Page I 3