Sometimes you just have to go with what you have and after watching the video of the BOS meeting held on Thursday, February 16, 2012, it is my opinion that the whole recall was a sham and a scam on the voters, including the people who signed the recall petitions, especially the people at the nursing home in Baldwinville. Of all places for a former nurse to go to get signatures. Now I watch the trio of columbus, wilder and mullins, who may have his own problems in Winchendon
and time will tell on that one. But it seems the triplets are doing exactly the same thing they complained and moaned about. I certainly did not have any idea that they were going to hire K&P. Talk about them perhaps, but how did they know K&P were interested in the job, especially after they turned down job of labor council last summer. On another question and perhaps some residents can help me out with this one, bob columbus supposedly left the railroad on disability, carpel tunnel syndome and supposedly when one goes out on disability, you can not receive any other income from something like a selectman's salary or stipend or what ever you call it. Is there an inspector general for the railroad that could answer these questions and if there is one, where might they be located. If columbus is on disability and he is not suppose to be getting any other income, would there be any financial consequences for that? Since the three of them appear to be in the ditch to bring back K&P and probably skelton next, it is my opinion that we may have to jump in that ditch with em and get down and dirty too. So if anyone has information on those questions, perhaps you could share them with us on the blog here. Remember, wilder and mullins can be recalled starting somewhere about August 6, 2012. Yes they can recall me anytime they wish now, but hopefully I will be waving bye bye to columbus after the May 7, 2012 elections. Now that would be fair play. Jeff Bennett
Jeff, I can not answer for the union rules but as one diagnosed with carpel tunnel in both hands, I can speak to that. Disability??? Really? You take aspirin to help with swelling and wear a wrist brace to keep your wrist inflexible until the swelling goes down. Your fingers still move, you can still open ketchup bottles and eat without assistance and even do activities of daily living without assistance. My understanding is similar to yours, disability is not a license to be paid by multiple sources. I would suspect being out on disability and taking a job requiring wrist action, like taking notes etc would pretty much fly in the face of workmen's comp.
ReplyDeleteI, for one, am pretty disgusted with the whole thing. I, as an employer (tax payer here and all) do not take kindly to being lied to by an employee. It is clear to me we all were re: K&P being rehired. Wilder's comment was laughable.
However, as a member of the board, would you answer this? What sought of indemnification does the town provide for acts of false witness? Is knowingly lying in connection with your position actionable? Is there a code of conduct, ethics pledge, anything of that nature you must swear to and/or sign, preferably the later. What bounds exist for selectmen or can they rob, cheat, steal, and lie with impunity? I think the only way to clean up this mess is via legal means, as in pressing formal charges. Of course, that would imply they violated anything.
Walt,
ReplyDeleteAll elected officials are REQUIRED to take the Ethics test which is administered online. Once the test is completed a certificate of completion is supposed to be on file with the Town Clerk. The issue in Templeton is that the Three stooges just rehired K&P as town counsel.
The Ethics Commission and Public Records division of the secretary of State's office are wholly owned subsidiaries of Kopelman and Paige. I have a number of rulings from Ethics and public records to support this assertion.
Do you think K&P has a financial interest in coming back to town? Could this be a conflict of interest? You betcha! But Leonard Kopelman is the one of the key people instrumental in drafting these new Ethics laws. So how far do you think you would get filing an ethics complaint against K&P?
Julie
I don't know, based one what I've heard, that represents a conflict of interest to K&P. K&P, just like the current law firms want, more than a one shot infusion of cash, recurring revenue. This is why I suspect the town is about to get sued by the now previous law firm(s). If I had to guess I'd say the contract was for services rendered between two dates. If the town, without cause, prematurely terminated the contract, it is a loss of recurring revenue, ergo a loss, ergo they have a right to claim damages incurred. Wanting to build a business revenue stream is not conflict of interest. On the other hand, if Wilder, Columbus, and Mullins had a financial interest in bring back K&P, that IS a conflict of interest, fiduciary malfeasance, and I am sure a few more charges.
DeleteREQUIRED viewing of an ethics training does not, by itself, mean a REQUIRED adherence to ethical action. This is what I was asking about. Where I work, there is required continual training in ethics, governance, legal compliance, business practices etc, designed to keep my employer out of law suits, especially the ones that end with a guilty verdict. Having taken the courses does not mandate legal compliance. Terms of employment do. The courses are merely to negate an excuse of "I didn't know".
I would have thought the town solicitor would be required to be in attendance for any board meeting in order to keep people with no legal training from doing things illegal, immoral, and unethical. To protect the TOWN not necessarily, a board member. As a tax payer, strictly speaking, I don't care about Columbus' legal exposure, but I care a great deal about the town's legal exposure.
Walt,
ReplyDeleteOnce a contract is signed it becomes a public document. The contract with Blatman, Bobrowski & Mead (BBM) is a public document. The contract, if there is one, with Kopelman & Paige is a public document. The difference between the contracts with the two law firms is that the contract with BBM was a flat fee agreement which included office hours/month and/or attendance at BOS meetings. There is no clause that BBM would attend ALL BOS meetings.
Word on the street is that an attorney for BBM was contacted before the BOS Meeting on Thursday Feb. 16th by Lenny himself and told that BBM would be losing the Town of Templeton's business on Thursday.
If K&P attends a meeting, which they did (rarely), the town had to pay the hourly rate ($165/hour + travel). The BOS had a few hearings where attorneys from K&P attended. K&P ALWAYS charged an hourly rate. Just make a public record request for K&P invoices from prior years. When and if you receive those invoices, they will be so heavily redacted as to be worthless, but it's worth a try.
Town of Templeton Legal Expenditures
with Kopelman & Paige
FY 2005 $192,213.54
FY 2006 $124,221.42
FY 2007 $88,573.35
FY 2008 $114,935.84
FY 2009 $106,916.63
FY 2010 $83,639.26
FY 2011 $91,587.85
Just wondering...was legal councel(BBM) notified of "emergency meeting" held on Thursday February 16th...the meeting to replace them?
ReplyDeleteThat's a very good question - I will check with Jeff Ritter the town ccordinator - There is a rumor that Leonard Kopelman called BBM and told them that they were going to be fired. I'm trying to verify this - that would meam that the selectmen lied when they all said that they had not had any contact with K & P prior to the meeting.
ReplyDelete