NORTHAMPTON — The City Council denied Thursday that it had violated the state’s Open Meeting Law at a public session during which the Northampton Police Department’s budget was cut by 10%, directly responding to two city police unions who brought forward the allegations in an apparent attempt to reverse the decision to cut funding.
At a special meeting, councilors responded to two separate complaints filed against the City Council by the New England Police Benevolent Association Locals 186 and 187, two of the city’s police unions, which allege that some city councilors had privately communicated with each other during a recess of a June 18 public meeting, changing some councilors’ minds on votes pertaining to the department’s budget.
“I believe that investigation in this matter will reveal that some of if not all of the councilors participated in communication with each other or were aware that other councilors participated in communication with each other,” NEPBA Local 187’s complaint reads.
City Solicitor Alan Seewald told the City Council during Thursday’s meeting that councilors could opt to conduct an independent investigation of the allegations, “or you can self-disclose.”
Seewald argued that virtual meetings created new legal questions as to what constitutes a violation of the Open Meeting Law. He said he took the position that “a conversation between two councilors at a recess is not a violation” of the law as a quorum of five members present is what is currently necessary for a legal violation. But the city solicitor did say he spoke to an assistant attorney general who “would not commit to that position.”
Ward 6 Councilor Marianne LaBarge — who was a central figure of one of the allegations — made a statement of innocence early in Thursday’s meeting, saying that she did not talk to any other councilor during the recess and even providing a letter from her brother stating she had a phone conversation with him during that time.
Councilors were quick to dismiss NEPBA Local 186’s complaint because of LaBarge’s vehement denial; she was accused of deciding to “change her vote” on the Police Department’s budget cut after speaking with Ward 5 Councilor Alex Jarrett during the recess. LaBarge never changed her vote on the Police Department’s budget cut because that vote was never retaken; she did vote yes on the full budget with the Police Department’s cut included.
The second complaint, filed by NEPBA Local 187, was a much broader accusation, Seewald said. In addition to LaBarge, councilors John Thorpe, Bill Dwight, Gina-Louise Sciarra, Jim Nash, Michael Quinlan, Jr. and Karen Foster each made clear declarations that they had no conversations with one another during the recess. Dwight did admit to texting Sciarra but only to notify her that one of the councilors’ microphones was still broadcasting during the recess.
“The complainants are directly impacted by the referenced vote, they’re not happy about the outcome of the vote, and so they want the vote undone,” said Ward 7 Councilor Rachel Maiore. “It’s clear we’ve already established, based on the statutes, that there was no quorum.”
Jarrett said he saw the complaints as “an attempt to intimidate,” or perhaps “just a lack of understanding of the Open Meeting Law.”
“I think no reasonable person would suspect that a quorum of councilors, which is five, communicated with each other in that 13-minute period,” Jarrett said.
The council unanimously voted to charge Seewald with writing a letter to the unions “reporting the conclusions we have come to, and we find both complaints lacking,” Dwight said. Representatives from NEPBA Local 186 declined to comment; NEPBA Local 187 could not be reached by 5 p.m. Friday.
The unions will have the opportunity to file the complaint with the state attorney general’s Division of Open Government if they are not satisfied with the City Council’s response.
Michael Connors can be reached at mconnors@gazettenet.com.