WELLFLEET — More than a year after a closed select board meeting led to a schism among board members and former Town Administrator Rich Waldo, the mostly unredacted minutes of that meeting have finally been released. They reveal a remarkably confused board whose members did not even know what they were supposed to be discussing in secret.
The minutes were published following the state attorney general’s office ruling last month that the meeting and the release of heavily redacted minutes of that session violated the Open Meeting Law. The newly released minutes, with just one paragraph censored, outline the origins of a conflict that ultimately led to the board’s reorganization and Waldo’s resignation.
The June 27, 2023 executive session, closed to the public, had been held “to hear complaints against a public official or employee,” according to the meeting’s agenda. But the unredacted minutes, along with emails between town officials leading up to the meeting, which were obtained by the Independent, reveal confusion over who the complaints were actually about.
Then-chair Ryan Curley thought the complaints were about Waldo. In fact, they were about the select board itself.
While staff members initially wrote to Curley requesting an executive session to discuss their complaints, the meeting revolved almost entirely around Waldo. That was because of an email Curley sent to Waldo on June 19, a week after receiving the request from town staff.
According to the meeting minutes, the other board members believed that Curley’s email to Waldo amounted to an “ultimatum” demanding that Waldo resign or he would be fired. They saw the email, which Curley sent without approval from the board, as an abuse of power. Later, in open meetings, the board voted to replace Curley as chair with Barbara Carboni.
Asking for ‘Open Conversations’
During a meeting with department heads in early June, town staff told Waldo that they had complaints they wished to bring to the select board. Executive Assistant Rebekah Eldridge emailed Curley on June 12 asking for a meeting “where we can have open conversations,” according to a copy of the email obtained by the Independent. “Sooner rather than later would be in the best interest of everyone so we don’t lose more staff.”
On June 19, Curley wrote to Waldo notifying him of his intent to hold an executive session to review complaints against Waldo. “Strictly as a personal opinion I think it would be in the town’s best interest to retain your services through at least the fall special town meeting,” Curley wrote. “I will give you thought [sic] the end of the day tomorrow to consider how you would like to proceed.”
According to the executive session’s minutes, select board member Michael DeVasto said he received a call from Waldo the next morning describing Curley’s email and his intent to resign by the end of the day. DeVasto expressed shock “that an email like this would be sent to him without any interaction or approval from the rest of the board,” the minutes read. DeVasto called Curley’s email “reckless” and “inappropriate.”
Eldridge told the board that she had requested a meeting to discuss complaints against the select board, not against Waldo. “It had nothing to do with Rich,” Eldridge told the Independent. “Most of the staff was behind him.” Eldridge thought that Curley had misunderstood her email and assumed that the complaints were about Waldo.
According to an email sent to the board from Town Counsel Carolyn Murray of KP Law notifying them of the meeting, Murray also believed the complaints were about Waldo.
“Certain department heads requested to meet with the Select Board to discuss issues related to the Town Administrator,” Murray wrote on June 19. “I think that all parties would prefer to come to a mutually acceptable agreement with respect to Mr. Waldo’s continued employment.”
During the June 27 closed meeting, board members questioned Curley on whether there were specific complaints against Waldo. “He didn’t answer,” the minutes read. The question was asked again. “He stated he couldn’t say if there was a specific complaint. He stated there have been many over the past year,” the minutes say.
In an interview with the Independent, Curley said he intended the meeting to be a preliminary discussion on how to handle complaints brought to the board by town staff. “It got turned around into something that it was not,” Curley said. “I wanted a way to identify legitimate issues that needed to be addressed.” Those issues, Curley said, were about both Waldo and the select board.
Waldo declined to comment for this article, instead referring a reporter to his attorney, Bruce Bierhans. Curley’s email to Waldo and the following executive session, Bierhans said, “constituted an unsubstantiated and unsupported attack on Rich. Whether these actions were defamatory is still an open issue.”
“We nearly lost a town administrator that day because of the chair’s unilateral action,” DeVasto stated during the meeting, according to the minutes.
Six months later, Waldo submitted his resignation. At a select board meeting earlier in December, Director of Community Services Suzanne Grout Thomas read aloud a letter on behalf of town staff decrying a lack of support from the select board. That letter, Eldridge told the Independent, was what town staff had hoped to bring to the select board in June.
The AG’s Decision
The June 27 executive session had been the subject of much conjecture since the select board’s reorganization and the release of an almost entirely redacted version of the minutes in November. Town Counsel Murray advised in a copy of the redacted minutes that the content of the meeting fell within the personnel exemption to the Open Meeting Law.
Murray’s redactions were appealed separately by two residents, Jude Ahern and Michael Shannon, and were ultimately overturned by the attorney general’s office earlier this summer. In her written decisions, Assistant Attorney General Carrie Benedon found that the board’s closed meeting and the censored minutes did not fall within the scope of the law.
“The fact that a topic may be of a sensitive nature does not itself constitute permissible grounds for discussion in executive session,” Benedon wrote.
Select board member Barbara Carboni, who is a lawyer, defended Murray’s decision, stating that she believes the meeting did in fact fall within the personnel exemption of the Open Meeting Law and that the unredacted minutes did not need to be released.
“Based on my 20 years of experience as a municipal attorney, I believed and continue to believe that Attorney Murray provided the Board with sound legal guidance and advice,” Carboni wrote. “I was surprised by the Attorney General’s determination requiring release of the executive session minutes.”
But, she added, she hopes the released minutes will end a much-contested chapter and lead to better trust. “I think the Board and the public are well-served at this time by disclosure and transparency,” she said.