Rotondi hearing due in next 90 days
Published on May 19th, 2004
STONEHAM, MA - The town's Finance and Advisory Board considered formally conceding responsibility on Monday night for the hurricane of controversy that continues to swirl around Town Moderator Michael Rotondi's ill-fated $5 raise.
Reacting to news that the state's Ethics Commission will conduct a public hearing to determine whether Rotondi's actions at last May's Town Meeting violated the conflict of interest law, Finance and Advisory Board Chairman John Warren opined that the Finance Board should shoulder some blame for the controversy.
"Maybe there was a wrong-doing [by Rotondi]. But I don't think so and he's taking a lot of heat for this," said Warren. "As a result of the action taken against the Town Moderator and the duties of the Finance Board, I think we have to take responsibility."
According to Warren, department heads such as Rotondi shouldn't be forced to speak about budget expenditures, as such warrant articles are sponsored by the Board of Selectmen or Town Administrator and reviewed by the Finance Board.
"How many department heads were at the last Town Meeting to defend their budgets? That's the responsibility of the Finance Board and the Board of Selectmen. So Mike seems to be in a position that other department heads aren't put in," Warren remarked in a post-meeting interview.
While Rotondi didn't comment personally on the Ethics Commission's order to show cause and subsequent call for public proceedings, he did issue a statement through his Medford attorney welcoming the opportunity to defend himself.
"It's difficult commenting because it's early in the process and Mr. Rotondi hasn't had the opportunity to hear the specific facts behind the allegations. But he welcomes this hearing so he can confront his accusers and listen to those facts," said attorney Joseph Spinale. "He feels confident his position will be vindicated when all the information comes to light."
According to Ethics Commission spokesperson Carol Carson, Rotondi faces up to $6000 in civil penalties if found guilty for three separate violations of the commonwealth's conflict of interest laws.
"What comes next is essentially a public hearing. One of the commissioners will serve as a hearing officer and one of our enforcement division attorneys will act as the prosecutor. The responder would then be able to submit his own evidence in his defense," said Carson, explaining that Rotondi's trial-like public hearing will begin within the next 90 days.
Supporting a long-standing defense by Rotondi that other town officials knew about the raise, Finance Board members Jim Grayson and Richard Gregorio disclosed that they received an Email from Town Administrator David Berry two hours prior to the start of last May's Town Meeting discussing the $5 raise. While Berry wasn't sure if he still had a copy of the correspondence, he admitted knowing that the transfer was related to Rotondi's pension.
"I just remember that he told me that it had something to do with his pension and that although he didn't think he would need it, he wanted the transfer just in case," Berry recalled.
According to Berry, he was unable to speak about the issue at Town Meeting because he was copying handouts for the assembly at the time the warrant article came up. However, Berry stood by claims that he briefly explained to Selectmen Tony Kennedy and Charlie Smith the raise's relationship to Rotondi's pension at a Board of Selectmen meeting held a half-hour prior to Town Meeting.
"I think I explained to them at the meeting that it had something to do with his pension. I'm pretty sure I did although they may not remember that," Berry said.
In addition, Berry also recalls seeing Rotondi explaining the raise's impacts to former Selectman Mary Pecoraro.
"He might have also explained it to Mary in the hallway just prior to Town Meeting," said Berry. "But I also remember [Rotondi] saying he was going to explain it at Town Meeting."
While Kennedy didn't specifically recall whether Berry told the Selectmen that the $5 raise was related to his pension, he admitted it was a likely possibility. However, Kennedy added that he had no idea that Rotondi requested the raise in an attempt to circumvent the retirement board's decision to deny his pension because he didn't make more than $200 -- a potential abuse of his Town Moderator position that the Ethic's Commission will mull over during the public hearing.
"He probably did say that it had something to do with his pension. But we didn't find out until afterwards that the retirement board had denied his request for a pension. I would have never known that had I not learned about it [after Town Meeting]," Kennedy explained.
While Kennedy felt Berry could have disclosed the relationship between the raise and Rotondi's pension, Smith flatly denied ever hearing the town administrator mention such a possibility.
"He never said that once and that's what I said when I was subpoenaed to the Ethic's Commission. I don't know why Dave would say that. I just think it was one of those things Dave just let slide and he didn't think at the time that it was going to blow up like this. I honestly believe he's trying to get himself out of that," said Smith.
According to Stoneham resident Terri Ghannam, who successfully petitioned for a special Town Meeting last July to rescind the raise, Rotondi's comments at last May's Town Meeting speak volumes about his culpability. Saying she is glad that Rotondi has been called before the Ethics Commission, Ghannam hopes the proceedings will send a message to other town officials who might have a conflict of interest.
"Let it not only be a lesson to the moderator, let it be a lesson to all the public officials who have a conflict of interest," said Ghannam, who explained her part in the controversy after being summoned to the Ethics Commission earlier this year. According to Gregorio, who has defended Rotondi throughout the past year, the Ethics Commission denied him the opportunity to submit his own version of last May's events. Saying he was unable to go before the commission due to work responsibilities, Gregorio claimed he implored the commission to meet with him at a time other than normal work hours to no avail.
"I plan to challenge them on that at the open hearing. As the chair of the Finance Board at the time, it was the Finance Board, the Town Administrator and Board of Selectmen's responsibility," vented Gregorio.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!