Mayor, city councilor spar over city appointments

Date: 1/24/2012

Jan. 25, 2012

By Debbie Gardner

debbieg@thereminder.com

WESTFIELD — It was a case of “he said, he said” when Mayor Daniel Knapik and At Large City Councilor David A. Flaherty recently traded barbs over the issue of governmental transparency in regards to recent Planning Board vacancies and reappointments.

Their comments were distributed to the media through emails, one forwarded to all city councilors and media representatives by City Clerk Karen Fanion at the request of Mayor Daniel Knapik. Flaherty’s response was also forwarded to the media.

The Planning Board issue evolved from Knapik’s decision in early December not to renew the appointment of the city’s former Director of Planning and Community Development, Lawrence Smith.

Smith, who had served in the position for 11 years, left on Dec. 5. Three members of the Planning Board, Andrew Denardo, Anthony J. Petrucelli, Jr. and Dori-Ann Ference, submitted their resignations or chose not apply for reappointment shortly after Smith’s departure.

According to the city’s Development Officer Jeff Daley, “no project has been delayed” to date, despite the city’s lack of a Director of Planning and Community Development and a functioning Planning Board.

Daley added that the city had engaged the services of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission shortly after Smith’s departure to advice Westfield on planning issues until a Senior Planner — a newly created city position that was being advertised — was selected. He expected that position to be filled sometime in March.

The newly created senior planner position is not the same as the position Smith held with the city. Daley said during the next few weeks the mayor’s office would be working with the city council “to put together funding and a job description so we can hire a community development director,” with the hopes of filling that position by July.

Prior to the Jan. 5 City Council meeting Knapik submitted four names for consideration and appointment to the Planning Board to replace those who had resigned — Jane Magarian, Ramon Rivera, Ramond St. Hilarire and Christopher Wilkie, already an alternate member –

At that meeting, Ward Four City Councilor Mary O’Connell asked that the appointments be sent to the council’s personnel subcommittee for review prior to approval.

Those appointments came out of committee for consideration at the Jan. 19 meting. City Clerk Karen Fanion confirmed that those appointments, and all other communications from the mayor were approved, though there was “some discussion” about the Planning Board appointees.

Reminder Publications received the following email from Knapik last Friday afternoon, addressed to City Council president Christopher Keefe:

“Having watched last night’s night’s council meeting, I felt it was important to clarify a few items as representations were made that misrepresent the truth,” Knapik wrote.

In his letter, Knapik organized his comments by topics, which is the manner in which they are presented below:

“Statements concerning the Planning Board resignations”

“It had come to my attention that three members of the Planning Board were going to resign over the non-renewal of [Lawrence] Smith’s contract The Ward 2 [Planning Board] member requested a meeting with me, which we had. Additionally, I had a telephone conversation with the [Planning Board] chairman. In each of those conversations, I had indicated that I appreciated their work and that I would like them to stay on. However, if they felt they needed to resign, that we needed to move forward and if that was their choice, then I asked that they submit a letter of resignation by the end of the week in which we spoke. I asked the chairman to communicate that to the rest of the membership. As you know, three members who were very public in their offers of resignation, resigned.”



“Statements concerning the Mayor did this without a plan.”

“As you know, I don’t do anything without a plan. And in fact, once Mr. Smith was told that he would not be retained, we immediately engaged the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission [PVPC]. The PVPC staff perform planning functions for a number of communities either as contract employees or vendors and they are recognized as experts in the field. Contract authorization was performed immediately. Additionally, due to three resignations, new nominations of candidates were submitted immediately to the council for consideration. To think that I wouldn’t provide expert advice to the board is ridiculous.



“Statements concerning the Mayor stacking this board with candidates of his own choosing and without experience so that he can ‘jam’ through his projects.”

“If memory serves me right, seven At-Large candidates were elected two years ago to the City Council, because their names appeared on the ballot and seven spots were open. Some of those candidates had no experience. And the city somehow has survived that. There is not a prerequisite knowledge requirement to serve our city. According to our charter, the mayor submits names to the council for consideration. And as has been the tradition over the years, (many names as stated at the meeting) come to the mayor’s attention through City Council recommendations. Additionally, this office has had recurrent press releases and press articles about the need for our fellow citizens to serve their city. This city has a large number of commission and board seats to fill and in this day and age, many people simply are to busy to participate. I appreciate all the citizens that step forward to serve their city and that service should not be demeaned.

“The thought that somehow I would stack a board or commission with hand-picked nominations so that I could some how ‘jam’ through projects (as if these citizens would somehow be beholden to do what I ask) is offensive. But in the two years I have been mayor, I have come to expect that commentary from that particular city councilor who has had a two-year history of sending veiled threats to me and on one occasion to my wife.”

Shortly after Reminder Publications received the above comments from Knapik, it received the following response from Councilor Flaherty, who identified himself as “that particular councilor.”



“Dear Mr. Mayor,”

“I have made no veiled threats and I challenge you to produce one piece of documentation that proves otherwise. Asking questions, expressing opinions, and seeking public records and compliance with appropriate laws are not ‘veiled threats.’. Regarding your wife, I only communicated with her once by private message on Facebook in regard to insulting offense comments she posted publicly. I did this in private so as to not have a conversation that might embarrass the first lady in public. Maybe I was a little direct and snappy, but at least I

tried to do it in private – which is more than I can say for you and her. You’ve made it public by talking about it here and by relaying your/her opinions to your friends who posted things on the internet.

“If you'd like me to show the thread to everyone I will.  As I said to you privately, I am sorry I communicated with her privately, I thought it was appropriate at the time, but looking back at the vitriolic reaction, I’m sorry I did it and I won't be doing it again. By the way, as you know, I was subsequently verbally attacked by her in a restaurant shortly after the election (she went out of her way to get off of her stool and approach me as I was leaving), and I responded calmly and professionally and told her that I had nothing to say to her and that you were a big enough man to speak for yourself. Sorry if you found this offensive or in the category of a ‘veiled’ threat.

“These are the only two times, in my entire lifetime, that I recall ever having any communication with your wife.

“I have received from you directly, and from others that you communicate with, nasty, offensive, and inappropriate communications on several occasions. If you’d like me to prepare a summary and forward them to everyone, I’d be happy to. I’m actually shocked that in this day and age, you actually write some of this stuff in emails and text messages. So as not to ‘misrepresent the truth,’ why don’t you start by telling everyone about the special ‘wave’ you and your wife have for Mayor Boulanger?

“Our role, as a separate branch of government, and my role as an elected official serving the best interests of the public, is to do our own due diligence before rubber stamping everything the executive branch sends our way. I’m sorry if you take offense to questions and

differences of opinion.

“Regarding appointments vs elected positions .... They are not comparable. Sad to say, but there are no skill or experience requirements to be elected. I’d love to see folks pass a test before being eligible to get on the ballot to serve in such important positions, but that’s not the way our system works. You believe I lack in people and political skills (and probably a long list of other things), and I have my own opinions of you as well. We can’t change that, we’re all entitled to our opinion, and we all serve at the will of the people who elect us. However, when we have choices about hiring people, or approving nominations, we can and should certainly look for the best candidates. I am thankful we have so many wonderful people who are willing to serve our city, but I also believe our role is not just to rubber-stamp every person with a pulse that you send our way.

“We can do better than that, and the people we serve deserve better than that.

“Regarding planning... most people plan in advance. You blew it here, and you directly led to the ‘voluntary resignations’ of the long-term dedicated capable planning board members and the ensuing chaos. If you really had a plan, maybe you would have engaged the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission before terminating Larry so that they would have been up-to-speed on day one.

“Maybe you would have talked with the planning board members in advance and told them what the plan was, told them how much you appreciated their efforts, and that you hope they'd stay on and work within your plan for the best interest of the city.

“How about the planning related to the HR Department? How many lawsuits are we going to have to pay out on because you didn't prepare and now the city doesn't have adequate documentation or witnesses? We just had a meeting where we learned that we had to pay a good amount of retroactive pay and rehire an employee who was justifiably terminated.

“How’s that serve the best interest of the city or demonstrate your ‘planning?”

Regards,

Dave Flaherty

"That particular councilor”