Following an impassioned discussion about a confidential personnel document that was leaked to the local media, apparently by a fellow member of the Batavia City Council, Council President Charlie Mallow said whomever leaked the document violated the trust of citizens and fellow council members and should resign immediately.
There is no way, Mallow said, that the council members can hold another executive session with any degree of confidence that what is discussed in closed session will remain confidential.
Mallow doesn't plan to call any further closed sessions on any matter during the remainder of his term as council president, which is about two months.
"If you cannot protect one of your citizens, protect your staff and follow your word, you don’t belong here," Mallow said. "I would expect them to resign. Absolutely. I don’t know how the citizens of the city wouldn’t expect someone to resign. If you have no integrity and you are not out there to protect the interests of our citizens, what are you doing here? You don’t belong here."
He then added, "That’s how the majority of the council feels. This is a betrayal. It’s a dirty betrayal."
And on the specific issue, Mallow said, the council is now stymied on dealing with it because nobody wants to go into executive session and risk having their statements leaked to the media.
"If there’s potential for further litigation on that matter, I can’t discuss it," Mallow said, "and that's a shame, because it needs to be discussed. It’s important. There’s an important matter there that needs to be discussed."
Mallow said one of his great disappointments is that a citizen who brought forward a complaint to the city with the intention that it be kept confidential was betrayed.
"They wanted the problem solved, not to make a spectacle of things," Mallow said. "They wanted a problem solved and they went to their government to do that and we didn’t. We failed them."
It was Councilman Frank Ferrando who brought the issue of the leak up at the close of Monday night's conference meeting. Ferrando called the leak a betrayal.
"There’s no reason to go behind closed doors if in fact everything can be shared," Ferrando said. "Let’s do it here, because I don’t want someone else telling someone what I said. I’ll say it myself. ...
"I will not go into executive session unless it’s stated clearly in council rules that what happens in executive session stays in executive session."
At one point, Ferrando turned to Daily News reporter Joanne Beck and said, “I want to say to Joanne Beck right now, if I’m the person who disclosed that letter, put it in the paper, I want people to know, because I know it wasn’t me."
Councilwoman Kathy Briggs also released Beck from any confidentiality agreement saying, "I know it wasn't me."
Beck reported the leak, and Mallow's criticism of it, Sept. 25. She disclosed that the Daily News received a copy of a letter accusing City Manager Jason Molino of "unprofessional and unethical behavior." The newspaper did not reveal the name of the letter's author, which Mallow praised as an example of good ethics. Beck did not disclose any other details of the letter or what prompted the complaint. Mallow characterized the accusations leak as a "witch hunt" but would not comment further at that time (regarding correction in this graph, see Charlie's comment below).
Mallow's commentary: Piecing things together, it appears that a member of the City Council called the author of the letter following the closed session and disclosed in some detail what was discussed in the session. That letter writer then contacted at least four council members and discussed the substance of what that person was told. It does not appear that Council member disclosed to Beck any of the closed session conversation. The Council member who called the letter writer may or may not be the same Council member who leaked the letter to the Daily News. I think they are two different people. At least, that's my best speculation as to the sequence of events based on available information.
Audio:
- Frank Ferrando
- Charlie Mallow 1
- Charlie Mallow 2
- City Attorney George Van Nest
NOTE: The two files above were recorded with my computer. The sound quality is just good enough so you can hear what Frank, and George are saying. Charlie was recorded with my iPhone and there is a bit of background noise on the first clip, though Charlie is quite audible. I include Van Nest even though I don't quote him above because his comments are interesting, especially since he notes that council has, as I've said before, discretion on whether to enter executive session on many topics. The council is rarely required by law to go into closed session. It's merely an option.
There should be no secrets.
There should be no secrets. We pay ur salary u work for us we should know what dirty little secrets u are keeping from us.
Executive session is not
Executive session is not about keeping secrets. It's about protecting privacy. I ask you, Mary, if someone made an accusation about you to your boss; would you want to read about it in tomorrow's paper?
As I've written before,
As I've written before, executive session can be abused. It can become really convenient to just bounce into executive session any time an elected body wants to discuss something privately even though that may not be the most transparent way to conduct business and it's a real gray area as to the appropriateness of executive session. Executive session can become a crutch for an unwillingness to deal with uncomfortable issues in public.
That said, I've also said, personnel matters are in fact one of those things that should be discussed in private (there may be exceptions, but I can't think of any right now). This is not about keeping secrets. It's a privacy issue. Every individual in this country has a right to privacy. In a highly charged political environment, such as city government, no employee -- even the highest ranking -- should be subjected to gossip and unsubstantiated allegations getting discussed publicly. If the matter turns into something like a lawsuit or substantial disciplinary action (and there are caveats with that one), then it probably needs to be made public. But until then, during the period where it is just allegations, it's a private matter between employee and employer.
I'm not sure how I would have handled this letter had it been leaked to me first, but I'd like to think I would have handled it with some sensitivity to the personnel/personal nature of it and would have not have gotten too carried away with "scoop."
Howard, let me clarify
Howard, let me clarify something. The accusation that came from one of our citizens is far from s witch hunt. That is an issue that council needs to handle. I was referring to what was done with the letter and the leak by Council.
Why is it when Jason Molino
Why is it when Jason Molino does something good it's plastered all over the news, but when he does something bad it's none of our business?
Dennis, Let's be fair. When
Dennis,
Let's be fair.
When something good comes our way, as a community, it should be plastered all over.
However, when accusations of "unprofessional and unethical behavior" are tossed about, then the issue should be handled as a personnel matter with the privacy each of us would expect if it happen to any of us.
If the accusations of "unprofessional and unethical behavior" prove to be true, then let's allow due process to take it's course, no different from what we would expect if it happen to us.
Dennis, If the person who
Dennis,
If the person who made the complaint wants it public, all they have to do is say so and go public on their own. But that person wants it kept private.
Dennis, if it was you, and you said you wnated a letter kept private, I thought you would have a right to have your wishes respected.
You and Mary say you do not think you should have that right, sad.
Another sad thing is that not every council member told the Daily News go ahead and release the name of the leaker.
John and Bea, I understand
John and Bea, I understand what you're saying, but Mr. Molino is employed by city taxpayers. We should be able to know what goes on with someone while they are under our employ.
Dennis, You are right, but
Dennis,
You are right, but the person who made the complaint does not want that. Now what?
To do what you want, the person's name needs to be made public also.
Now, maybe we need a new rule that will say if you want to make a complaint, then do it in public, no hiding. But will people come forward then and tell Council about something that is wrong?
What if it is a Council member who has the complaint made against tem? That has happened before.
Do you think Council members should be treated the same as the Manager?
I think there's a lot of
I think there's a lot of speculation about what has happened when it was probably a minor issue. When Mr. Mallow talks of possible impending lawsuits, it leads you to believe that it wasn't minor.
John,I believe anyone paid
John,I believe anyone paid with public funds is under the scrutiny of the public. I agree with the new rule you proposed, also.
The lawsuit I think Charlie
The lawsuit I think Charlie is talking about is the right the person who wrote the letter had to have this kept private. Can that person sue the city if their name gets out?
lol, John and I rarely agree
lol, John and I rarely agree on anything, so I'm savoring this moment.
I think this is getting muddled.
1. The letter was written with the expectation that it would be kept confidential.
2. The matter was discussed in private.
3. A member of council leaked the letter to the press.
4. There is a question about the possibility of the author of the letter taking action against the city since that expectation for confidentiality was breached.
John's suggestion has merit, but he also notes the problem of people NOT coming forward if they have to make their complaints in a public forum.
I could foresee the following scenario:
Citizen A tells Citizen B about an incident that involved an elected official.
Citizen B decides that the incident merits investigation.
Citizen B attends a council meeting and brings up the incident as he/she understands the circumstances.
Since it is now a matter of public record, the media reports the incident.
At this point, the public has the option to render a verdict before all the facts are presented and an investigation is complete.
That investigation takes place and it is learned that the accusation was false.
Can you put the milk back in the bottle?
Charlie is the reason council
Charlie is the reason council wants to hide this from Batavia taxpayers, because it is about one of their own? Is it something that could effect the public? Is someone not doing their job at city hall?"We The People" have a right to know, if someones conduct was not that of a public leader, IT IS OUR BUSINESS. Why would this person with the info want to keep it confidential??? HMMM I dont think he did, I think you in council did.... Its got to be pretty incriminating for you guys to be in such an uproar. I say out with it, or maybe there is a way we can find out legally, with a lawyer representing the people. We have had enough hiding behind closed doors. Funny how this was put off long enough for Jason to get his raise. WTH
Dennis, at this point, we
Dennis, at this point, we don't know that Jason did anything wrong. He is apparently accused of something, but that doesn't mean it is true.
Innocent until proven guilty, right?
That's why employees -- especially somebody in Jason's position -- have a right to privacy in these matters (and among all the possible lawsuits to consider is the one Jason would have a right to file in this case (not even remotely suggesting that he would)).
A person in Jason's position, no matter how generally well liked (and obviously, Jason has made some enemies) can be the subject of any unfounded allegations (not to disparage the person who made these allegations). Is it really fair to have made public every and all allegations made against a person when such a person could easily be the target of unfounded and untrue accusations? Believe it or not, there are people out there who are politically motivated and vindictive and will say anything to advance his cause or get even (again, speaking generally and not about the person who made this allegation), so in that environment shouldn't an employee have a right to have such accusations kept private until such a time as a person with authority to do so finds some just cause to believe there is some truth to the charges and through due process of rules/law makes that matter publicly known, as appropriate in each individual case?
Think what you will of Jason, but he got screwed on this. Whomever leaked this information treated him unfairly and unjustly. Nobody deserves to have their private personnel matters made public.
Karen, see the comment I just
Karen, see the comment I just left. The public doesn't have a right to know, not just yet. The people involved have a greater right to privacy until this is resolved. If there was final decision that went adversely against Jason, then, maybe, depending on a number of factors, then the public might have a right to know. But not yet. Not when there is NO PROOF that any accusation is true.
Howard if it is something
Howard if it is something personal, than I agree it should be kept secret, but I question what and why. The actions and gestures tell another story. Why would one of our council members leak this info if it was personal?? They wouldn't. What the hell is going on with all this secret politics in Batavia? I think its time to clear the air. We deserve to know. We pay our city leader off the sweat of our brow. Jason needs to come out of the office and clear the air.
Howard you say not yet?? What, we need to wait till they can cover their tracks?? Sweep it under the rug?? Run the paper shredder?? Theres already been enough of that this year, thank you!
I wont comment anymore Howard, but I Told You So...
Karen, See the comment I
Karen,
See the comment I posted above.
Your point of view is the VERY reason why there is an expectation of privacy.
You have already convicted the accused and the council without even knowing the particulars.
If the person, writing the letter, requested that it be kept confidential, there had to be a reason. Perhaps the allegations are murky and that person just wanted a clarification.
Give some documentation that proves your hypothesis that the council is sweeping something under the rug by respecting a request for confidentiality by a citizen.
Howard, I completely agree
Howard, I completely agree with you. I am all about open government. There were plenty of things that the city Attorney made mention of last night that I see no reason to discuss away from the public (Real Estate, etc.), but as a business manager, owner and employee myself, Allegations made against Personnel are off limits until the matter has been properly discussed and ALL parties are notified.
For anyone to say that just because someone works for a government agency they are not entitled to the same rules as someone who doesn't, is flat wrong.
Mr. Molino was ACCUSED of something by a private party and was never duly notified. He found out by reading a paper. Regardless even of executive session if you want, ALL Council members in that room with city paid Attorneys, agreed on a proper and legal method to handle this situation. One or more of those members decided to make it political. Nothing more.
I believe with all my heart that it's time to open the doors and let the citizens of Batavia in on the process. Give power back to our residents. This is not one of those issues! This was a vagrant act of politically motivated betrayal.
I'm with Mr. Barons on this one...If anyone here had that happen to them, you would be talking about, and rightly so, lawsuits against the party (s) involved.
Karen, I don't follow your
Karen, I don't follow your reasoning.
For example, you write "Why would one of our council members leak this info if it was personal??"
Well, maybe because the council member doesn't like Jason and wanted to ensure these accusations got out in public in order to embarrass him.
But the fact is, the council member had a moral and ethical and legal obligation to keep this matter confidential. regardless of what you or I think of it, that's the fact. It's not about keeping anything secret. It's about doing what one promises to do and is obligated to do.
This isn't about being secretive. It's about doing what is required by law and common decency.
Common decency. There's a
Common decency.
There's a word, well two, that a lot of people should contemplate for a good moment.
This is a perfect example of
This is a perfect example of the crap politics that everyone is fed up with at all levels of government. They should all dress up as clowns or kangaroos so they look as foolish as the act.
Karen, You could not be more
Karen,
You could not be more wrong.
The person who wrote the letter still has refused to come forward. Did that person go to last nights meeting and say anything? No.
Has that person come on this site and say anything? No.
It's clear the person does not want their name to be made public.
This could have been leaked for no other reason than the council person just doesn't like Jason. Did you ever think of that (answer: no!).
Karen, if you wrote a letter to Council about anything, and asked that your name not be made public, do you, Karen Miconi, have a right that Council respect your request? I think you do have that right, but you say you do not deserve that respect.
I am sure if what Malino did
I am sure if what Malino did was illegally it would be reported to the police..So since that hasn't happened and no laws are broken why worry about it..NO one on council would cover up any type of illegal activity ,because then they would be open to lawsuits them selfs..
But in light of all this it would of been a good idea to hold off on his raise until this matter was cleared up..
Psssts hey buddy leaking on
Psssts hey buddy leaking on the letter leaked to da news from the top secret batavia citizen under the lyon street bridge, don't tell anyone k don't want to resign. Will the real slim shady please stand up.
John, maybe the reason he
John, maybe the reason he doesn't want his name out there is because he is afraid of the backlash from council and Jason. I sir, am not, in one bit, afraid of any of them.
If I was to write a letter to council, it would have to be about something serious, FACT, and no, I wouldn't give a rats behind, if they put my name out there, just like here on the Batavian.
If this is that serious, then I think the one who should be exposed, is not the member of council who as you say "leaked info", but the ones trying to cover it up. Thats why it is important to be upfront with public information. I think the council person who leaked info, did it out of frustration. He could see a coverup in the works, and had the nuts to do something about it. I say good for you !! Mystery council person.
Use me for the scapegoat too, like you always do, why because, Im brave enough to say something, and dont need to hide under a skirt and cower. As for asking for a resignation(LOL) It wouldn't be council, I would be asking.....
We want transparency!!
Posted by Karen Miconi on
Posted by Karen Miconi on September 29, 2009 - 2:34pm
We want transparency
Too bad you won't vote for it.
Karen, 1) We don't know if it
Karen,
1) We don't know if it was a "he". From the way some of talked, it sounds like it might be a "she". Who knows?
2) Maybe the person just wanted Council to do something, but did not want this blown up this big. We don't know since that person has refused to make their name public. Maybe the city attorney can let us know if it is legal to release the name as a result of all this?
3) Maybe the council person leaked it becuase they just don't like Jason and for no other reason. Maybe they could care less about the issue or the person who sent the letter?
4) According to WBTA, at the 2 PM news, all 9 members denied being the leaker. Now we have a liar also.
Since "the leaker" is to
Since "the leaker" is to cowardly to step forward all city council members will be runnin laps around the mall er uh city hall mall centre(sp) thingy and doin pushups in the rain. Get your faces all the way down in there! THANKS ALOT MAYO.
There seems to be a lack of
There seems to be a lack of understanding here. Until the accusation is weighed on its merits, it rightly remains no more than an assertion. No one seems to be advocating concealment. The concern is for testing the accusation prior to going to the next level. That's only being fair, preventing what may be unfounded rumor from damaging an employee's reputation.
CM, you hit the nail on the
CM, you hit the nail on the head.
Hey I was told that the
Hey I was told that the school superintendant Stutzman owned income property and that he put down that he was livin in one of them so he can get the star program
Is this something that the public should know about even tho its something that was heard or is it something that should be discussed behind closed doors so we may never know if it was decided to at least investigate the matter or if it gets dropped because hes an insider.
Object lesson in rumor
Object lesson in rumor defense:
I don't like So-and-so's sarcastic sense of humor, so I'm going to make up a rumor about her. I'll say that she abducts pet kittens and grinds them up as the secret ingredient in her prize meatloaf. Her sarcasm has put off enough people; I'll drop the rumor on some she's offended and soon it will be all over town. By tomorrow, it will have ballooned to 'So-and-so is a cannibal responsible for most of the faces we see on milk cartons,' and no one will even dispute it!