Sirois v. Glocester Town Council, 103020 RIAGO, AGO OM 20-50

Case DateOctober 30, 2020
CourtRhode Island
Sirois
v.
Glocester Town Council
AGO OM 20-50
No. OM 20-50
Rhode Island Attorney General Opinion
State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
October 30, 2020
         Mr. Jason Sirois          Timothy F. Kane, Town Solicitor, Town of Glocester          RE: Sirois v. Glocester Town Council          Dear Mr. Sirois and Attorney Kane:          The investigation into the Open Meetings Act (“OMA”) complaint filed by Mr. Jason Sirois (“Complainant”) against the Glocester Town Council (“Council”) is complete. For the reasons set forth herein, we find that the Council did not violate the OMA.          Background          The Complainant alleges that sometime between May 1, 2020 and May 5, 2020 the Council violated the OMA by discussing Complainant’s employment outside of a properly noticed public meeting. During its May 7, 2020 meeting, the Council publicly voted to accept the Public Works Director’s recommendation to not offer a permanent position to Complainant, who was a probationary employee.          The Council submitted a substantive response through counsel, Timothy F. Kane, Esquire, including affidavits from all five members of the Council. Attorney Kane states that, “[o]n or about May 1, 2020 [he] received a telephone call from the Glocester DPW director informing [him] that Mr. Sirois’ probationary employment period would expire on May 9, 2020 and that the DPW director would not be recommending Mr. Sirois for further employment with the Town of Glocester.” After Attorney Kane’s conversation with the Glocester DPW director, Attorney Kane states that he “called Glocester Town Council President George O. Steere, Jr. and informed him of my conversation with the DPW director and that the matter was in order to be scheduled for the next Town Council meeting namely, May 7, 2020.”          Based upon the affidavits submitted by Council President Steere and Council members Julian Forgue and Patricia Henry, Council President Steere had a conversation with Council member Forgue and also had a conversation with Council member Henry regarding the subject of scheduling the topic of Complainant’s job performance on the May 7, 2020 meeting agenda. Council President Steere and Council members Forgue and Henry each attest that they “do not recall discussing Mr. Sirois’ job performance” with any other councilmember between May 1 and May 5, 2020, although Council members Forgue and Henry “may” have had a telephone conversation with each other during the relevant time period “with respect to scheduling the subject of Mr. Sirois’ job performance for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT