Absurdity Alert - Condition Red.
By Jim Conley • Apr 14th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
I think my head is going to explode.
Last Tuesday, the Brookline Selectmen appointed special counsel to represent them and other town officers in the matter of Arthur Conquest’s complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. (Can’t pay for teachers, but billable hours are another thing.)
And who did they hire? Why, our old friend DM Moschos of Merick O’Conell in Worcester.
Moschos was the J.D. whom Town Administrator Richard Kelliher and Town Counsel Jennifer Dopazo paid a couple of G’s to advise them that it was perfectly legal for Brookline taxpayers to cover DPW Commissioner A. Thomas DeMaio’s $11 thousand legal bill—paid to former Selectman Jeffrey Allen—stemming from the Michael Sher/footbridge grant donnybrook [see posts].
Moschos rendered his “advice letter” saying that DeMaio was entitled to indemnification on the assumption that the Commissioner had been cleared in an investigation. (He hadn’t.) But Moschos was led to believe he had by Dopazo. And when Moschos learned that DeMaio hadn’t been cleared…nothing changed.
As I said then, Moschos is the perfect chump for the Selectmen, Dopazo and Kelliher. He probably believes that Dopazo had to defuse a bomb on her way to calling the police that May evening.
Update: More absurdity. Word is that the Town will have to hire a lawyer to advise them on whether town meeting can act on the warrant article (it’s really a resolution) that urges the Conquest matter be addressed by the panel reviewing the police department’s policy on citizen complaints.
So much for representative town meeting being the “purest form of democracy.”
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
Was the decision to hire outside counsel attributable to (a) the lack of expertise within Town Counsel’s office to handle this matter, (b) the lack of adequate legal staff in Town Counsel’s office, (c) concern that with Town Counsel herself as a witness that there would be an actual or potential conflict of interest if the matter were handled by Town Counsel’s office (including by the ATC who is married to the President of the BPD union), (d) concern with potential personal liability on the part of certain Town officers which might require indemnification, (e) all of the preceding or (f) some other mysterious reason?
As to Dopazo’s calling the police, did she make one or two calls, on 911 or the non-emergency BPD telephone number? Lt.. Burke’s October 10, 2007 report indicates she made the first 911 call and Dopazo’s reportedly testified that she called the non-emergency BPD number from her office (not on her cell phone from the scene).
Town Counsel’s office is a small law firm. It should have versatility in municipal and related law. The Town of Brookline is an employer. Discrimination issues may surface from time to time that may involve the MCAD. While Conquest is not a Town employee, his access to the MCAD may be an appropriate venue to address his issues with the BPD and the Town. Town Counsel’s office also represents the Town’s various departments. So why is the Conquest matter being farmed out? Dealing with the MCAD is not legal rocket science. I have suggested possible reasons in the preceding comment for this outsourcing. Whether this decision is proper or not, there should be concern with what Town Counsel’s office actually does and doesn’t do. Perhaps TM might address this in more detail this fall at its anticipated special meeting. TM might go back into its historic bowels to back when the Town did not have full-time, in house Town Counsel and the reasons why eventually the decision was made to establish full-time in house Town Counsel. (There were financial issues involved, of course.) Town Counsel’s office has grown, at least in numbers and costs, since then. Let the examination focus not only on what Town Counsel’s office does but what it doesn’t do regarding legal matters involving the Town with four (4) full time attorneys. With three (3) attorneys serving on the Board of Selectmen, one might think that they would have been concerned over the years with the productivity of Town Counsel’s office. Brookline is the home of THE COUNTRY CLUB, a private endeavor. I raise the question whether Town Hall (soon to be our own Taj M’Hall) is its municipal version, but supported with public funds? There is to be considered this evening by the Selectmen the hiring of an attorney to be added to Town Counsel’s office. Taxpayers being asked to pay more with the override have to tighten their belts. What about the Town? Maybe the Town should get rid of its administrative “Trans-fats” by becoming more productive.
Re: Update
BROOKLINE’S FULL EMPLOYMENT FOR ATTORNEYS POLICY
Maybe it’s time to come out of my semi-retirement with all the potential “lucre for lawyers” program of our Town. Years ago there seemed to be a full employment policy for landscape architects (aka gardeners) in Brookline. Now it’s time for legal fertility to flower. By the way, Mike Merrill’s year of “probation” expires in May, perhaps too late for him to get this legal gig.