A special council meeting in the town of Corning last month has led to distrust from some residents and prompted a larger conversation about transparency in local government.
WSKG’s Natalie Abruzzo has been following the story and spoke with Managing Editor PTV Taylor-Vuolo about what happened.
The transcript and audio have been edited for clarity and continuity.
________________________________________________
Phoebe Taylor-Vuolo: You’ve been to a couple of these pretty intense town board meetings. Can you describe that first somewhat controversial meeting and why it frustrated some residents?
Natalie Abruzzo: Well, the meeting that you’re referring to, Phoebe is a special town council meeting on July 1.
The agenda was very light and included an executive session as its first topic of business and then a resolution coming out of the executive session.
PTV: What was unusual about what happened?
NA: It’s certainly not unusual for local governments to host special meetings, call them to order only to go into an executive session. In fact, that is protocol according to state law.
The public body has to vote on whether to go into executive session in front of the public.
What I heard was the town supervisor, Jennifer Mullen saying something that was almost inaudible about not doing the executive session and moving straight into the resolution.
The resolution the board was voting on was about whether to authorize a payment from their insurance company and then invoice the town.
The resolution was passed and the meeting adjourned.
They did not appear to vote on whether to skip the executive session.
PTV: So the town council skipped the executive session they had scheduled, they didn’t vote on it. How did the people attending the meeting react to that?
NA: The unexpected changes caused confusion and frustration.
The town supervisor and deputy town supervisor also left the room abruptly while the deputy supervisor told the town residents that if they wanted the information from the meeting, they’d have to FOIL it.
All of this took place in the span of approximately 1-2 minutes.
The town residents wanted more clarification about how the town is spending its money.
Here’s audio from that meeting and deputy town supervisor, Stuart Sammis.
“No no no no, we don’t even know what this is.”
“And you can’t. FOIL it.“
PTV: Why was this such a significant thing for the residents who were there?
NA: Yeah, there appears to be tension in the town right now. So, let me try to explain what I mean.
Most recently, town supervisor, Jennifer Mullen was arrested on several felony charges, including grand larceny.
This case is currently in limbo, though. I’m told there’s no court date on any court docket in the county as of this conversation we’re having, Phoebe.
On top of that, a colleague of Mullen’s filed something called a Notice of Claim. This is typically a precursor to a lawsuit.
The employee is seeking $500,000 in damages alleging a hostile work environment.
And as of this conversation, this case has not moved to a lawsuit.
So, there was already distrust amongst some town residents with the town supervisor. Her legal troubles have only exacerbated this.
PTV: And it sounds like that meeting made things even worse. Did the town council ever explain why they skipped that executive session and didn’t engage with residents afterward?
NA: In the following town meeting, the town supervisor explained that they were advised by the town’s attorney to leave right after the meeting. And leave they did, I mean, it was the shortest, most intense and confusing government meeting I have ever attended.
Mullen did say, however, that the topic of the special meeting and executive session—that never occured—was about a worker’s compensation matter.
“It had nothing to do with me, but it was not anything we could share. Our attorneys told us to leave. It had to do with NYMIR workers comp. We weren't trying to hide any money.”
PTV: Did residents seem satisfied by these answers?
NA: I mean, it seemed to quell some of the initial frustrations, but there are many unanswered questions. And people were taken aback by the behavior.
Mullen did offer an apology to the residents.
I spoke with Carol Faratella. She’s a Steuben County Legislator who represents District 13, which includes the town of Corning.
Faratella told the town council during the meeting that their demeanor at that first meeting was “despicable.”
“I thought the demeanor that they presented was not professional, and I think they could have done better.”
Faratella has been in public service for nearly fifty years. She says she’s never seen anything like this before, Phoebe.
PTV: There’s something in New York called Open Meetings Law. You’ve been looking into whether that first meeting violated that law. Can you explain what Open Meetings Law is?
NA: The New York State Open Meetings Law is meant to keep the public business in front of the public, which also means keeping the public fully informed of how policy is being shaped.
Open Meetings Law applies to any public body whether it is state, county, village or town government.
What all of that kind of boils down to is talking about how they conduct their meetings, when they can go into executive session, how they record their meeting minutes, when they give notice to the public, those types of things. It’s about accountability.
PTV: So what did the Corning town council do that could have violated Open Meetings Law?
NA: The question is basically whether the town discussed the contents of that proposed executive session behind closed doors and out of sight of the public.
According to the Committee on Open Government, it is not unusual nor a violation of the Open Meetings Law to skip an executive session per se.
What is an issue is a public body not conducting public business in an open and public manner.
Christen Smith, a senior attorney with the Committee on Open Government explained that the exchange of information—whether it’s over email, phone call, discussions—cannot replace deliberations that would otherwise take place during public meetings.
“If they were having those discussions right, even though they were doing them one individual at a time, if that was designed to be the discussion of their public business, whether or not they had intention to take action, then that is getting very close to being an action that is inconsistent with the requirements of the open meetings law.”
NA: The question here becomes when, where and how did the town council determine that they no longer needed to deliberate on this resolution?
Was it in a group email? Was it in individual in-person conversations? Was it a phone call? Was it before the special meeting? How did the town council determine that they would agree to a payment using public monies and that that executive session was unnecessary, without deliberating in front of the public?
PTV: Do we know the answer to any of those questions, Natalie?
NA: The answer is still unclear, Phoebe. I sent a FOIL request to the town and I’m waiting to hear back.
I did ask the town supervisor and deputy town supervisor about the executive session and both declined to comment.
Town Supervisor Jennifer Mullen did say in an email relating to part of my FOIL request that there is no email correspondence about that decision to skip the executive session.
Mullen says that because council members felt comfortable voting on the resolution that they did not need to go into executive session at all and could proceed to the vote.
And she says this happened at the start of the meeting.
Here’s what I saw: the meeting was called to order, attendance was taken, the pledge of allegiance recited, and then Mullen said as everyone was sitting down, “Alright, we’re going to skip executive session.”
PTV: What you’re saying is this whole thing is pretty unclear, and fairly complicated. Do small local, often rural, governments like the town of Corning have the resources they need to be able to understand and follow this law?
NA: Sure, there are some local governments where there might be one or two full-time people and everybody else is part time, including a mayor or council member.
In the town of Corning, council member Lon Fiscus says town officials reach out to the Association of Towns for clarification when needed.
Even when they do have those resources, it could just be a matter of local governments proceeding as usual, as in “this is how it’s always been done.”
Local governments can get caught in patterns that bypass procedure and as the years go on, it becomes the standard.
PTV: Well, I know this is something you will continue to cover, and I’m sure you’ll be back as you get more answers. Thank you so much, Natalie.
NA: Thank you, Phoebe.