Follow-up on meeting

 

Ousted Chariho official enlists lawyer to challenge school committee

By Victoria Goff     The Sun Staff WOOD RIVER JCT. — A Chariho Regional School Committee member who was ousted by colleagues last week has enlisted an attorney to challenge whether the com­mittee had the authority to dismiss him. The School Committee voted 6-3-1 to disqualify William J. Felkner, 45, “from participat­ing in School Committee meet­ings” last week after Chariho Solicitor Jon M. Anderson issued an oral opinion that Felkner was no longer a mem­ber of the committee since he became a newly elected mem­ber of the Hopkinton Town Council a day earlier. The committee also decided that Felkner was disqualified until a ruling from the state Board of Elections or court said otherwise. Felkner, of Ashaway, has two years left in his School Committee term since joining the board in 2006. The com­mittee includes representa­tives from each of the three Chariho towns: Charlestown, four members; Hopkinton, four members; and Richmond, three members. Felkner said Monday that he has hired North Scituate­based attorney Nicholas Gor­ham, the House Minority Whip who lost his seat in this month’s election. “It’s a dangerous precedent that a legislative body can start removing its own mem­bers,” Gorham said. He said he has not “seen anything in the Chariho Act [the district’s governing docu­ment] that gives the School Committee the authority to remove a member.” Gorham also said that, although he has not reviewed the meeting’s agenda yet, he was told “this removal wasn’t even on the agenda… Certainly the public should know if they’re going to do something like that. Certainly Mr. Felkner should know. There are some real procedural issues to begin with that have to be carefully examined.” Felkner and Gorham said they plan to address the School Committee at an upcoming meeting on the matter. “I think we should have an open discussion in public about some of the issues that they’ve tried to raise,” Gorham said. “I just want to appeal to common sense.” “Common sense” is what Chariho Superintendent Barry J. Ricci said led him to assume that Felkner was not going to retain his seat on the School Committee after being elected to the council — the reason why he said he did not send Felkner a pack­et of documents pertaining to the meeting’s agenda. When Felkner contacted Ricci prior to the meeting about not receiving the pack­et, Ricci said he chose not to respond. He did not offer specifics on why. Felkner’s status on the School Committee was not a listed agenda item. Discussion on the matter began during the commit­tee’s “Call to Order” in public before the executive session, which was scheduled a half­hour earlier than the regular session open to the public. “From a common sense and practical point of view, how could you ever anticipate the need to put an agenda item to remove someone who would not be there,” Ricci said. Asked why Felkner was not placed on the agenda, given that Felkner indicated he planned to attend when he inquired about his com­mittee packet, Ricci replied: “The agenda was already published and posted. It was much too late to change the agenda. They [the Hopkinton Town Council] weren’t sworn in until Monday night [the day before the committee met]. He could have chosen not to be sworn in to the council on Monday night, then he would have been a member of the School Committee.” William G. Day, of Wyoming, who handled the matter during his final hour as committee chairman, said he contacted the district solicitor, Anderson, about the legality of Felkner serving on the school board and Hopkinton council simulta­neously, after it had “been mentioned to me by a couple of individuals that Felkner planned to continue to serve.” The first time Day said he heard Anderson’s opinion was at the meeting. Anderson, who does not typi­cally attend committee meet­ings, was already expected to be present for a listed agenda item, Ricci said. When Day was asked why he didn’t contact Felkner prior to the meeting, he replied: “Mr. Felkner is a very difficult individual to speak to.” Day cited a phone message that he said Felkner left three to four months ago, in which he accused Felkner of being “very crude” and “very unprofessional.” Felkner did not speak to the committee during the hour-long debate about whether he should remain on the school board, except to say he did not think the com­mittee had the authority to remove him. When Day told Felkner he could sit in the audience, Felkner refused. “We gave him every oppor­tunity to sit in the audience,” Day said about the commit­tee discussion, noting Felkner could have addressed the committee during the public forum and could have weighed in on agenda items as a member of the public. When Felkner refused to leave the meeting, Day asked a police officer to “escort Mr. Felkner.” The officer told Felkner that he could not stay at the meeting. “That wasn’t my call,” Day said. “That was the police officer’s call. I haven’t talked to the officer or the chief as to what was the reasoning for asking the gentleman to leave.” Richmond Police Chief Raymond A. Driscoll did not return a phone message before press time. Anderson said he deter­mined his opinion by collec­tively interpreting the Chariho Act, the Hopkinton Town Charter, common law known as the “Doctrine of Incompatibility” and case law from Georgia and Washington. The Chariho Act and Hopkinton Town Charter do not explicitly state that a town councilor cannot serve on the School Committee. However, Anderson told the committee that the Hopkinton Town Charter prohibits a person from hold­ing more than one elected town office concurrently. It also says: “Members on boards or commissions that act as representation of the Town of Hopkinton in regards to the School District shall not disallow that elec­tor from serving on another board, committee or commis­sion in Town government.” The charter defines mem­bers of the council and School Committee as elected offi­cials. Anderson said the two offices would be “incompati­ble,” offering the example of a councilor voting on a ballot question for his or her town to withdraw from the school district, while the councilor served on the school commit­tee.

Felkner contacted Ethics, Elections boards

Before William J. Felkner appeared at the Hopkinton Town Council and Chariho Regional School Committee meetings last week, he said he contacted two state agencies on holding dual offices. Steven Cross, chief of investigations for the state Ethics Commission, said he never issued an “official advisory opinion” to Felkner, but acknowledged he did speak with him prior to last week’s School Committee meeting. He said he told Felkner that, in the past, the commission has “had advisory opinions that when the question is strictly, ‘I’m on the town council, can I run for another office and can I keep both offices,’ we have said with cautionary language, yes, you can do that.” However, Cross noted that the advice was based on the state code of ethics; it did not address the town charter.       At this point, Cross said, “There’s nothing here to be handled by the ethics board.” Robert Kando, executive director of the state Board of Elections, said the board would issue an opinion only if it received a formal complaint that specifies the alleged violation of state law and facts supporting the accusation. Kando said he has spoken with Felkner over the past two weeks and told him, “I didn’t know of anything in state law that allowed it or dis­allowed it. If he had any questions, he should contact his attorney.” Felkner said last week that he wants to serve on the School Committee and Hopkinton Town Council in order to implement school choice, a system in which a guardian chooses a school for his or her child, regardless of location.