Councilors face alleged code of conduct violations

By Patrick Adrian
[email protected]
CLAREMONT — The Claremont City Council plans to discuss two separate incidents of possible Code of Conduct violations relating to active city councilors at upcoming meetings.

On Wednesday, Councilor Abigail Kier asked the council to discuss a possible censure of Councilor Jon Stone for allegedly deliberately misrepresenting information shared with city residents about the content and intent of a council-approved resolution.

Stone, in turn, said he wishes the council to discuss whether Kier violated the Code of Conduct when the Department of Parks and Recreation hired Kier’s sister-in-law as a part-time yoga instructor last November.

City councilor criticized over social media post: For the second time in two years, Stone is facing public criticism for a post on Facebook, again with councilors asking to discuss a possible censure of Stone and some residents petitioning for Stone’s resignation.

On Thursday, May 28, Stone published a post on his city councilor page on Facebook, in which he states inaccurate facts to constituents about a recently approved council resolution, one that Stone opposed.

On Wednesday, May 27, the council voted 8-1 to adopt a non-binding proclamation in which the council strongly encourages citizens to wear face masks when in public spaces to reduce spread of the novel coronavirus. Council members explicitly repeated throughout the discussion that this proclamation does not mandate anyone to comply, but only encourages residents to wear masks as recommended by the U.S. Center of Disease Control (CDC).

The following day, Stone wrote the following on his councilor Facebook page: “I stand behind my position for voting against a city council resolution for mandating the wearing of face masks… I advocated once again for voluntary compliance, but was outvoted by the other members of the council who continue with their ‘progressive’ agenda.

On Wednesday, Councilor Deborah Matteau rebuked Stone’s actions, attributing his post to exacerbating the public’s misunderstanding.

“Yes, the public is going to get the idea this is a mandate, because Councilor Stone is saying this is a mandate,” Mattteau said.

Resident Sam Killay, who raised the issue during the citizen’s forum at Wednesday’s council meeting, said that he believed Stone made a “conscious choice to be misleading,” citing the number of times during the May 27 meeting that councilors emphasized that the resolution would be voluntary and non-binding.

“He wrote the exact opposite of what happened,” Killay said. “When people say things that are deliberately false or deceptive, I call that lying.”

At the end of the meeting, Kier asked the council to consider, at a future meeting, “a proposal of censure for Councilor Stone for knowingly dispersing incorrect information on something as important as a resolution on public safety and health.”

“A censure is just a statement of disapproval,” Kier added. “And this was something that I disapproved of.”

Whether Stone knowingly gave inaccurate information or not is unknown. The Eagle Times tried to contact Stone about his interpretation of the resolution but was unable to receive a response by time of publication.

The official proclamation, which the council adopted on Wednesday, states that the council “strongly encourages the public to wear masks in public places in accordance with current CDC guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.” It does not include any suggestion to private businesses regarding their own customer mask policies.

A censure discussion has not yet been scheduled. The next meeting, scheduled for Wednesday, June 24, already has a full agenda.

The council had briefly discussed whether to censure Stone in 2019 for inappropriate remarks on his personal Facebook page about a Claremont couple, but the council decided against it.

Council to discuss potential hiring violation: On June 24, the council will discuss whether the city violated the city’s nepotism policy when the Parks and Recreation Department hired Kaitlyn Kier, the sister-in-law of Councilor Kier, as a part-time yoga instructor last November.

According to city policy, once a resident is elected to the City Council, that councilor’s family members — including sister-in-laws — “shall not, thereafter, be hired by the City of Claremont so long as the City Council member serves on the City Council.”

Notably, the policy does not prevent a person from running for office on the council if one already has a family member employed in the city, nor would election to the council affect a family member’s existing city employment. The policy only prevents the city from hiring a councilor’s family members once the councilor is actively serving.

On Wednesday, Stone asked that the council also discuss “[Councilor] Kier’s possible violation of the city [Code of Conduct] by the city having a conflict with an employment matter.”

Stone did not explain how Kier might have violated the Code of Conduct. The Eagle Times reached out Friday to Stone for comment, but did not receive a response by time of publication.

Kier told the Eagle Times on Thursday that she had no conversations with any city employees regarding her sister-in-law’s hire.

“She finished her yoga certification and was excited to apply to the community center, as it was close to her home and a great starting point for her practice,” Kier said. “I don’t know who she talked to, who she interviewed with or who her [direct] boss is.”

Kier said that she refrains from having conversations as a city councilor with community center personnel outside of council meetings.

City Manager Ed Morris told the Eagle Times last week that the city was still discussing the employment situation but expected to provide more information at the upcoming meeting.

The policy does not explicitly address how to remedy a hiring violation. Presumably, a councilor could elect to resign one’s seat, but the policy does not obligate the councilor to bear the responsibility.

Fourth of July fireworks show canceled

City Manager Ed Morris announced Wednesday night that Claremont will not hold its annual Fourth of July fireworks show this year, citing concerns about the ongoing novel coronavirus pandemic and larger crowds than usual with surrounding communities canceling their individual fireworks events.

The city was hoping to plan a fireworks show where people could park in different sections of the city and watch from their vehicles, Morris told the Claremont City Council. But when Lebanon canceled its own fireworks program last week, Claremont would have been the only town within a 100-mile radius hosting a Fourth of July fireworks show.

“[We felt] the amount of people we might pull wouldn’t be responsible at this time,” Morris explained. “Nor would we have the police and other resources to handle a crowd that size were it to happen.”

Morris said the city will explore opportunities to hold the fireworks at a later date, depending on the course of the pandemic. He also said he discussed the situation with the sponsor, McGee Toyota of Claremont, who understood the decision.

Some councilors, however, disapproved of the city’s decision.

“We’re going to cancel them when everything is opening back up again?” said Councilor Jon Stone. “I think a lot of people are playing into the whole fear thing. I think it’s time that we get back to business and take some precautions if necessary, but we should start moving forward.”

“I understand the concern, but I think with planning we can mitigate the risks,” said Councilor Erica Sweetser. “Even [large retailers] have had to figure out how to manage the number of people who come inside… There are ways to mitigate the risk, or at least think about that.”

Other councilors pointed out that the crowds for the city’s Fourth of July event are too large to compare to local box stores, or even Friday’s racial justice protest in Broad Street Park, which councilors said only had 100 people, most of whom wore masks.

“There is a reason why all the other communities around us decided to [cancel their similar events],” Councilor Deborah Matteau said. ”Because fireworks draw huge crowds… If we keep ours, we’re not just going to have our normal couple of thousand people. We’re going to have two or three times that.”

Councilor Andrew O’Hearne asked Morris about the feasibility to hold a shorter, scaled-back fireworks show, suggesting that a shorter program might discourage out-of-towners from making the trip.

But Morris said a shorter program wouldn’t be cost effective, as much of the expense is consumed by the set up and permits, regardless of how many fireworks are used. Additionally, the city would have difficulty messaging the details about the reduced program.

Police chief condemns death of George Floyd, reiterates importance of body cam policy

In a conversation with the Claremont City Council, Police Chief Mark Chase condemned the actions of the four Minneapolis police officers involved in the death of an unarmed George Floyd and stressed the Claremont Police Department’s efforts to be transparent and accountable to the public.

“[Floyd’s] death while in the custody of the police officers is unconscionable, deeply disturbing and both morally and professionally offensive,” Chase said on Wednesday. “Mr. George Floyd needlessly died at the hands of the people who gave an oath to protect every person’s rights, including Mr. Floyd’s. They failed and we should all pay attention to what is going on right now.”

On May 25, Floyd, while in the custody of four officers, died of asphyxiation allegedly attributed to officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck and not releasing pressure, despite Floyd saying repeatedly that he could not breathe.

Chauvin has been charged with second degree murder. The other three officers, who allegedly took no action to stop Chauvin, have been charged with aiding and abetting.

Chase personally condemned Chauvin’s actions and the other officers for failing to intervene.

City Manager Ed Morris said he wanted Chase to update the council about the department’s use of training and policies to protect public safety.

While police officers must sometimes use physical force to maintain law and order, use of force is a relatively small part of an officer’s job, Chase said. The department works hard to keep policies regarding use of force and fair and impartial policing up to date and officers train yearly in use of force and best practices and review of laws.

The Claremont department has also utilized cameras since April 2019. All on-duty officers are required to wear body cameras and every marked cruiser in use is equipped with a cruiser cam, Chase said. The lone vehicle exception was the new cruiser donated by McGee Toyota of Claremont last year, which will not be used for on-duty purposes until the camera is installed.

The cameras have been “a tool,” Chase said, who added that the public, as well as officers, had requested cameras for several years.

“Video is everywhere and has changed a lot of the last five or 10 years,” Chase said. “Not every police department has it. I understand there’s a cost to the cameras but transparency is important.

Notably, many residents called for the need of body cameras in 2016 following the fatal police shooting of 25-year-old resident Cody LaFont by former Claremont officer Ian Kibbe. Kibbe had claimed the shooting was an act of self-defense, saying that LaFont advanced toward Kibbe with a revolver drawn and refused commands to drop the weapon. LaFont, who had a history of depression, had made several calls to 911 that ultimately resulted in Kibbe’s visit to LaFont’s home.

After an extensive investigation, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s office concluded in October 2016 that Kibbe’s actions were “legally justified.” Last year, however, the state office released an amended conclusion to the LaFont case, stating it “can no longer conclude Mr. Kibbe’s actions were justified” after Kibbe later pled guilty to two counts of conducting an illegal search and falsifying documents in an unrelated case.

Chase, who became Claremont’s chief of police in February 2018, said that while managing the amount of camera footage can be time consuming, the equipment has been an effective tool in bolstering transparency and accountability.