News

Document probes city’s inaction, intent with Stone records

By Patrick Adrian
[email protected]
CLAREMONT — A new court document questions why the city of Claremont retained physical copies of a former employee’s personnel records after officials agreed in arbitration to purge.

In a memorandum filed in Sullivan County Superior Court on Friday, attorney Peter Decato, representing Claremont City Councilor Jon Stone, is contesting the city’s intent to release investigative records of Stone during his service as a police officer because, based on an stipulated agreement between the city and Stone in 2007, those records legally should no longer exist.

“The [agreement] indicated that the city was to purge Mr. Stone’s personnel file of all reference to a one-day suspension, a notice of termination and all events leading up to them,” Decato states in the memorandum. “Once records are purged, they are no longer government records and the city should no longer regard them as such.”

In 2007, the city negotiated an agreement with Stone’s union representatives from American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Council 93 to resolve four grievances filed by Stone against the Claremont Police Department. Stone filed the grievances after the department issued Stone a notice of termination on March 27, 2006.

According to the 2007 stipulated award, Stone agreed to tender his resignation from the department and the union would withdraw the four grievances.

The city, in return, rescinded the one-day suspension of Stone dated March 8, 2006, and would “purge Jonathan Stone’s personnel file of all reference to the one-day suspension of March 8, 2006, the March 27, 2006, notice and all events leading up to them,” according to the award.

Decato, citing the American Heritage Dictionary, notes that the word “purge” by definition means “to clear,” “to remove or eliminate” or “to rid.”

“Now, 13-plus years later, it appears that the city counts amongst the records it considers responsive, records that relate to Mr. Stone’s suspension and his termination,” Decato states.

Decato also said that Stone is “concerned” the city has breached the terms of their 2007 agreement by still possessing the investigation documents into Stone.

“At the time [Stone] settled with the city, he put great value on confidentiality and in fact the city promised to purge his personnel record of all documents relating to the four grievances,” the memorandum says.

Decato additionally argues that releasing those documents would be an injustice to Stone, given that the records to be released will only include “the city’s versions of the facts,” as those were the only ones requested in the Right-to-Know filed by journalist Damien Fisher. Those records would not include Stone’s own testimony to the events.

Stone may be further disadvantaged because his former union deleted and destroyed Stone’s employee files some time ago, including any evidence that might support Stone’s version of the accounts, according to Decato.

“Time has not been Mr. Stone’s ally,” Decato states. “He is prejudiced by the delay caused by Mr. Fisher waiting 13 years to ask the city for information concerning Mr. Stone.”

Importantly, until this year a legal precedent in New Hampshire had guaranteed the exemption of municipal employee personnel files, which includes police officers, from public disclosure. The New Hampshire Supreme Court overturned this precedent on May 29, ruling that personnel records could potentially be released as public documents.

Fisher filed a Right-to-Know request with the city on June 6. Fisher’s request included copies of investigative reports into Stone’s conduct as an officer, communication with Stone regarding his termination of employment and correspondences between the Claremont Police Department and New Hampshire Police Standards and Training Council regarding Stone’s conduct or “moral turpitude.”

The city of Claremont, complying with Fisher’s request, said it has identified records of 11 investigative cases into Stone. Prior to the release of those records, Stone filed a complaint to seek an injunction, which is currently under review in Sullivan County Superior Court in Newport.

Fisher told the Eagle Times in July that the public has a right to know about Stone’s conduct as a police officer because Stone is an elected official.

In addition to serving on the Claremont City Council, Stone is running for a seat in the state House of Representatives this November, where he is challenging the incumbent Rep. John Cloutier (D-District 10).

According to Decato, Stone acknowledges the public’s interest to know about police officer conduct but feels that, with the passage of time, the current interest into the city councilor’s past is driven more by curiosity than a public need.

The Eagle Times reached out to Claremont City Manager Ed Morris for a comment but has not yet received a response.

Avatar photo

As your daily newspaper, we are committed to providing you with important local news coverage for Sullivan County and the surrounding areas.