Where dead letters get a post-mortem.

March 13, 2007 — Today's autopsy is performed on the Statement by Pam Duke, read and spread by Town of Rochester Supervisor at the March 1 Town Board meeting.

Ms. Duke's statement in blue. Autopsy report in red.

I would like to take this opportunity to share the Town Board's intentions relating to the process by which we interviewed Manuela Mihailescu as a candidate for the Historic Preservation Commission.

You just confessed: the Town Board had intentions relating to the process by which you interviewed Manuela.

***

We are aware that many of you are here this evening because you feel Ms. Mihailescu was wronged by the Town Board.

You brought a written statement. How did you know before the Public Comment Period why the people came to the meeting?

***

And many people have judged our actions based on only one version of the story. I would like to share what I can without violating our obligation to Ms. Mihailescu to protect the confidentiality of Executive Session.

There is only one version of the story worth mentioning: the truth. And, by the way, if Rod Futerfas, the town's attorney, gave you such good advice on "your obligation to protect the confidentiality of Executive Session," why was he replaced by Joshua Koplowitz?

***

In January 2006, our Town established a formal appointment procedure for vacancies on Town boards, commissions and committees that is published on the Town website and is available at the Town Hall. In accordance with that policy, we post each opening, invite people to send in letters of interest and interview every candidate.

Here is the whole policy:
"The Town Board shall review and discuss all applications and letters of intent in executive session.
The vote to select any candidate shall, however, be made at a public meeting of the Town Board."

No mention of "deranged Town Board shall come up with a rumor, spread it for months, then use it as a pretext to reject the candidate."

***

The selection procedure states that interviews of prospective candidates are to be held in Executive Session.

The word "interview" does not appear in the policy. Let alone "second interview."

***

Executive sessions are confidential meetings of the Town Board that are permitted by State Law and that, among other things, authorize public bodies to discuss and review personnel matters privately.

You keep repeating, repeating, repeating, repeating that you are not allowed to discuss what happened at the closed-door executive session, but Robert Freeman, Executive Director of the New York State Committee on Open Government, said you are mistaken.

"There's nothing in the Open Meetings Law or any other law that forbids them from discussing it," Freeman said. "What they're really saying is, 'We don't want to talk about it.'"

Rod Futerfas, the town's attorney, said that, because of potential litigation, the board will not discuss the meeting unless Mihailescu signs a waiver. "There is more than just the executive session that is involved here," Futerfas said.

There is no legal responsibility to keep the Executive Session confidential. It simply does not exist. You do not want Manuela to absolve you of confidentiality, you want her to sign away her rights in order to cover your collective behinds.

***

After interviews are completed, the nominees' names are presented to the Town Board for a vote at a public meeting.

In other words, after Pam and Toni and Alex and Francis complete the interviews, the nominees' names are presented to Duke and Spano and Miller and Gray so they can pretend to vote in public.

***

Until now, we have not spoken about Ms. Mihailescu's confidential interview. We have honored due process and the obligation of privacy owed to her relating to the executive session. However, while Ms. Mihailescu has publicly released her version of events, she has not authorized the Town Board to give its account by signing a waiver of that confidentiality.

"There's nothing in the Open Meetings Law or any other law that forbids them from discussing it," Freeman said. "What they're really saying is, 'We don't want to talk about it.'"

***

Accordingly, we are obligated to remain silent about what happened during the Executive Session interview.

What part of the following do you refuse to understand?

"There's nothing in the Open Meetings Law or any other law that forbids them from discussing it," Freeman said. "What they're really saying is, 'We don't want to talk about it.'"

***

We believe, however, that we are able to discuss our intent and the thought process leading up to the session. In reviewing Ms. Mihailescu's appointment to the Historical Preservation Commission, the Town Board received information from residents that potentially linked Ms. Mihailescu's name to adult websites.

Resident Pam Duke... resident Tony Spano... resident Alex Miller... resident Francis Gray... of course you can provide the names of those residents who "potentially linked Ms. Mihailescu's name to adult websites."

***

The Town Board had many questions.

The Town Board didn't have one question,
'cause the Town Board had a concocted answer...

***

The questions we asked ourselves were:
1. Is the information relevant to her appointment?

And the answer was?

***

2. Is the information reliable? Should it be disregarded or does it require further review?

And the answers were?

***

3. If the information were reliable and true, would it prevent her from carrying out her duties on the commission or would there be any objection to appointing her?

And the answer was?

***

These are legitimate questions and the only way to answer them was to meet with her to ask for her side of the story.

If the only way to answer your legitimate questions was to ask Manuela for her side of the story, why do you attack her side of the story now? Do you grasp the inconsistency or am I wasting my time?

***

To do anything less would have deprived her right to defend herself against unknown accusations.

Come again?!

***

Immediately after the second Executive Session, Ms. Mihailescu made her story public. A group of people published her version of the interview and mailed postcards to townspeople that appear to be designed to incite indignation and outrage. Here is where this confidential matter became a public political issue.

You know me by now. I am slow. So, let me get it right... If a "rape" victim's story gets in the newspapers and the readers show their outrage, it all becomes a political issue?

In other words you are suggesting that in a similar situation, but with Republican perpetrators, Ms. Mihailescu would have kept mum. Please, say that again and let me see you keep a straight face.

***

We regret the emotional angst that this has created and the division that this has caused in our community. We take the responsibilities of office seriously, and by following our candidate interviewing process, we believe that we acted properly and with sensitivity.

You don't give a damn about emotional angst. You tried to silence Manuela after 3 minutes. Luckily for you Rod Futerfas' partner knew better...

As for the rest of the paragraph, I am torn between laughing and throwing up. Responsibilities taken seriously? Sensitivity? You?

***

It is time for all of us to work together to face the challenges that are inevitable as we continue to move through our differences.

It is time for all of us to work together?
Ms. Duke, with all due respect, are you out of your progressive mind?

It is time for all of us to work together?
What did you think Ms. Mihailescu attempted to do when volunteering for the Historical Preservation Commission other than work together?

It is time for all of us to work together?
What did you think I attempted to do when volunteering for the Business Development Committee other than work together?

It is time for all of us to work together?
How did your character assasination attempts contribute to working together?

We continue to move through our differences?
Is this code for political cleansing?

***

Despite what the local press and rumor reported, the vote on Ms. Mihailescu's candidacy was never taken and the process was not completed.

Obviously Ms. Mihailescu's fault...

***

Are we prepared to vote now?

Is it November already?

***

Pam Duke

Jon Dogar-Marinesco