The controversy surrounding former Derby Finance Director Henry Domurad’s departure from City Hall last year just won’t go away.
At a meeting June 27, the Derby Board of Aldermen voted 5-2 to direct the city’s attorney to research and determine whether any unused vacation, personal or sick days are owed to Domurad.
The vote was split among party lines, with the Democratic majority in favor.
However, Mayor Anthony Staffieri killed the motion by issuing a veto July 2.
“I do not wish to waste any more time on this matter in disregard to the Court decision against Mr. Domurad’s claims,” Staffieri’s veto reads.
The mayor did not return a message seeking comment for this article, nor did corporation counsel Joseph Coppola or John Gesmonde, a lawyer who once represented Domurad.
Background
Domurad left Derby City Hall in April 2012.
The mayor’s office said he submitted a letter of resignation.
Domurad said he was fired and claimed the signature on the resignation letter wasn’t his.
He later sued to be reinstated.
The majority of the Board of Aldermen voted twice against settling Domurad’s lawsuit out of court. The rejected settlement would have seen Domurad receive $53,000 — $8,000 of which was sick time and vacation days.
During a court hearing, his lawyer alleged that Staffieri’s office, as a condition of hiring Domurad, had Domurad sign a pre-written letter of resignation that would be enacted at the mayor’s will.
However, a judge couldn’t get past Domurad’s initial assertion that the signature on the letter wasn’t his. The judge said Domurad lacked credibility, effectively crippling Domurad’s lawsuit.
In the end, Derby didn’t have to pay a dime.
Still Owed Money?
In recent months, the Aldermen have been talking — in executive session, which are meetings closed to the public — about whether the city owes Domurad sick time, along with personal and vacation days.
Democratic Alderman Ron Sill said Monday (July 8) that Domurad should get any money owed him, despite the controversy over his departure.
“No matter what, he put the time in and that should have been cut and dried that it was his,” Sill said. “I’ve never seen anybody that it was denied to in City Hall . . . That’s what we do to one of our own in Derby? It just doesn’t seem right.”
Article continues after the document.
Democratic Alderman Art Gerckens said he wasn’t surprised by Staffieri’s veto.
“Apparently when things don’t go this mayor’s way, his answer is to veto it and that’s it,” Gerckens said.
He pointed out that Staffieri has vetoed Aldermen three times in the past year, twice in matters which concerned Domurad.
But with the Democrats holding a slim 5-4 majority on the board, Gerckens conceded Domurad will probably have to pursue his case by other means — per the city’s charter, six votes are needed to override mayoral vetoes.
“I think they know they can veto anything they want as long as it’s 5-4 and I think that’s what they intend to do,” Gerckens said. “(Domurad) needs to go directly to the state labor board and see if they can step in on his behalf.”
The mayor’s written veto indicates the city is looking to shore up its position in a lawsuit.
“The matter is in litigation, and the Corporation Counsel should be involved in the discussion of payment of any claimed benefits only in the resolution of the litigation,” the veto reads.
But there’s no record of new Domurad litigation in Derby City Hall or within the local court system.
A spokesman with the state’s Labor Department said there were no claims pending regarding Domurad before the state’s Board of Labor Relations or the department’s Board of Mediation and Arbitration.
Mayor: Aldermen ‘Crazy’
Staffieri did not return a message left in his office this week, but in April said his stance on the issue was simple: the city won in court, so they shouldn’t pay Domurad.
“The judge called him a liar, said ‘Mr. Domurad, you know that was your signature, you don’t have a contract.’ Connecticut state law says if you don’t have a contract, you’re an at-will employee, you don’t have any benefits,” Staffieri said.
In April the mayor accused several Aldermen — DeGennaro, Sill, Gerckens, and DiCenso — of playing politics with the issue.
“Now here it is, the Democrats, Mr. Sill, Mr. Gerckens, Mr. DiCenso, Ms. DeGennaro — they all voted against giving him the payout. We had to go to court because of that,” Staffieri said.
“But then we went to court and the court says we don’t have to pay nothing. Now they’re looking to pay for it out of the city coffers. How crazy is that?”
My advice to Mr. Domurad: Steal the money from the city’s tax office. Apparently, there’s penalty in doing such a thing. Or better yet, get a small business loan like the mayor’s kids got. Repayment of such loans seems to be optional.
In addition to the quotes attributed to me, I also stated, “Apparently, this Mayor does not agree with a representative form of government.” Like a child who takes his ball and leaves when the game isn’t going his way, Mr. Staffieri chooses time and time again to use his veto power rather than work with the board.
I would also argue that he doesn’t believe in transparency in government either (take a look at the tax collector issue).
While I was being interviewed for this story, I brought up Mr. Staffieri’s lack of leadership qualities (again). He has had the opportunity these past two years to demonstrate his leadership skills with a group that doesn’t necessarily buy into everything he says and does. The measure of true leadership would have been to see him work with and talk to this board. In that respect, he has failed miserably and has demonstrated that he is absolutely clueless when it comes to leadership.
Finally, the article mentions that Mr. Staffieri states this issue is in litigation. The next sentence reads that there is no litigation in City Hall, the local court system or with the Department of Labor. Who are we to believe? I know who I believe and it’s not the child who takes his ball and leaves.
p.s. By the way, I am an at-will employee (as are most people in this country). If I lost my job tomorrow, I would be paid vacation time, personal days and any accrued sick time. So while we successfully argued against a settlement (saving the city 53k), the proper way to handle a termination is to determine if anything is owed the former employee, come to terms and then move on. I don’t think that approach is crazy at all…I would call that being responsible and conducting the city’s business in a professional manner.
The recent Court ruling determined Derby owed Domurad nothing. That being the case, only political reasons are motivating Derby’s Democrat Party to raise his issue again. Art Gerckens, the most recent Staffieri antagonist, just switched from Independent to Democrat further showing this to be a lets strengthen the Democrats issue rather than a lets strengthen Derby issue.
Welcome to the 2013 political season.
With all due respect Mr. Szewczk, did you read the motion? We asked for Corporation Counsel to research and determine whether or not any money was owed.
You may feel qualified to make that determination, but it’s not up to you.
This veto does open up a whole new interesting can of worms…let me explain. Can a Mayor deny the Board of Aldermen from seeking legal advice from Corporation Counsel? According to my copy of the charter, counsel is there (in fact, he’s allowed to sit at the big table) so that we can ask for his legal opinion. It could be argued that by vetoing the request for legal advice from counsel that the Mayor has violated the Charter for the City of Derby.
Now let us address your other “issues.”
For the record, I did not just switch from Independent to Democrat. I switched in December, well before you or anybody else could claim it was politically motivated.
Apparently your definition of lets strengthen Derby is different from mine. If you believe a closed, non-representative form of government that keeps secrets from the citizens of Derby is the way to strengthen Derby then we cannot debate in a responsible manner.
I’ll give you this…Alderman Art the antagonist. I like the sound of that phrase. I may use it during the election season. Peace.