The Plymouth Select board narrowly approved a new civil conduct policy after a long debate Tuesday night that at times lacked civility.
By a contentious 3-2 vote, the measure passed requiring all town officials – appointed or elected – to treat each other with respect.
“Our goal was to create a clear, transparent process,” said Select Board Chair Deb Iaquinto, who voted in favor of the policy.
“We wanted to clarify expected behaviors, lay out a consistent process for filing complaints and explain what enforcement would be,” she said.
While the new policy was spurred by an outburst at Town Meeting in April, the Select Board itself has come under recent scrutiny over disrespectful behavior on the dais.
One recent example came on July 28, when board member David Golden dropped an f-bomb after Bill Keohan voted against euthanizing an aggressive pit bull.
Golden called Keohan an f—ing coward, then later apologized to the board for his outburst.
Golden was one of two Select Board members who voted against the civil conduct policy on Tuesday, citing concerns over the potential restriction of free speech.
“Folks who have presented here tonight have been very defensive that it’s not meant to chill free speech, but I think it does just that.
“While it may not be the intention, it may be the outcome of the enactment of this policy. I think this warrants further discussion.”
Iaquinto said the policy does not restrict free speech.
Golden, who submitted a redlined version of the copy offering multiple suggestions, called the policy an “overcorrection” and said he couldn’t support it.
The other nay vote came from Kevin Canty, who offered a detailed critique of the measure and said it would not solve the underlying hostility and rudeness board members have shown toward each other.
When Canty began to compare the problem to unruly kids in a school yard, Quintal jumped in.
“Point of order,” Quintal said, interrupting Canty. “We’re not talking about playgrounds. Can we move along here and get to the vote … make your story a little shorter please, with all due respect.”
Retorted Canty: “I appreciate the prescient example of the kind of conduct I’m talking about.”
“Because I don’t agree with you?” asked Quintal.
Golden then called Quintal’s interruption “inappropriate” and urged Canty to continue his analysis because he had similar concerns, but Canty demurred.
“I think Mr. Quintal made the point for me better than I could do myself,” Canty said.
Later in the meeting Quintal apologized.
Though Quintal raised serious concerns about the proposal during the meeting and seemed to oppose it, he ended up voting for it, along with Iaquinto and Bill Keohan.
Canty later said Quintal’s vote was not a surprise.
“Dick Quintal has a history of being against anything I’m for and being for anything I’m against,” said Canty. “This situation is no different.”
Quintal did not return messages seeking comment.
Town officials said they were spurred to draft the new guidelines by an outburst at town meeting in April.
Some town meeting members urged the town moderator or the police to do something after Jeff Fosdick, the son of then airport commission chair Kenneth Fosdick, shouted from the back of the auditorium at another town meeting member, a vocal airport critic.
It happened after town meeting members approved an airport sewer line extension over the objection of the critic, Lisa Lantagne.
Fosdick blurted out “Suck it, Lantagne.” — so loud it could be heard in the front of the room.
As soon as it happened, some Town Meeting members asked the police officer on duty, or Town Moderator Steve Triffletti, to do something.
From the dais, Triffletti warned: “If people are acting inappropriately you’ll be asked to be removed.”
He later said it was the only action he could take as long as the offending party stopped behaving inappropriately.
The policy enacted Tuesday lays out a code of behavior for elected and appointed officials, as well as those who wish to speak at public meetings.
But it would not address disruptions at Town Meeting, which operates under its own set of rules.
“Speakers are encouraged to refrain from making any personal, impertinent, unduly repetitive, slanderous, or profane remarks,” the policy states.
“Individuals in attendance at a public meeting may not interrupt recognized speakers or members of the commission/committee/board,” it says. “Further, such individuals are encouraged to refrain from engaging in disorderly or boisterous conduct, including the utterance of loud, threatening, or abusive language; whistling; stamping of feet; or other acts which disrupt or otherwise impede the orderly conduct of any meeting.”
The policy also lays out a procedure for filing and investigating filed complaints and alleged violations of the policy. It also details disciplinary options, including public censure of an elected or appointed official, and declining to reappoint the individual to his/her seat.
Another provision of the policy requires officials to “disclose all potential conflicts of interest when first speaking.”
Both Golden and Canty, the two dissenters on the policy vote, came under fire in June after voting in favor of a controversial land deal which benefited a developer they described as their friend and campaign manager in their respective campaigns.
Although both Canty and Golden disclosed the relationship on required disclosure forms, neither mentioned the conflict before casting their votes.
Golden said the conflict provision is redundant because the state conflict of interest law already covers any potential issues.
Andrea Estes can be reached at andrea@plymouthindependent.org.