Former South Berwick town manager to file complaint with Human …
Foster’s Daily Democrat
Emboldened by a recent ruling from the state Department of Labor that found he was pressured to resign, former Town Manager Jeff Grossman is launching an aggressive campaign to get his old job back.
New leadership takes the reins at two SAD 35 schools
Foster’s Daily Democrat
There will be some new faces walking the halls of two School Administrative District 35 schools this fall.
State pushes Kittery to join with Wells school district
Foster’s Daily Democrat
The state is asking the local School Committee to meet with the Wells-Ogunquit Community School District School Committee to talk about consolidating the two districts in an effort to cut costs.
Property valuations are mailed in Eliot
York Weekly
Homeowners may have been shocked with the new property valuations they received in the mail this week, but the town assessor urges residents to use caution when interpreting the numbers.
Morning crash injures Berwick woman
Foster’s Daily Democrat
A Berwick, Maine woman escaped serious injury Wednesday morning after police say her car veered across the center line and nearly collided head on with a Berwick Public Works truck.
I wonder how much more the Town Manager issue is going to cost the town? Will the courts put us right back where we were 5 months ago, but much poorer?
It looks like we’re going to have a boat load more legal costs, and potentially have to pay the balance of the ex managers contract, and even possibly hire him back.
Now I’m really ticked off about the whole situation.
I understand that some of the council and townspeople had problems with the ex manager, but it looks like some very poor choices may have been made.
I think it is very convenient for Mr. Grossman to be able to publicly have his say knowing full well that the terms for his leaving, as well as policy regarding personnel matters, prevent the town council from being able to defend their decision. I’m sure there is plenty that is not known for those very reasons. All three councilors in question have participated in our community (school board, planning board, and conservation commission to name a few) for quite some time, and have had good standing relations with the community up until now. Mr. Grossman’s record is not nearly as long, nor has his community relations been nearly as good as these three who are being called into question. I continue to find it hard to believe they acted arbitrarily without any merit whatsoever in a way they felt would detriment the town. If Mr. Grossman wants to continue to have his say so publicly, he should also give his permission for the other side of the story to be heard, or he should stop talking all together.
Unfortunately, one or more official state boards have already sided with Mr. Grossman.
He is eligible for unemployment benefits.
According to one of those agencies, apparently, they did not feel that the town was justified in asking him to leave.
I never had any dealing with him so I am not defending him, or advocating for his return.
Nor am I trying to accuse anyone of anything.
My concern is what this is going to cost the tax payers of South Berwick.
At the very least, we will incur additional legal fees.
At the worst, we could have a situation where the ex manager is reinstated, and still has to work with the councilors that did not see eye to eye with him.
It has been my experience that when someone in reinstated, the working relationship is much worse than before.
South Berwick could find itself in some serious financial straits.
I too wish the council was able to open up and address the issue publicly.
Since they can not, I can only voice my concerns about the costs, and effect the possible future can hold for South Berwick in a potentially very bad situation.
Good for Mr. Grossman. We all but begged for answers from the council and never got them. I don’t blame him for having his say, he deserves it. His reputation is ruined and he has already won a small victory in mediation. I could see this coming a mile away and the fact that the council couldn’t (at least three of them) amazes me. As a taxpayer, I don’t want to see this cost us another dime, but I had a feeling from day one it would. I wish it would go away, but I cannot blame Jeff Grossman for this. I am not advocating anyone, but if anybody thinks this situation was handled properly, i’ve got a church to sell you.
Most separation agreements in this day and age have confidentiality clauses, so it is neither convenient nor inconvenient that the councilors can’t say anything-it is just a sign of the times. Several people wanted him out, this was the price that was paid – money, and knowing they can’t talk about it. Likewise, he can’t reveal details other than to whomever is mentioned in the clause (attorneys, agents for the town, etc.), so I’m not sure he CAN have his say publicly. If he breaks the terms of the agreement, perhaps the town would have legal recourse. While I’m sure this was not how the councilors envisioned this would go, the fact remains this is all due to how and why Grossman ‘resigned’ and how they handled the situation. I hope it can be resolved at a minimum cost to the taxpayers.
the councilors had the opportunity to bring it all out during mediation. Obviously they didn’t have the goods.
They more than likely had the goods, what they didn’t have was some common sense, cool heads, and some decent legal advice. Panicking at the time left the town hall closed for a week, the snow removal crews on their own to run up huge bills, and clearly as we can see now, a legal situation that was not put to rest, just delayed.
Grossman left this town in utter financial disarray. Last I heard, incompetence is still reasonable grounds for firing. What this town council needs to do now is stop trying to cheap out with the legal costs and hire some decent firepower to put this to rest.
great! hire some more lawyers! just what we need more legal bills.
Oh, so, we should spend $200K and let Grossman come back to fill out his term, to save $25K in legal bills?
Listen, when the initial agreement was signed, Grossman should have also been compelled to sign a “Waiver & Release”. With this, he would have given up all future claims against the town. It could have been adapted slightly to include filing all these Labor complaints as well.
As he was paid over $100K in the settlement and apparently wasn’t asked to sign a waiver & release, is …….I mean, what kind of lawyer is advising the town here? They could have a legal malpractice case, if nothing else.
This is sheer insanity.
After reading all of Mr. Grossman’s demands, it is clear that he is not worried about what his actions will cost the town. This is not the type of town manager we need. If there was a lot of publicity about his leaving it was primarily from interviews that he himself gave to the media. The negative fall-out is largely his own fault. It is time to move on and not stir up all this again.
well, good luck with that. without a waiver and release in place, the town is going to be forced into fighting this out in the courts and mediation.
we should look into the legal malpractice situation, at least there we could recover some of the costs.
Public employment Law is very complex. What I see on this blog are individuals attempting to put a spin on Issues thay have no direction or education about. It will take lots of money and time to complete the process. But I can assure you it will never get resolved on this sight. No matter what your spin may be . This situation could have been handled in a manor that had more thought and planing behind it.
Hey did you hear about the new bridge we are getting on 236, It’s about time.
john…. i am a lawyer. its not that complex. what was overlooked was BASIC.
again i am not advocating Mr. Grossman. And I am not speaking on his behalf, but if you truly felt you were wronged, that your reputation was ruined and you were finding it difficult to find employment within your profession .. what would you do? Anything different?? He, along with two other councilors and a mediator seem to believe he was forced out without just cause, how would any of us take that? Should he just walk away and accept it? I don’t know if you would Jess, maybe you would.
1) Much of the publicity generated in this situation was produced by Mr. Grossman. Beyond the initial flurry of “town hall is closed”, the story would have died within a week.
2) A signed waiver and release should have been a requirement to complete the buyout of his contract — and Grossman getting the buyout money. Clearly that was not done. Had it been done, the entire matter would have died there.
3) Had Grossman refused to sign the waiver and release, the town would have fired him, and he’d be exactly where he is today, doing exactly what he is doing today…..with 100K less of town money. And trying to fund his various appeals, etc., himself. As it is now, he’s got a very nice town subsidy to fund all his various legal machinations.
Grossman and his lawyer probably went out to their car after the termination meeting in a daze shocked at their good luck.
Talk about the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.
I agree Anonymous. But I will not just put the blame on Mr. Grossman. You’re a lawyer, would you advise your client to just walk away for the better of the town?? I saw this coming months ago. It was bungled from the beginning.
No, i’m saying that the town needs to hire some competent legal help. As it is, with the “advice” they are getting, this could drag on for years and because the town won’t spend the money on competent legal help, ending up costing a fortune. Losing a dollar to save a dime…..
Had I been Grossman’s lawyer, I would have pulled over in the first parking lot out of sight of town hall, and done a “happy dance”……
Doesn’t anyone in this town’s government ever think things thru and consider the ramifications? It seems like everything is done simply in the name of expediency and with no thought whatsoever given to any possible outcome other than getting something “off my desk today”.
And people are surprised this town is in trouble. That alone is simply amazing.
I couldn’t agree more. I didn’t get my point across as well, but I totally agree. Clearly thinking things through is not their strong point, as they didn’t even ask themselves ..ok so we fire the town manager, what next? (call it firing, call it a forced resignation, either way) I believe more than one of them used the term “dropping the ball” in reference to their lack of foresight. Yep, I’d say you did and I am not just talking about shutting down the town.
Great ! It looks like we can have a trial right now. Anyone a JUDGE !!!
I wonder if the waiver etc. were signed and are in place, and Grossman has the nerve and #$@& to stir this up. He’s got a large reputation of litigation (and losing the litigation). Just “Google” Jeffrey A Grossman Westbrook Maine, and see what comes up. Go down to the Jaguar case, and then go down to when he sued the City of Westbrook (Grossman v Richards) over his exit there, and see that he’s lost big. He’s a loser. He should sit on his $102 k and get a life, and go away.
Which begs the question of why he was hired here in the first place.
Usually, with a correctly, competently written waiver and release, you forfeit the settlement payment — here 102K — if you chose to go on and litigate.
Clearly, there is nothing in place, because if there were, you’d simply fill papers immediately and ask for an immediate summary judgement. That, apparently, is not happening, so we can only assume that there was no waiver and release signed.
Which, with this information on Grossman’s past in hand, is even more irresponsible in retrospect that I had realized.
Who is the town lawyer? They should be fired immediately….we should also be looking into some sort of malpractice action against them. This is beyond ridiculous. Does anyone on the Town Council have any experience whatsoever in dealing with legal situations?
The Town’s lawyer, Chris Vaniotis, of Burnstien Shur,must be keenly aware of this. He should be able to inform the public of what has happened , or not happened, here. The public should demand an explanation from Vaniotis and the Town Council of what the story is here.
The Town Councliul was NOT informed of the Westbrook case when Grossman was hired in the first place. And who was screening candidates? Maine Municipal Association, the same outfit that is advising them THIS time around. Go MMA!!
Town attornety Chris Vaniotis:
His number is :
207 774-1200
His email is:
cvaniotis@bernsteinshur.com
anon 4 Let it be known the town council was aware of his past record. It was as easy to find back then as it is today. Look at his hireing and see who completed the background. Lets look at who forced this issue and know the council members are not lawyers. A few of them were well advised as to the illigal activity. yes well advised. Where are the backers of there last few months. You know the one’s that were pusshing hard on the back door. John R, Bill S, Brad C, Jack K ect you know who you are and now we are going to pay for all the )^)*&^ . Don”t fade away just stand up for your illfated attemp to get what you wanted. I will not be surprised if in fact he gets the Job back . If one would ask Mr. Grossman for a copy of his settlement agrement I am sure He will give you a copy. Lets ask why a council chair did not leave the unemployment issue alone. I belive there was an agrement by the town not to interfear with his right to draw. I think a few council people owe us at least the information as to why thay let a few hard nose backers to push them into this mess. We could have let him work out his contract and moved forward!
Litigate : Is that what its called when you file a complaint with the Human Rights Commision. Not sure your on the right page. What He is doing is setting some People up for Personal Damages. I belive his settlement excludes him from any litigation against the town. If any thing it will be the human rights people that will bring the charges against the town. There answer will be pay him the total contract or give him a Job that pays the same !!!! Sorry for all the gloom and doom here but I will say it again public employment is very different then private sector. Very , when it comes to Property ownership of ones Job. Its falls under Rights.
excuse me, but that is the most incoherent analysis of the legal situation to date. If this is any indication of the level of understanding, analysis or legal acumen of the people involved or on the periphery of this decision, it is no wonder the town is in such trouble.
Employment law is not that complex. It is not rocket science. To people — lawyers in the field — it is fairly cut and dried, particularly when there is a question of incompetence involved. Here, the Town’s current level of debt and the spending of the past years under Grossman most certainly open his competence up to question.
It isnt’ rocket science. You simply need to get knowlegeable advice before taking action. Clearly that didn’t happen here. And now, you get comments like the the one immediate before this one…….no wonder this town is so screwed up.
Could we get this town council to spend a dime and call a real lawyer? To get someone to lead these guys out of the wilderness? Right now, they obviously don’t have good help….and whining about how “complex” the situation is …is NOT an excuse. The taxpayers are already paying dearly for the Town Council’s actions and inability to control the budget.
HIRE A REAL LAWYER AND END THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So, no one knows why the three councilors asked for Grossman’s resignation because the councilors can’t publicly comment?
That would seem to be the case.
The unemployment board seemde to believe that he deserved benefits, which means they aren’t buying the “he quit on his own” defense.
If that is the case, and he can prove there were extenuating circumstances due to internal pressure for his resignation, he may win damages or his job back.
He took the money. $102,000. He’s a loser in previous attempts to sue former employers. MMA “forgot” to tell the Town Council that hired him about his lawsuit against Westbrook ME when he was discharged there(which he lost in a very large way). He’s damaged goods. He deserves nothing other than to be ignored; and should have the sense to fade away.
That’s a nice thought Anon4, unfortunately, the courts do not accept the “we’re not interested, thank you” option.
This will cost the town money if it goes anywhere near a court house.
Regardless of anyones feelings for this person, this is an issue the town has to address, and all the wishing in the world won’t make it just go away.
Like the attornet that posted several days ago Grossman was supposed to have agreed to “drop it” in exchange for $102,000. Over $100,000! He’s goy his hand in my pocket and your pocket. The Town lawyer, Vaniotis of Burnstein Shur had better get a hold of this and end it. Or should he be sued for malpractice?
Did the Department of Labor hear testimony from both parties in the process of deciding Manager Grossman was “pressured to resign”?
I don’t recall reading or hearing so but I may have missed it.
If not, the Department of Labor only heard one side of the story and the other side could be different.
Bill,
The council chair was reprortedly at the meeting, but did not have the attorney present.
of course not. of course they “economized” by sending the council chair without an attorney.
my god. the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. they are going to end up costing us all hundreds of thousands more as this wends it way thru the courts, hearing and arbitrations for years to come.
you’d think by now. at the very least, one or two of them might have figured out they need some serious advice.
each member was invited to the meeting and they were called in indivdually. i believe the council chair was present when each individual spoke, but i am not positive. i do know that each member was given an opportunity to speak, not just the council chair. i am not sure the mediator was interested in talking to the lawyer, he most likely wanted the reasons for their (the council) pushing the issue to begin with. Now even though we may not know all the reasons, he should have been given them. So… obviously they came up a bit short. I am not saying better legal advise wouldn’t have helped when the separation agreement was drawn up, however, the mediation meeting wasn’t about legal advise, it was about a concils decision to force resignation.
excuse me, but again, a far more professional way to handle this is to be accompanied by a lawyer. a lawyer does not answer the arbitrator/mediator’s question, but rather, sits to the side and advises……
if the lawyer is not permitted to sit in the room with the client, he/she sits outside, and when the person hits a questionable area, they excuse themselves and go outside for a consult.
whatever happens, the individuals speaking for the town should have been consulting with the lawyer on the situation and been advised as to what to say and what not to say.
all that said, another mishandled situation, and another one that should never have arisen if the initial termination had been handled properly.
this town council needs a serious injection of professionalism. its time to grow up, put on some big boy clothes and understand this is not a game or a tit for tat competition between council members. The taxpayers of this town should not be paying dearly for personality differences or disagreements.
once the termination was completed, the two members of the council that disagreed should have closed ranks with the rest and worked to resolve this before costing the town a fortune. Unfortunately, we are all going to end up paying for someone’s idea of “revenge”.
You can bet that 1 of the 2 councilors that disagreed are leaking stuff to Grossman.
I don’t believe that for a minute.
I think you can bet on it.
They are sandbagging the entire council repeatedly.
Well, unless you have proof that’s a pretty strong accusation. Are you referring to the two who didn’t want to force Grossman out?
Because if you are, I couldn’t disagree more. The ones who forced the resignation are ill-prepared for their positions, and one is downright nasty to people. I think they do more damage to the council’s reputation than anyone else.
Since all the meetings are public, with the exception of executive session, and there has been no further executive session in regards to Mr Grossman, what information could be “leaked” that isn’t already public record?
If by sandbagging you mean to not rubber stamping everything the other 3 councilors want, then I would not call that sandbagging.
I wouldn’t want a council where all the councilors are not allowed to express their opinion just because more of the councilors want things a certain way.
Read the papers, and judge for yourself their public comments as an indication. Nasty? The one I’m thinking about can be (and is) downrigt nasty as well.
Well, Anon,
The two you are refering two will not be running for reelection this year.
It a good time to put your papers in and do a better job.
I find the current majority to be trying hard to build consensus; unlike the previous majority who ram-rodded things one after another after another. When majorities shift, it’s amazing how people howl. Amazing how the pot then calls the kettle black.
the one i am thinking of wants to make record his voting on the issue clear and there is nothing wrong with that. That doesn’t mean he is leaking anything. come on, that accusation is out there and this not the place for it. The rest of us in here are smarter than that.