Jimmy Williams (Enterprise photo)

SARANAC LAKE — The mayor of Saranac Lake on Monday accused village trustees of holding an “illegal meeting” without him over the weekend. The board members, in turn, denied the allegation and called for an independent investigation into a dispute between the mayor and the village manager.

Last week, village Manager Erik Stender submitted his letter of resignation to the village board following an interaction with Mayor Jimmy Williams, which the mayor has called a “personal interaction.” Stender has declined to comment on the incident. Saranac Lake Police Chief Darin Perrotte said there was no request for a police presence at the town hall, but that after hearing about the incident, he initiated an investigation and determined that “there were no allegations of violations of law.” But village trustees want more information. Trustee Kelly Brunette said she believes there should be an internal investigation to determine if there were violations of village policies.

“I think it is important that this matter is addressed effectively, swiftly,” Brunette said at the village board’s meeting Monday. “It’s our responsibility to protect the welfare of the employees that work in this building.”

After reading the report from Saranac Lake police on Wednesday, Brunette reiterated this.

“I believe an investigation should be completed by an independent entity,” she said.

“There’s employees in this building that said they’re afraid of (Williams),” Trustee Rich Shapiro said, to which Williams said he felt Shapiro was trying to milk the incident.

Shapiro and Williams have frequently disagreed on a variety of issues since Williams’ election in 2022. Williams acknowledged that his relationship with the board hasn’t been smooth.

“I realize that we have not had the best working relationship on this board. I do realize that last year, we had a couple of embarrassing moments we were forced to deal with,” he said.

“I wasn’t embarrassed,” Shapiro said.

“This is becoming a circus that the village of Saranac Lake does not need,” Williams said.

–

The meeting

–

The conflict over this incident between the mayor and village manager came in the last 20 minutes of a more than one-hour-long meeting, during which the board discussed job duties and the hiring process for the village’s community development director position. Community Development Director Jamie Konkoski announced earlier this month that she will be resigning after six years on the job on July 26, the same day as Stender. Village board members suggested that it could take upward of three months to fill the role. Resident Mark Wilson, during public comment period, said he felt the code administration part of the job is “tremendously important and tremendously timely” and urged the board, if there is a prolonged absence, to have a village attorney present.

After Deputy Mayor Tom Catillaz made a motion to go into executive session “for personnel reasons,” Williams spoke up and said there was something he’d like to say publicly first.

“There was an illegal meeting held,” Williams said.

“What was this illegal meeting?” Shapiro said, interrupting Williams. “Tell me when we had an illegal meeting. You’re lying right now.”

“I’m still explaining,” Williams said. “On Sunday, there was an illegal meeting …”

“Tom and I couldn’t get together at his house?” Shapiro said.

“You tried to have multiple people notice the meeting,” Williams said. “You said it was noticed to the media, we talked to the labor attorney, and when I said it was illegal, you did not respond.”

Just before noon this past Saturday, Shapiro sent an email to the Enterprise, village board members — with the exception of Williams — and an attorney who has experience with labor and employment law. The email read: “Tom Catillaz, Deputy Mayor, has called for an emergency executive session tomorrow at 10AM to receive advice from counsel on a personnel issue. The Mayor will not be present at this meeting.” A location for this meeting was not included in the email.

“Your statement that we had an illegal meeting is erroneous,” Shapiro told Williams Monday.

Soshanah Bewlay, executive director of the New York state Committee on Open Government, said only a court can determine if a violation of the law has occurred.

However, Bewlay said that by law, when noticing a meeting, the notice must include the physical location where the meeting will be held, plus the location of where any board members will be if they’re attending virtually, absent extraordinary circumstances.

Bewlay added that any executive session must be held in the context of an open meeting — meaning that a meeting open to the public, which was properly noticed and attended by a quorum (majority) of the board, must be convened first. An elected official must make a motion to go into executive session and publicly explain the reason for it. Later, after leaving the executive session, the board must explain what was discussed and whether any vote was taken.

“If an executive session was identified as needing to happen and was held, but no motion was made during an open meeting, that would not be in compliance with the Open Meetings Law,” she said Wednesday.

Trustees Matt Scollin and Brunette told the Enterprise Wednesday that they did not attend a meeting on Sunday, meaning there could not have been a quorum of the board in the executive session.

“I had reservations about the legality of the meeting posting, relative to state Open Meetings Law, so I didn’t go,” Scollin told the Enterprise.

On Wednesday, Shapiro reiterated that the meeting ultimately did not happen.

“We did learn that we cannot exclude a board member from a meeting,” he told the Enterprise. Shapiro added that board members had hoped to get legal counsel following Monday’s board meeting, but that did not happen.

On Monday, Williams cited the village’s policies on calling an emergency meeting. The deputy mayor can call such a meeting if the mayor is not present, he said.

“But Tom did that while I was present,” he added.

Williams also said he believes seeking labor counsel was not a legitimate reason for calling an executive session, and that he was not notified of the meeting.

“I don’t want to cause strife on the board, but there is a law, there are procedures, there are rules that not only we but the state vote on every year,” he added. “They must be adhered to. … There is no reason outlined in that that could exclude a mayor from executive session.”

Executive sessions can be held for eight reasons, as laid out in Section 105 of the state’s Open Meetings Law. One of them is “the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation, or matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation.”

“Saying it’s a personnel matter isn’t enough,” Bewlay said. She added that one could say something like “a matter leading to the employment or termination of a particular person.”

Williams also took issue with the idea that village board members would spend taxpayer money on legal counsel for this meeting. Shapiro said Wednesday that the law firm is “already under retainer by the village.”

Williams went on to say that if a trustee, as a private citizen, would like to start a petition, they can.

“To do what?” Shapiro asked.

“To have me removed from office,” Williams said.

“That’s not how it works,” Shapiro said. “You have to go to the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court. I have looked into it.”

–

Seeking legal counsel

–

Village board members expressed frustration, noting that they’re trying to get more information about what happened between the mayor and the village manager.

Scollin asked how they can get advice on the situation when the mayor is one of the people involved.

“What do we do when our highest elected official … there’s an incident with another employee? The board is responsible,” Brunette added. “How do we seek counsel? Whether criminal or not, there’s violations of village policies.”

“If someone wants to open a formal investigation with the police department, open it,” Williams said. “It’s already been completed. Everybody on this board knew that.”

Brunette clarified that she is looking for an internal investigation into whether village policies were violated, then said she felt going into executive session at that time would be best.

Shapiro asked if Williams would step out if they were to go into executive session. Williams said no. Shapiro then made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Williams said it’s not up to trustees to discipline each other. Shapiro mentioned that he was censured by the board. Williams said the board could do the same to him.

“We have … two main people now who are leaving. When is it going to end?” Catillaz said.

Catillaz said he believes there “comes a point when we have to take a step forward.”

“We’re trying to get a report,” he said.

Police Chief Perrotte told the Enterprise Wednesday that the police report had been given to the village clerk and was in the hands of the village attorney for review before release. Scollin and Brunette confirmed that board members received the report on Wednesday.

“I believe we have a responsibility to conduct an independent internal investigation, due to the nature of the allegations,” Scollin said. “However, it is important to remember that we are talking about peoples’ lives and professional reputations here. There should be no rush to judgment in any direction. Any investigation must be fair, full and timely, in line with our commitment to providing a safe and respectful work environment for all village employees.”