Reasons to Recall Winchendon Selectman Ed Bond

The following emails document some of the reasons to recall selectman Ed Bond

Conflict of interest

From: James M. Kreidler, Jr. [mailto:manager@town.winchendon.ma.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:55 PM
To: bhunt@mackprototype.com; Ed Bond; Jim Kreidler; Keith R. Barrows; Linda Daigle; Mark S. Shea
Subject: Selectman Bond re: Conflict of Interest Opinion

Dear All,

As is my obligation, I have now on several occasions discussed with Selectman Bond the conflict of interest presented by his “participation” in DPW matters. I have done this either at or after each of your last three meetings. I had this conversation with Selectman Bond when I asked for a brief recess (the first time) at your meeting at which the water and sewer rates were set. Then, just last week, I spoke with Selectman Bond once again with Chairman Barrows present, regarding my belief that he is unable to “participate” in matters relating to the DPW (the second time). As a result of this discussion and after his insistence that he can participate just not vote on DPW matters, I sought a legal opinion. Again last night, on a DPW issue relating to the transfer station fees, after Selectman Bond participated by offering a “second” to the motion, I once again sought a recess and once more ( a third time) advised Selectman Bond of the conflict with his participation. Selectman Bond then abstained from further participation in that matter. I felt as though the message had been received and that Selectman Bond understood his limitations under the law. Curiously, however, later in the very same meeting when the matter of the sewer bill abatement for the Fire Department was before you, yet another example of a DPW issue, Selectman Bond participated and voted.

I am doing my best to convey the serious nature of Selectman Bond’s participation in matters that he is precluded from participating in under the Conflict of Interest statute (G.L. 268a).

I am attaching the legal opinion from Counsel (I have put hard copies in your folders) regarding Conflict of Interest issues relating to Selectman Bond concurrently serving as employee Bond.

James M. Kreidler, Jr.
Town Manager
109 Front Street
Winchendon, MA 01475
978.297.0085

---

Conflict of interest

From: James M. Kreidler, Jr. [mailto:manager@town.winchendon.ma.us]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 2:52 PM
To: 'Jackson Blair'
Cc: 'bhunt@mackprototype.com'; 'Ed Bond'; Linda Daigle (assistant@town.winchendon.ma.us); 'Robert "Zeb" Zbikowski'
Subject: RE: FW: BoS Policy Revision Comments

Jack,

I can agree that it seems archaic.

The thinking is that someone’s mere presence at the table, or even in the room according to the SJC, is participation enough to constitute a violation. While this may seem like a bit of overkill there are some personalities that can and do impact actions just by being there. This rule is meant to cut against those things from occurring.

Jim
James M. Kreidler, Jr.
Town Manager
109 Front Street
Winchendon, MA 01475
978.297.0085
P Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

---

Abuse of selectman position for personal vendetta and gain. Unethical conflict of interest

From: James M. Kreidler, Jr. [mailto:manager@town.winchendon.ma.us]
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 3:02 PM
To: bhunt@mackprototype.com; Ed Bond; Jim Kreidler; Barrows, Keith; Linda Daigle; Mark S. Shea
Subject: Discussion with Selectman Bond

Dear All,

I am sending this email documenting the conversation that took place between Selectman Ed Bond and me, with Selectman Keith Barrows as a witness. I am sending it along for two purposes---first, to memorialize our conversation and second to keep all members equally informed.

At the conclusion of Monday evening’s meeting I asked Selectman Bond if he would stay for a bit so I could speak to him about some issues. I also asked one other member to stay along as a witness. Selectman Bond stayed as did Chairman Barrows.

I discussed several issues and they were:

1. Selectmen’s Policies- I advised Ed that he had not yet returned the signed acknowledgment receipt from the Board’s policy document that Linda gave him the day after he was elected. Ed stated that he had done so already and I advised that he had not. He committed to do so right away. As of this writing, in spite of being in the office each morning, he has still not done so.

2. Requests for Research and Information- I next spoke to Ed about his attempt, on May 7, 2009 or two days after his election to the Board, to get my administrative assistant Linda Daigle to produce and analyze the past 5 years of water department budgets---comparing the expense of a unionized workforce versus a private contract operator. I recounted that Linda said to him that he would have to get that information from me and that he refused to do so. I informed Ed of the fact that I was aware that he next (immediately) went to the town accountant’s office and directed the Accountant to create and analyze the very same information. Given the fact that Charlotte had been informed during her hiring that no one member of the Board can direct her to engage in a substantive research and analysis project without a vote of the full Board, Charlotte, appropriately, put Ed off. I then recounted that Ed approached Charlotte again, this time on May 28, 2009, looking for the completed information. [Note: this is a full 17 days after the public Selectmen’s meeting during which I advised Ed that it is an ethics violation for him to participate in matters relating to the water department] I next reminded Ed that his participation in this particular matter was a violation of the Ethics laws that he is held to by statute and by Board policy. Ed disagreed. He said he is only barred from actual voting and that he can talk about the issue all he wants. I told Ed it is my job to advise you and I am telling you that you are wrong. I told him that “participation” under the ethics law includes voting, talking, informal lobbying, and researching. He disagreed. I suggested that he seek an opinion from the ethics commission and he said that he would.

3. Telegram Reporter and Citizen Gail Stanton- I next asked Ed what he is doing with Gail Stanton. He became somewhat defensive and said he was just asking some questions. I shared that I was aware that Ed was working with Gail’s ex-husband and had been repeatedly peppering him with personal questions about gail---questions about their marriage, their divorce, her maiden name, etc. Ed then offered that he was sick of being slandered in the newspaper. I stated that Gail had tried to get his comments on three separate occasions but that he had refused to speak to her. He said that he will continue to not speak to the press. He said he is sick of his name being in the paper. The conversation then pretty quickly devolved into a “discussion” about whether or not Ed is a thief and a liar. Moments later Ed abruptly left the room.

Keith, if any of this deviates from your recollection of the discussion please advise.

Jim
James M. Kreidler, Jr.
Town Manager
109 Front Street
Winchendon, MA 01475
978.297.0085

These emails were obtained from the town of Winchendon by public records request.