To the Editor:

I am writing in response to last week’s article, Berne Board fires Duncan. There are some serious questions regarding the way this situation was handled. I think the article should be of serious concern to Berne residents.

I have followed the situation closely and I have no confidence at all that this now former employee benefited from the due process he was entitled to. In fact, I think he was fired in an act of political retribution. 

This employee’s performance was openly celebrated by the supervisor in board meetings as the article documents. Everyone was happy with his performance at the transfer station. People would bring his job performance up unsolicited in conversation. He was, by all accounts, doing a good job in a position where he interacted with hundreds of residents.

In my opinion, it is not a coincidence that he was suddenly removed from his workplace, under police escort. It was because he spoke out about Highway Superintendent Randy Bashwinger’s clearly unethical use of public resources in his campaign to be re-elected. Let’s think about Mr. Bashwinger’s awkward and juvenile Facebook profile, one of his few posts that speak the truth: 

” I am a pretty simple guy treat me good and I will do same to you . treat me like shit and see what happens  .those know who have made the list. “ 

Can you imagine posting something like that on your Facebook page? Pathetic.

The vindictive Mr. Bashwinger publicly posted on his re-election Facebook page, saying that all the town employees pictured endorse him for re-election. I am told the photos were staged under his direction, as their supervisor and they were clearly taken at the workplace. These employees were clearly put in the position where, if they didn’t go along, they would “know” they have “made the list.”  Everyone who votes for Randy Bashwinger is making a huge mistake.

Last spring, Mr. Duncan was a celebrated employee and Supervisor [Dennis] Palow and Superintendent Bashwinger were very happy to take credit for his performance. If there was a problem, he should have been counseled as a first step.

Was he counseled? Was he advised of any complaints? What was the problem? Was he trained? Here is an employee who constantly interacts with the public. Was he doing this without training? There is no list of who has received the mandated employee training at Town Hall. 

I attended the meeting where this very public firing took place. Supervisor Palow, once again, violated the state’s Open Meetings Law, citing an illegitimate excuse to hide behind closed doors to discuss Mr. Bashwinger’s politically motivated retribution scheme against Mr. Duncan.

You cannot cite the discussion of a personnel issue as a reason to hide behind closed doors as a board. The Enterprise has covered this extensively!

Berne was the subject of the articles while Mr. Palow was on the board and making such illegitimate motions to go into executive session. He should know better. There are very limited legitimate reasons to go into executive session and Berne has a documented history of misusing these sessions. I was repeatedly harassed and threatened by Mr. Palow in these bogus sessions where multiple subjects, not cited, were discussed. 

A board has to specifically say what they are going to discuss. The reasons should be clear. The name of the person does not have to be revealed. In the hypothetical case that an employee had been repeatedly counseled for violations of employee handbook, the residents deserve to know what is being discussed.  

You cannot put an executive session on the agenda for a meeting. Such meetings have to be publicly approved by the board. This meeting was on the agenda, implying that the board approved an executive session somewhere. Where and when did that happen?

The board came out of the illegitimate executive session, Mr. Palow said no action was taken and then immediately made the motion to fire Mr. Duncan! What the hell was discussed behind closed doors then, Mr. Palow?

My experience with executive sessions in Berne gives me no reason to believe anything legitimate went on behind closed doors. The total disrespect of Open Meetings Law in handling this “executive session” clearly indicates to me that this was just another step that ignored due process in the firing of an employee. It’s pretty clear to me that the decision was made to fire Mr. Duncan behind closed doors while the reason for the meeting was kept secret.  

At this point, I can only assume that Mr. Bashwinger and Mr. Palow have ignored the law, due process, and the people’s trust in firing a conscientious employee in an act of political retribution.  

Joel Willsey

Berne

Editor’s note: The Enterprise filed a Freedom of Information Law request on Aug. 28 for any documents related to Shawn Duncan’s employment, including any complaints filed about him, and any response to those complaints, and to date has received no documents.

While it is true that the state’s Open Meetings Law does not list “personnel matters” as one of the reasons an elected board can meet privately, the law does allow a closed session for discussion of “matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person.”