Latest News
Auto Repair
Blinds
Building/Remodeling
Floor Refinishing
Insulation
Landscaping
Landscaping
Lightning Rods
Moving
Overhead Doors
NORTH CANAAN — Noting that Town Clerk Jean Jacquier has been absent for the last month, on March 3 the Board of Selectmen named Paul Mattingly — who serves as executive assistant to the selectmen — assistant town clerk until the next election.
Jacquier claims she is the target of antagonism and harassment at Town Hall, which is taking a toll on her health.
Controversy in the clerk’s office has been ongoing since last year when First Selectman Brian Ohler filed a complaint with the state Attorney General’s office accusing Jacquier of misconduct in carrying out the duties of the office.
Jacquier, who was elected in 2017, and served as assistant town clerk since 1993, denied most of the allegations and has filed suit against the Town of North Canaan to recoup $15,000 in legal fees she’s spent defending herself.
In October 2024, the Attorney General’s office ruled it had found three violations, strongly suggesting some changes be made to Jacquier’s existing practices but declined to take any further action.
Ohler accused her of, among other charges, not securing the vault in her office, improperly posting campaign material, untimely stamping and inappropriate shredding of documents.
Jacquier acknowledged she shouldn’t have put up a candidate’s solicitation in Town Hall.
Although the investigation found “improper security of the vault outside of the Town Clerk’s hours of operation,” Jacquier maintained she’s never left her office unattended, explaining the probate judge’s office also uses that vault and others had access to the office.
She also said Ohler signed off on her request to shred the papers. The Attorney General’s office responded that the shredding had destruction dates and it would take no stand on that issue.
Jeffrey Mirman, the lawyer representing Jacquier, said the response from the Attorney General’s office showed it found no sufficient evidence to hold a trial to see about removing her from office, nor was she asked to be disciplined in any way.
In November, the town filed a motion to strike Jacquier’s suit for legal fee reimbursement, claiming “the Defendant (North Canaan) owes no duty to indemnify and/or reimburse the Plaintiff (Jacquier) pursuant to 7 101a(b).”
On Jan. 28, Hon. Walter Menjivar at Torrington Superior Court granted the town’s motion to strike.
Ohler said after that ruling, Jacquier stopped coming to work. He said she continued to receive her salary, “over $6,000” in her absence.
Assistant Town Clerk Marilisa Camardi has been filling in two days a week — she is limited in the hours she can serve — but was away the past week.
“This proposes significant problems for continuity of services,” said Ohler.
Mattingly was sworn in and began fulfilling the responsibilities of the town clerk’s office on March 4. The appointment was made under Connecticut General Statute 7-20, which enables the Board of Selectmen to install an assistant town clerk. Mattingly and Camardi will work together to fulfill the assistant town clerk’s role, Ohler said.
This week Jacquier, who said she was an avid supporter of Ohler when he ran for office, disputed that she lost the case, saying the settlement request was entered too early. “It’s not like I lost in court. It can be refiled.” She said the judge urged the parties to come to an agreement. She also took exception to the figure Ohler put forth as the salary she received last month, saying it’s much lower.
In February, Jacquier filed a motion to extend her case for legal fee reimbursement. The filing states, “The Plaintiff requires additional time to amend the allegations of the complaint to conform with the Court’s Order.” On March 6, Judge Menjivar granted the extension.
Jacquier, shaken by the circumstances, explained the reason for her absence. She claims the atmosphere at Town Hall is toxic and that she has been unduly harassed by entrenched employees. She said she has been verbally abused for the past year. She added that it has been an honor to serve the people of North Canaan for the past 31 years.
In a letter dated March 3, Ohler wrote to Jacquier following up on an email he sent to her on Feb. 6 asking about her welfare. He said he hasn’t heard from her and asked she contact him. He wrote, “Unless there is a substantial and lawful justification for your ongoing absence and for your refusal and/or failure to perform your office’s statutory duties, please be advised that the town’s Board of Selectmen reserves the right to vote on a motion to suspend your salary until you return to work.”
An executive session of the Board of Selectmen was scheduled for March 11 to discuss Jacquier’s salary.
Related Stories
Get Local News Delivered To Your Inbox
Subscribe to receive stories reported for, by, and about our neighbors, on the issues affecting you.
By signing up you agree to our
privacy policy
.
Telecom Reg’s Best Kept On the Books
When Connecticut land-use commissions update their regulations, it seems like a no-brainer to jettison old telecommunications regulations adopted decades ago during a short-lived period when municipalities had authority to regulate second generation (2G) transmissions prior to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) being ordered by a state court in 2000 to regulate all cell tower infrastructure as “functionally equivalent” services.
It is far better to update those regs instead, especially for macro-towers given new technologies like small cells. Even though only ‘advisory’ to the CSC, the preferences of towns by law must be taken into consideration in CSC decision making. Detailed telecom regs – not just a general wish list -- are evidence that a town has put considerable thought into where they prefer such infrastructure be sited without prohibiting service that many – though not all – citizens want and that first responders rely on for public safety.
Such regs come in handy when egregious tower sites are proposed in sensitive areas, typically on private land. The regs are a town’s first line of defense, especially when cross referenced to plans of conservation and development, P&Z regulations, and wetlands setbacks. They identify how/where the town plans to intersect with the CSC process. They are also a roadmap for service providers regarding preferred sites and sometimes less neighborhood contention. In fact, to have no telecom regs can weaken a town’s rights to protect environmental, scenic, and historic assets, and serve up whole neighborhoods to unnecessary overlapping coverage and corporate overreach. Such regs are unique to every town and should not follow anyone else’s boiler plate, especially industry’s.
Connecticut is the only state that has a centralized siting entity for cell towers. The good news is that applicants must prove need for new tower sites in an evidentiary proceeding and any decisions have the weight of the state behind them. The bad news is that the CSC used to be far less industry-friendly and rote in their reviews, which now resemble a check list. There is an operative assumption at CSC that if an applicant wants a tower, they must need it, otherwise why spend significant money to run the approval gauntlet? This reflects a subtle shift over the years at CSC from sincere willingness to protect the environment toward minimal tweaking of bad applications with minor changes. The bottom line is that towns really cannot rely on the CSC to do all the work for them.
What CSC issues telecom providers is a “certificate of environmental compatibility” after an evidentiary proceeding (not unlike a court case) with intervenors, parties, expert witnesses, and the service provider’s technical pro’s sworn in and subject to cross examination. Service providers get to do the same with any opposition from intervenor/party participants – like towns and citizens -- and their experts. It’s an impressive process whose ultimate goal is the fine balancing between allowing adequate/reliable public services and protecting state ecology with minimal damage to scenic, historic, and recreational values. They unfortunately often fall short of their mandate – like approving cell towers with diesel generators over town aquifers -- evidenced by CSC only rejecting about five cell towers in the past 15-20 years.
The CSC was founded in 1972 and clarified its mission in the 1980’s to prevent the state from being carved up willy-nilly by gas pipelines, high tension corridors, and broadcast towers. With the sudden proliferation of cell towers beginning in late 1990’s, it became the most sued agency in Connecticut by both an arrogant upstart industry if applications were denied and by towns/citizens when bad sites were forced on them. CSC gradually formed a defensive posture that drives their decisions toward industry with deeper pockets and attorneys on retainer.
For citizens, nothing can wreck one’s day like the CSC. It behooves towns to protect what little toolkit they have, and understand the legal parameters of the CSC’s playing field. The CSC is not a “normal” government agency where municipal/citizen redress is based on logic and local support. Their process is largely immune to everything but specific kinds of evidence – like town regs with setbacks/fall zones, radio frequency transmission signal strengths, sensitive areas identified, and detailed wildlife inventory, among others.
There is a current cell tower fight involving two intervening towns -- Washington and Warren; both with good cell tower regs – over a tower site within 1200’ of a Montessori School, near Steep Rock’s nature preserves with comprehensive geology/wildlife databases that include endangered, threatened and special concern flora and fauna, on established federal/state migratory bird flyways, within throwing distance to a historic site capable of being listed on the Underground Railroad, and with an access road on a blind curve entering a state highway that will permanently damage wetlands, vernal pools, and core forests. There are well credentialed environmental experts, including Dr. Michael Klemens, former chair of Salisbury’s P&Z, as well as the former director of migratory bird management at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and an RF engineer testifying to alternative approaches, plus three attorneys representing intervenors. It is the most professional challenge I have seen at CSC since Falls Village successfully mounted one that protected Robbins Swamps several years ago.
The hearing is ongoing, with uncertain results. To see what it takes today to stop an inappropriate tower siting, see Docket #543 under “Pending Matters” at https://portal.ct.gov/csc before removing local cell tower regs – the lowest hanging fruit that any town can possess in case it’s needed.
B, Blake Levitt is the Communications Director at The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council. She writes about how technology affects biology.