Medford City Council questions review, oversight of City Clerk's Office

The Medford City Council was told Wednesday that the review of the City Clerk’s office authorized by the administration is more about charting a path forward to avoid future election snafus — like the recent mass inactivation and reactivation of voters’ rolls — not a question of pointing fingers or assigning blame.

The information came from Lauren Goldberg, an elections expert working for KP Law, the firm on retainer with the city. Goldberg confirmed for the council that two city clerks from other communities, Upton and Northborough, have been hired to review the function of Medford’s City Clerk’s office.

The clerks started their review of the workings of the office on Monday. Four employees in the clerk’s office, including the City Clerk Adam Hurtubise, were ill through Thanksgiving. MaryAnn O’Connor, the city’s director of Public Health, confirmed four city employees were out ill with COVID-19, a fifth employee was isolating due to exposure issues.

Hurtubise has not returned to the office.

A path forward to avoid future issues

“The city does not want election issues to arise like this,” Goldberg said, explaining it’s not about finding wrong doing, rather about supporting City Hall workers in the clerk’s office. “This is not an investigation, it’s to chart a path forward, to create a strong likelihood that the city will not run into this again.”

Councilor Michael Marks said he is not opposed to a review of the City Clerk’s office or to finding best practices for the office. He questions, he said, the mayor’s unilateral decision to review an office that is the sole responsibility of the City Council.

“Where, under our charter, does the mayor or chief of staff have the authority to review the City Clerks office,” Marks asked the rhetorical question. He also took note of the secrecy around the whole review. “There has been no formal correspondence from the city administration as to how this process will unfold.”

He noted he was alerted to the “Holiday Extravaganza“ earlier Wednesday, an event hosted by the mayor’s office the same night as the committee meeting. The meeting was held virtually to accommodate the festivities that included Santa Claus, a holiday market and the lighting of the city’s holiday tree.

“I am opposed to having a candidate for public office making those decisions, I thought the review process would be free of candidates,” Marks said, referring to the mayor’s campaign for re-election. He questioned the administration’s authority to OK the process.

“I want to know the extent of the review, who authorized it, how it’s being paid for and who selected the reviewers,” Marks said.

He also asked how the city was paying the retainer and fees for KP Law, as the council cut the allocation for the law firm from the budget in June.

“The only position we hire is the City Clerk, we have oversight of the clerk’s office,” Marks said. He pointedly asked who authorized the review of the clerk’s office. “I’m not sure why the Medford City Council was not brought into the discussion and the review of the office we oversee.”

“I am not responsible for the decision,” Goldberg said. “I don’t know if it was the Interim Chief of Staff (Nina Nazarian) or the mayor who made the decision.”

She also said she was not responsible for setting the scope of the review or the implementation of any recommendations that could be included in the document.

The reviewers were selected by Goldberg who said she based her choice on past experience, the experience of the reviewers and the recommendations of the Secretary of State who has hired the clerks in the past.

“The point is to get the voters list straightened out,” Goldberg said.

Councilor Isaac B. “Zac” Bears reminded the council the state has said all ballots cast in November were cast legally.

A spokesperson for Secretary of State William Francis Galvin has stated that “no voter did anything wrong by casting a ballot.” The spokesperson, Debra O’Malley, said of Medford’s November contest, that some voters could have been challenged because they had been placed on the inactive list in 2020. “Everybody who voted, voted legally,” she has said.

Bears also said the council has long been concerned with the funding and staffing in the City Clerk’s office, especially considering the elections.

The council signaled the need for more funds for the City Clerk’s office for two years, to ensure the Massachusetts’ election laws are followed, Bears said, adding the council had been advocating for an election’s coordinator for years. The position was authorized in June and an elections coordinator was finally appointed in October.

“This council has been direct and intentional in its concerns about resources for the City Clerks office,” Bears said. “We need to make changes to ensure we can meet Massachusetts election law.”

Who gets the report?

Councilor Nicole Morell asked when the council can expect to receive the report following the review; asking whether the mayor will receive the report first, and whether the council will also be included in the distribution of the report.

Councilor John Falco, who lost his mayoral bid to Breanna Lungo-Koehn in November, asked who was overseeing the work of the two clerks.

“If they have questions, whom do they ask,” Falco wanted to know. “Are they talking to the elections coordinator? To the City Clerk? Who’s writing the report?”

Falco acknowledged that it is important the city look into what happened to prevent it from ever happening again. He too noted the council should have been involved in the review process since the irregularities were revealed following the Nov. 2 election. He requested a timeline to clarify events

Goldberg is confident the review will reflect what happened and what procedures and policies need to be changed to improve the process.

Several residents attending the virtual meeting were concerned at the silence from city offices surrounding the issue.

“When I went to City Hall to ask for the voter activity list, I was told to file a Freedom of Information Act request,” said Patricia Brady Doherty, a volunteer on several fall campaigns. “The flow of information had been shut down. I asked whether there was an on-going criminal investigation. The answer should have been a resounding 'NO!'"

However, the silence and lack of response worried her.

“I was told that ‘I can’t talk to you,’ by several people,” Doherty said.

Marks said yesterday he is still waiting for several answers, including how the review is being paid for, how the city is paying for KP Law, and how recommendations will be implemented.

“I’m hoping some of my questions will be answered,” Marks said.