Mayor’s attorneys call Inspector General’s report “flawed” and “one-sided”

Council passes resolutions after flip-flopping on longevity pay

By Neil Zolot

EVERETT – The City Council passed four items in reaction to a recent state Inspector General’s report that Mayor Carlo DeMaria received $180,000 in undue longevity pay and should pay the City of Everett back, in a Special Meeting on Tuesday, March 4. The City Council passed resolutions demanding the money be returned; eliminate longevity pay for elected officials; the decoupling of the positions of Auditor and Chief Financial; and requested an appropriation of $150,000 from the Administration to conduct an audit and hire legal counsel.

“The report is disturbing on a number of levels,” Ward 5 Councillor Robert Van Campen said. “Regardless of intention, things were not done properly and we are duty bound to implement the recommendations of the Inspector General,” a reference to the February 27 report of Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro calling for the recovery of longevity payments improperly paid to DeMaria.

Van Campen described the Inspector General’s Office as “an independent, non-political organization.” Their investigation alleges DeMaria asked the City Council for longevity pay when he found out other city employees were making more than him in July 2016, was paid $30,000 in retroactive payments that September and the item was in a human resources line item used to pay employees for used sick and vacation time.

The plan to eliminate longevity pay for elected officials was referred to the Subcommittee on Legislative Affairs & Elections for study. “There is never a situation when an elected official should receive longevity pay,” Van Campen feels. “Reelection is longevity pay.”

The request for funds to conduct an audit and hire legal counsel was made because appropriation requests have to originate in the Mayor’s Office. ”It’s the opposite of the federal system and common in many cities,” Van Campen explained. The City Council approved his request to appropriate $15,000 to proceed in the meantime.

Van Campen also called for a roll call vote on each item. All four passed unanimously among the Councillors present, with Councillor-at-Large Stephanie Smith and Ward 1 Councillor Wayne Matewsky absent, and Councillor-at-Large John Hanlon voting against the appropriation of $15,000. Ward 3 Councillor Anthony DiPierro recused himself from the proceedings because he is a relative of DeMaria, but called for all the facts to become known before decisions are made.

Mayor DeMaria is currently out of town with his wife, Stacy, celebrating their 28^th wedding anniversary. His attorneys have responded, however, in statements released this week. “The Administration strenuously disagrees with the findings and conclusions of the Massachusetts Inspector General,” read a February 27 letter sent to the City Council. “The City has worked with the Inspector General for nearly three years since learning of the investigation, producing documents and making City officials – including the Mayor – available for interviews with investigators. The release of a 16-page report by the Inspector General only two days after Mayor DeMaria voluntarily met with investigators suggests a pre-determined result. In 2016, during a public meeting, the City Council passed the longevity ordinance in the ordinary course of business, and the City made annual payments to the Mayor consistent with its language. Contrary to the Inspector General’s report, the Mayor did not propose the ordinance, draft the ordinance, or vote to approve the ordinance. Neither the Mayor nor any member of his Administration engaged in concealment. The City Council received information in multiple years concerning the Mayor’s longevity payment amounts, which was included in City budgets posted on the City’s website. It was not until the most recent mayoral election cycle in 2021 that the amounts were called into question. Any skepticism regarding the Mayor’s longevity payment was spurred by this political campaign. The Administration is vigorously exploring options to address the Inspector General’s unsupported and flawed conclusions. I have worked too hard and too long as a public servant in Everett to stand by while the Inspector General attacks my integrity and the integrity of the members of my Administration.”

Two lawyers representing DeMaria spoke in Public Comment at the outset of the meeting. Atty. Young Paik asked the City Council to act “only when it has all the facts” and pointed out that investigations by the Inspector General are not adjudicatory and lack the process for rebuttal.

John Pappalardo added, “It is important to note when the Inspector General requests information, it is a closed process – with no opportunities to confront witnesses. There is no process for appeal because the proceedings are one-sided.”

Atty. Young Paik, counsel for the Mayor and for the City’s Chief Financial Officer, Eric Demas, in a statement released prior to the City Council meeting, stated: “The following is undisputed: First, the newspaper that primarily heralded the accusations at issue has since admitted to lying and fabricating evidence. Second, the ordinance in question was proposed by this council and considered by this council publicly, for all to see. Third, the manner in which the Mayor’s administration executed the ordinance was published in the City’s budget and on the City’s website on multiple occasions, for all to see. Finally, the Mayor and Mr. Demas have throughout this process made themselves and the City’s records openly available to the investigating authorities. They have nothing to hide. And let me be clear: I know of zero evidence—no witness statements, no documents—indicating that the Mayor or Mr. Demas proposed or drafted the longevity ordinance, and zero evidence showing any intent by the Mayor or Mr. Demas to conceal the manner in which the City calculated the Mayor’s longevity payments.”

Both Paik and Pappalardo submitted longer statements to the City Council for the record.

The Mayor’s daughter Alexandra DeMaria also addressed the City Council. She called the allegations “a campaign against my father” and noted, “Being a DeMaria in Everett has not been easy” due to smears and accusations against her father and members of her family, even from teachers she had.