‘We can’t afford to finance our Town Clerk’s personal vendetta’

TOWNSEND — As Townsend faces two lawsuits led by its own town clerk, a resident is collecting signatures from voters in town to bring two warrant articles to a special Town Meeting this fall that would dock the legal costs incurred by the town from the town clerk’s salary.

Dawn Priest said she had supported Town Clerk Harrison Mayotte when he ran for his position, but now she feels disappointment after Mayotte’s ongoing efforts to sue the town for what he has claimed to be violations of public records law.

“We are being forced to defend these lawsuits at the expense of our taxpayers, and we are angry. We are facing extreme financial challenges, like many other towns across Massachusetts,” Priest said in a Sept. 10 statement. “We can’t afford to finance our Town Clerk’s personal vendetta – and we don’t want to. After a lengthy and disappointing phone conversation with Harrison, I realized that if someone doesn’t do something, he will destroy our town.”

In late July, Town Administrator Kieran Meehan told The Sun that the first lawsuit, filed in April in Middlesex Superior Court, had cost the town $14,000 in legal fees to that point, a figure that has likely grown since then with that lawsuit still ongoing. The second lawsuit, filed by Mayotte in July, was referred to the town’s municipal insurance carrier, which may result in higher legal insurance premiums for the town in the future, Meehan also said at the time.

The first lawsuit was originally by Board of Health Chair Dr. Christian Roman-Ramirez, who alleged in that filing that the town failed to respond in time to a public records request he had made in February regarding all revolving account budgets for the town. Mayotte joined that one as a plaintiff-intervenor, and kept the suit going even after Roman-Ramirez accepted a motion to dismiss his initial claim.

The second suit was filed by Mayotte in July in response to a Select Board meeting agenda with items for discussion concerning his own powers as the records access officer for the town. Mayotte claimed the discussion items, which were removed from the July 7 agenda before the meeting, were meant as retaliation for the first lawsuit.

Priest expressed concern that the legal expenses for the town could result in town employees having to be let go.

“We must protect our employees and town services. Harrison expressed no care whatsoever that his former supporters are upset with his actions,” said Priest. “As someone who loudly supported him through two Clerk elections, I am incredibly disappointed in his choices. I elected him to serve, not to spend.”

Priest said the petition will create two articles for a special Town Meeting. The first would amend the fiscal 2027 budget to transfer funds from Mayotte’s salary to offset the legal costs from the lawsuits. The second article would permanently reduce the salary of his position.

“He didn’t care about wasteful spending when it was coming out of the taxpayers pockets. Perhaps he’ll care when it’s coming out of his own pocket,” said Priest.

One silver lining of the situation, Priest told The Sun in a phone call on Monday, is that she is seeing more unity among residents opposing Mayotte’s lawsuits, when the town had otherwise felt more divided between recent debates over school funding and budget overrides.

If Priest collects enough valid signatures to bring the articles to a Town <eeting, she will be in the unique situation of having to submit them to Mayotte himself. Mayotte told The Sun Thursday that “guidance has been received from the State Ethics Commission and will be followed,” as it pertains to his office being responsible for reviewing signatures for a petition directed at him.

On the petition, Mayotte said in a separate statement that Priest “retains her right to petition the government,” a right he said he has as well.

“But these proposed articles raise serious First Amendment concerns about retaliation for exercising that very right,” said Mayotte. “A proposal to reach an elected official’s personal compensation, accompanied by a public statement that the purpose is to make him feel the cost ‘out of his own pocket,’ raises serious questions about whether governmental power is being used to chill protected constitutional activity or coerce an individual into abandoning the exercise of rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

“We are prepared to vigorously protect and defend all rights secured by the Constitution and to pursue every available remedy against any person or entity legally responsible,” Mayotte’s statement concluded.

Priest said Friday that she expects to file the signatures next week.

The petition coincides with a Sept. 11 motion Mayotte filed to voluntarily dismiss the second lawsuit without prejudice. Mayotte declined to comment on that motion on Wednesday but said he would address it in the future.

Mayotte had also filed a motion to dismiss the first lawsuit in August after he said the town complied with the records request in question. However, the town filed an objection to that motion on the grounds that it was filed without prejudice, meaning Mayotte could bring the claim forward again in the future.