Jason Herron filed an appeal with the Vermont Superior Court on 5/01/2023 to address open meeting violations between the Guilford Selectboard Chairman, Zon Eastes, and the newly appointed Town Administrator Sheila Morse.

​

The Selectboard then hired a law firm from Burlington to file a dismissal of Herron’s case and on 08/11/2023 the Motion to dismiss was left with Judicial Officer, Michael R. Kainen.

​

On Saturday 11/11/2023- Herron contacted the Superior Court concerned that it had been three months since the motion to dismiss was under advisement by Justice Kainen.

​

The following Thursday, Judicial Officer David A. Barra dismissed the case and on 12/14/2023 Herron filed an appeal with the Vermont Supreme Court.

​

In Herron's Brief to the Supreme Court, he listed 13 errors in the Trial Court’s ruling. Due to the time restraints pertaining to oral arguments, he limited his concerns to 3 questions.

​

First question; Why did selectboard member Zon Eastes have to warn the town of Guilford and then vote with the rest of the selectboard to access the fund in question, but when he became chairman, he was able to access the same fund without even notifying the selectboard? The trial court does not even mention the fund nor how it was accessed in its ruling to dismiss.

​

Second question; The newly appointed town administrator claimed she began redacting public information on behalf of the selectboard. How was she legally authorized to act on behalf of the selectboard if the board never met to discuss the topic? The trial court does not mention anything about the redaction of public information in its ruling to dismiss.

​

Lastly, Chairman Eastes was caught holding two separate and unannounced gatherings of the selectboard with their appointed Town Administrator. When confronted, the chairman claimed that he was just distributing materials and assured the residents of Guilford that there were no discussions about public business while this public body was all gathered.

​

My third question is this, and it’s the most important. Is there an exception in Vermont’s open meeting law that allows the unannounced gathering of an entire public body, for the purpose of distributing material? If so, then there is absolutely no way to enforce Vermont’s Open meeting laws.

​

A public body could gather whenever they wanted and without any public notice. If they were caught, which is extremely difficult to do, one of them would simply claim they distributed some form of material and there were no discussions… End of debate. Allow that same scenario, in all-remote form which is what happend here, and there is no way to stop private gatherings of public bodies.

​

That scenario is happening where in Guilford, yet somehow the trial court dismissed it all without even addressing one of those concerns.

​

In fact, the trail court’s premise for its entire dismissal is based on a false quote. Herron never said, That “neither a selectboard member nor a town administrator may seek legal counsel about town business without running afoul of the Open Meeting Law.” That statement was fatal by not only misquoting Herron, but it metastasized into every opinion in the trial court’s ruling.

​

Herron explained that the selectboard chairman had several methods to “seek legal counsel” without accessing the fund in question and even pointed specifically to the legal services provided through Guilford’s insurance company, the VLCT, which offers the same services Eastes required without improper access to a public fund.

​

Without some further explanation, no one can be sure how the trial court came to write that false quote.

                                                           

To Summarize:

 

Herron's brief pointed to an unredacted legal invoice issued by the law firm representing the town. That invoice proved Chairman Eastes wanted to know if he had the authority to call for a recess without a vote. Herron happened to be on the selectboards agenda that evening.

 

At that meeting, Eastes refused Herron the right to speak on two separate occasions concerning public documents. Herron's name was invoked on both occasions and other residents were allowed to engage with the board, but not him.

​

When Herron's agenda topic came to the table, he was silenced after 5 minutes, in mid-sentence, by an alarm and instructed to stop speaking. When residents of the town offered to donate their time for him to continue, Eastes called for that recess.

​

Once the chairman was confronted about his motives for contacting the law firm, all future invoices were redacted by Sheila Morse.

 

When Herron questioned how the town administrator could redact an invoice, concerning the Guilford Free Library Addition, on behalf of the selectboard, without the board meeting to discuss it, she first contacted Katie Buckley to draft her response and then contacted the same law firm Zon contacted for his advice.

​

From there, Eastes started having all remote and completely private gatherings to distribute materials.

​

After Herron's arguments were presented to the Supreme Court, they upheld the Trial Court’s decision and granted the Town’s motions to dismiss his case without answering even one question.

​

To add insult to injury, one of the Supreme Court Justices that ruled to dismiss the appeal was a resident of Vernon where Eastes and Herron were competing for the Democratic primary nomination. Karen Carrol neglected to expose her conflict as a judge whose salary and appointment is dictated by the Legislative branch where Eastes and Herron were competing.