JEWETT - Police were again present at a Jewett town council meeting, last week, where a resident was asked to leave and, after refusing to go, got emphatically ordered out, ultimately exiting without incident.

This was the second time in four months the Greene County sheriff’s office has assigned a deputy to a routine gathering of local government leaders.

It is not known what caused the sheriff to send someone to the November 12 and February 11 sessions although the latest turnout of citizens was noticeably larger than normal. 

The expelled resident, Tammy Vanucchi, in a subsequent phone interview, said she went to the municipal hall to deliver a message.

Vanucchi said she had formally requested to be on the agenda to discuss “town business,” a request denied by town supervisor Greg Kroyer.

New York State law pertaining to town governance states, “although Open Meetings Law gives the public the right to attend town board meetings and to listen to town board deliberations, the public does not have the right to speak at town board meetings except as provided by rules created and adopted by the town board.”

In addition to that law, the town council, in November, by a 4 to 1 vote, enacted new Rules of Order for their monthly get togethers.

Their action followed a series of sitdowns, during the summer and fall, punctuated by heated conversations between Kroyer and highway superintendent Robert Mallory.

The discord escalated into an expletive-undeleted shouting match in October involving Kroyer, Mallory and other town council members.

While not naming him, the new rules barred Mallory from sitting at the head table, as he had done for years, and declared that, “members of the public may not speak unless recognized by the supervisor,” eliminating a customary public comment period.

The supervisor was also authorized to, “retain/appoint a sergeant at arms to maintain the civility of the meeting and have those interrupting or preventing the meeting from proceeding, to be removed from town property.”

No force was necessary, last Wednesday night, but as council members attended to regular business, Vanucchi suddenly stood and said, “I’m calling for councilman John Giordano’s resignation.”

Vanucchi was advised to stop, which she did not do, and she was then repeatedly asked to leave by Kroyer, saying she was, “out of order.”

The deputy allowed tensions to quickly and peaceably dissipate. Vanucchi exited but before going, she referenced a text recently sent to a Jewett highway department worker from councilman Giordano’s cell phone.

The same text is the subject of a January 30 letter written to Kroyer by a lawyer representing the town’s highway workers union.

In that letter, attorney Kevin Brown alleges, “it has recently come to the union’s attention that councilperson and deputy town supervisor John Giordano sent a threatening and wholly inappropriate text message to a bargaining unit member.”

The text, containing Giordano’s cell phone number, shows, “an emoji that - given the surrounding circumstances, is reasonably understood to convey “I’m watching you” or “you are being monitored,” Brown wrote.

A copy of that text, with what appears to be a human eyeball, was attached to the letter from Brown who noted, “the bargaining unit member has reported this incident to the town supervisor.”

Kroyer, in a followup phone interview, said the letter has been turned over to town attorney Tal Rappleyea, having also been delivered to a separate attorney representing the town in highway union matters.

The circumstances surrounding the text have been reported to the sheriff’s office and reportedly discussed by Kroyer, Giordano and the highway worker. Giordano, in a phone interview, offered no comments.

Brown further wrote, “the union understands that [Giordano] and the bargaining unit member are involved in a personal dispute,” which reportedly dates back to 2022.

“This dispute has now been improperly injected into the workplace as a result of the town’s decision to install surveillance cameras - cameras that should not be used to monitor employees or to advance personal grievances,” Brown wrote.

“Of particular concern,” Brown wrote, “the current draft MOA grants access to camera recordings and initial review authority to a limited group of individuals, including the deputy town supervisor.”

Government leaders, by a 4 to 1 vote last fall, opted to install security cameras at the municipal facility including the highway garage.

The union, in October, sent a letter to the town seeking specific information about the cameras such as; their locations, the type and specifications, who has access to the recordings, etc.

In that letter, written by field representative Richard Whitney, the union requested that the town, “cease and desist from unilaterally installing surveillance cameras and bargain with the union prior to making any changes to any other mandatory subject of negotiation.”

Those cameras have not yet been installed as talks continue between the union and town regarding the MOA (Memorandum of Agreement).

All of this comes amidst a Notice of Claim filed against the town and the town board, in January, by Mallory and town clerk Maya Carl.

The potential lawsuit alleges violations of Civil Service Law by the town including, “creating a hostile work environment” for Mallory and Carl, “intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy.” 

Detailed in the claim are events leading up to and following the execution of a search warrant by the sheriff’s office at the town hall in July, 2025.

Police, in a press release at that time, said their sweep was prompted by, “allegations of potentially fraudulent activity,” noting that investigators seized, “electronic devices, paper files and business records.”

Nothing more was heard about the search until the Notice of Claim which states that Mallory and Carl reached out to police about a local building project in the spring of 2025, resulting in the raid and ongoing probe.

The papers allege that plaintiffs Mallory and Carl had conversations with Kroyer, other council members and the town attorney before contacting police about the building project, located on land owned by the town’s planning board chairwoman Barbara Schobel.

“Immediately following Plaintiffs cooperation with law enforcement, Defendants began a campaign to marginalize, embarrass, demean. and punish Plaintiffs for their cooperation with law enforcement,” the Notice of Claim alleges.

“Plaintiffs have been subjected to months of hostile behavior from Defendants in the form of arguments. cold behavior, and hostile abuses of authority,” the papers state.

It is anticipated that Mallory, Carl and their attorney will be deposed on the Notice of Claim in the ensuing weeks, possibly leading to a lawsuit, dismissal or settlement.