01:00 AM EST on Wednesday, February 7, 2007

By Maria Armental

Journal Staff Writer

CHARLESTOWN — The attorney general’s office is investigating whether the appointment of the new town solicitor violated the Open Meetings Act.

Robert E. Craven, a private attorney based in Providence, was appointed on Jan. 11 on a 3-2 vote. Craven’s name and résumé were never shared with Council President Katharine H. Waterman or Vice President Harriet A. Allen. Town Manager Edward M. Barrett acknowledged he received a copy of the résumé, but discarded it.

Resident Clifford L. Vanover filed the complaint on Jan. 22, charging that Councilmen James M. Mageau, John O. Craig Jr. and Bruce W. Picard discussed Craven’s appointment in private.

“In addition, they conspired to adopt a course of action to withhold information of public interest from their fellow councilors and the public,” Vanover wrote in his complaint.

The attorney general’s office received Vanover’s complaint on Jan. 24 and decided to pursue it on Jan. 31, according to Michael J. Healey, a spokesman for the department.

“We found that his complaint has merit and that it warrants a full review,” Healey said.

“Be advised that although you insist that your OMA complaint is against certain individuals (Mr. Mageau, Mr. Craig and Mr. Picard), this Department views your complaint as being against the entire Charlestown Town Council,” Adam J. Sholes, special assistant attorney general, wrote in his response to Vanover on Feb. 1.

“It is a legal impossibility for an individual to violate the OMA because the OMA only applies when a majority of the members of a ‘public body’ convene for a ‘meeting.’ ”

Craven said he had spoken individually to Mageau, Craven and Picard regarding another complaint filed in November.

“I did speak to them individually, never collectively,” Craven said.

Craven said Mageau asked him to attend the meeting because Mageau intended to submit his name for the town solicitor’s position. J. William W. Harsch, also tapped for the position, was also in attendance, he noted.

The attorney general’s office is already investigating two other complaints filed by Allen and Waterman and resident Thomas C. DePatie.

DePatie accused Mageau, Craig and Picard, then council members-elect, of violating the open meetings law by meeting without proper notice to discuss town affairs, namely the election of the new council president, vice president and the position of the town administrator, which was vacant at the time.

The three met for breakfast on the weekend after the election and decided to support Mageau as the next council president and Craig as the vice president.

Allen and Waterman’s complaint accuses Mageau, Craig and Picard of going into a closed session on Jan. 4 without proper notice or discussion on the reason for such a meeting. The minutes from that meeting have been sealed.

Allen dropped a second complaint that had accused the three councilmen of violating the Open Meetings Law by trying to adopt an abbreviated version of a meeting’s minutes that did not reflect a vote taken, witnesses present or an accurate description of the council members’ comments at the meeting.

marmenta@projo.com