Belham takes censure, but defends blogging
BY AMY DeMELIA SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Monday, November 2, 2009 2:18 AM EST
NORTH ATTLEBORO - While saying he accepted his colleagues' vote to censure him, Selectman Paul Belham maintained Thursday the actions that got him into hot water were justified because he needed to defend his family and name.
"I was censured for my actions on blogging, and I accept that censure," Belham said. "But I spent eight years serving to defend our rights and I have a right to express myself."
Selectmen voted unanimously Tuesday - including Belham, himself -for the censure, a move that does not carry a penalty, but criticized Belham's actions regarding the fire commission investigation into five written complaints about the fire chief's management.
Selectmen Michael Thompson and Mark Williamson conducted a review of the commission's investigation, which selectmen ultimately branded "inconsistent" and "poorly managed."
As part of its findings, the review team faulted Belham for having conversations with two of the letter writers before the complaints were filed, including one in which he asked the person to put his concerns in writing.
He was also faulted for expressing his opinion regarding the allegations on The Sun Chronicle's Web site while his son was a volunteer member of the fire department.
Fire Commissioner Christopher LeBlanc raised concerns about posts Belham made on the Web site during his testimony before the review team, noting that Belham signed some of his posts with his name.
He was particularly concerned with a comment Belham posted, which read in part: "you know not what you are speaking about you should keep your mouth shut until you have or heard the facts. People like you that hide behind this forum are most of the problem by making your suggested accusations only add to the problems. If you are going to accuse me of anything at least be man or woman enough to make them directly to myself and not hide behind forum namelessly."
Belham acknowledged posting on the blog when interviewed by the review team, but said he did nothing wrong because he was exercising his First Amendment right to free speech.
"I didn't disclose anything from executive session. I didn't say anything about the board. I didn't say anything as the board's chairman," he said. "I was talking as myself. I offered my phone number so the faceless coward who was attacking my reputation, my family and my name could contact me and talk about the issue."
Belham said he voted for the censure because, "I agree that there are some thing I could have done differently. I've told the board I won't go onto sites looking to see what the blogs say, but if I hear that someone is attacking my name or my family, I'm going to defend myself - that's my right."
Belham was not the only person faulted in the review team's report.
Selectmen also voted Tuesday to demand that all three of the town's fire commissioners resign by noon today after questions were raised about why they interviewed the fire chief before interviewing the letter writers, and failed to turn records over to selectmen.
The review team also found the fire commission held illegal emergency meetings.
If the commissioners do not resign, the board will conduct a termination hearing to remove them. Selectmen will act as interim fire commissioners until new appointments can be made.
Town Administrator Mark Fisher said Thursday night that to his knowledge, his office has not yet received any letters of resignation.
Fisher was also issued a "letter of concern" by the board for telling the fire chief the complaint letters might be covered under the Whistle Blower Act, but failed to inform him later, after speaking to town counsel, that the law did not apply.
