Kathy sought a remedy with the Town of Norfolk, The Town countered with a Settlement Agreement (attached). Kathy declined the settlement and has been pursuing a Grievance with the Town of Norfolk ever since. Brief Statement of the Remedy Sought: Kathy Astley would like to receive the 90 hours of vacation earned that the Town of Norfolk took away.

These settlement negotiations were unsuccessful. E. Board of Selectmen Consider the Grievance Following the Parties' unsuccessful settlement negotiations, the Union brought the grievance to the Board of Selectmen. Testimony of Scott Bragdon. The Board of Selectmen first met with the Union to discuss the Grievance on March 5, 2019. Testimony of Scott Bragdon.

Astley with a proposed settlement agreement which required she not disclose the settlement and, no other employee shall be able to file a grievance on the vacation accumulation issue. Mrs. Astley did not agree with the proposal, nor could she or the Union have the right to waive other union members negotiated grievance rights (J-1). At no time during these negotiations did Mr. Bragdon claim or charge a timeliness issue.

The complaint was originally filed with the Committee on February 28, and you responded on behalf of the Committee by letter dated March 18, 2020.1 The complaint alleges that the topic Approval to transfer funds from Weymouth High School (031) to District Wide Exp (200) for legal settlement purposes regarding Settlement of WEA Arbitration (Action Requested) included on the notice for the Committees February 27 meeting was insufficiently detailed.

Herman requested, 1) settlement agreement that the City executed with [a named] employee [and] 2) [the named] employees job description. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and SPR20/1015 was opened as a result. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR20/1015 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 7, 2020).

Herman requested the 1) settlement agreement that the City executed with [a named] employee [and] 2) [the named] employees job description. The City responded and unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and SPR20/1015 was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G.

The material terms of this tentative agreement included: $7500; the removal of no-reapplication language that the Employer had previously proposed as part of the settlement; and conversion of Leddies discharge to a resignation.4 The grievance was then placed in abeyance pending execution of the settlement agreement. On or around May 13, 2019, the Union received a draft settlement agreement from the Employer.

Att epap ted fo csefereuce Atte yw: Show 4 her 4 AiG wot bee GywitacteA by Arey Jane ANd the. 751 eemM erst they As S4YS 4o Lheve (weluded ioe : the le fey Settlement Sign - Plas Omll ym pa (ty Keo we O, Les er Ago> SI Wee #0 (espid Ata 4an/ From My Drea rive Arid Cs ntact an o & Cause they inancheetly Qocuments My L Seth kA Phase lite. New Taty ASKeef p12.

On February 28, 2005, while this matter was pending at the Commission, Appellants Curtis and Girouard signed similar Settlement Agreements with the City. Assad appears to have signed the proposed Settlement Agreement relating to him in early March, 2005. The City signed Assads and Curtis Settlement Agreements on March 22, 2005. The City did not sign the Settlement Agreement with Girouard.

Copy of the recent settlement agreement between [a named individual] and the Town of Arlington [2.] Records of payments to any attorneys (other than Town Counsel) related to this settlement, including payments directly or indirectly to attorneys representing the police officers involved. The Town responded on February 22 and March 5, 2024, and provided records. Unsatisfied with the Towns response, Mr.

The parties to the litigation reached a settlement agreement and on December 29, 2023, the Court entered a Settlement Order of Dismissal, thus concluding the litigation matter.

Kelley I would like to challenge the dismissal by the hearing officer based on the following reasons: The 2009 Settlement was clearly broken there is no doubt. This was a settlement that only accomplished taking out some files and the promise that BPS would not break the law again. There were many bizarre and derogatory false allegations put in my file by Mr. Cardillo. Mr. Sordillo was a witness at the hearings back in 2012 with Mr.

Failure to Honor 2 Settlement Agreements one in 2009 that was already MA. Law wasn't happy with that settlement, BPS agreed to follow what was already MA. law and 2014 Settlement Agreement at DSLR. See Attached Documents Attachment 1 Statement of Charges Statement from Paul Jelley Response to Mr.

Kelley and BPS were parties to the settlement, which resulted in a written settlement agreement (2014 settlement agreement). Paul Wood (Wood), the Assistant Director in Charge of Building Services who allegedly unlawfully did not appoint Kelley to an Area Manager position in the circumstances at issue in MUP-11-1191, signed the agreement on the BPS's behalf.

Furthermore, at least one of these settlement agreements contains a confidentiality provision that would result in a breach of contract by the Commission if it were produced in response to a public records request, and will need to be withheld on that basis So far, the Commission has identified approximately 600 communications responsive to these requests.

However, we note that the Board discussed the possibility of a settlement agreement in a water contamination case filed by the Town of Barnstable against Barnstable County, and then approved and executed a settlement agreement. The Board thought that it had to promptly disclose the settlement agreement in open session. In addition, the settlement agreement had to be filed in Superior Court by June 30.