North Haven Town Hall has responded to the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities’ notice regarding the civil rights abuse allegations from former First Selectman’s office executive assistant Leigh Gomez.

Gomez, an African American, and her attorney Eugene Axelrod, had filed a discrimination complaint against the town with the CHRO on June 9, 2009. Gomez accused First Selectman Janet McCarty and Community Services Director Gerardo Sorkin of removing her from town employment in a roundabout fashion so as not to look poorly, due to her race. Gomez’s allegations also include that she was initially hired because of her race, targeted for removal due to a meeting with a Republican co-worker, promised and then denied several town positions, and that she received retaliation after the complaint.

Town Hall’s response, filed with the CHRO by attorney Michael Petrie of Jorden Burt LLP, in Simsbury, claims that Gomez’s release was simply due to poor job performance. The letter also asserts that Gomez did not receive the positions she desired for legitimate reasons, and that McCarty’s role in Gomez’s job search lacked discrimination. Additionally, Town Hall denies any retaliation.

The town’s response labels Gomez’s complaint as “a frivolous defensive tactic intended to prevent the Town from making legitimate and necessary personnel decisions.” The letter claims that Gomez’s work performance had been “unsatisfactory,” and that she had either not applied for the positions she believed she was promised, or had been denied them for legitimate reasons.

Poor work performance

According to the response, Gomez was hired by McCarty as an executive assistant on March 17, 2008. McCarty was impressed with Gomez after she heard her speak at a Democratic Town Committee meeting and learned of her journalism background. McCarty then invited Gomez to apply for the position and eventually extended employment even though Gomez “did not possess classic administration experience,” according to Petrie.

The response alleges that during her time in McCarty’s office, Gomez quickly failed to live up to the expectations of her position. According to the letter, the duties of the executive assistant include “considerable knowledge of the Town of North Haven” and “considerable ability in oral/written communications.” Petrie writes that Gomez did not demonstrate either responsibility - accordingly, McCarty informed Gomez in May 2008 that her title was being changed to “executive secretary” and that she would not receive a raise in July 2008.

The response claims that McCarty had “expected” Gomez to “learn about and become familiar with all aspects of town government.” Petrie alleges that Gomez “has not demonstrated any interest in learning about town government and she is unfamiliar with key personnel, current issues and upcoming events or ongoing projects.”

Additionally, Gomez stated in her CHRO complaint that it was “a campaigning year” when she was hired, and that Town Hall hoped she could be a “political gain.” However, the Town Hall response claims that 2008 “was not a campaigning year,” as McCarty was elected in 2007 for a two-year term, and that Gomez’s “misinformed” statement represents her disinterest toward town government.

The response lists Gomez’s writing responsibilities as “drafting and preparing press releases, announcements, weekly columns, letters and proclamations.” Petrie alleges that Gomez “routinely produced unacceptable written product that was riddled with errors and required substantial revisions by Ms. McCarty,” and that Gomez’s poor writing performance “persisted throughout 2008.”

Accordingly, the response states that McCarty met again with Gomez in January 2009 to discuss the assistant’s shortcomings in both government and writing related activities. McCarty then allegedly advised Gomez that she was “not working out” and should seek town employment elsewhere.

“Legitimate and necessary personnel decisions”

Petrie states that shortly thereafter, McCarty informed Gomez about openings for Secretary of Community Services and Senior Clerk of Community Services. Gomez alleged that she was offered her pick of the positions. However, the letter claims that McCarty “never promised or assured” Gomez that “she would be placed into any particular job.” Petrie claims that McCarty instructed Gomez “that in order to be hired for any position, [she] would have to submit an application, go through the application process and be selected as the most qualified candidate.”

Gomez claimed that she chose the secretary position. In late February 2009, the position was given to Janeen D’Amore, an external candidate. Petrie points out that Gomez had not submitted an application for the secretary position. However, Gomez’s complaint alleged that she was told that although the position was hers, she would still have to “go through the drill of applying for and interviewing for the position” with Sorkin. Therefore, Gomez claimed that the position was purposely filled before she had a chance to apply.

Gomez also alleged that McCarty had instructed her that “internal applicants had first right to internal job openings.” However, Petrie denies this to be town practice. “The town is always free to hire the most qualified candidate fort the job,” he writes.

On Feb. 24, Gomez applied for the clerk position, which had been vacated by the incumbent clerk, Dan Riccio, who had accepted a position in the tax collector’s office. According to the letter, Sorkin interviewed Gomez and three other applicants for the job. However, none were hired, the letter states, because Riccio, a union employee, exercised his union rights to reclaim his former position without application, as he was entitled to do.

Gomez claimed that McCarty then offered her the position of senior clerk in the finance department. Additionally, Gomez alleged that once again, she was told that although the position was hers, she would still have to go through the motions of applying. Petrie writes that McCarty “never promised [Gomez] this position” and in fact “advised” Gomez again that she would have to go through an application process to be considered.

Gomez asserted that the finance position’s job description was purposely rewritten by McCarty to disqualify her. The town’s response states that “it makes no sense that Ms. McCarty would encourage [Gomez] to apply for a job and then change the job description.”

Gomez further alleged that McCarty openly told her that “the Senior Clerk position was no longer available to [her].” The response replies “that never happened.” Instead, Petrie opines that Gomez “has not pursued the Senior Clerk, Finance, position – most likely because she realizes that she does not possess the accounting and clerical skills needed to succeed there.”

Petrie writes that in May 2009, McCarty informed Gomez that if she did not locate another town position by July 1, she would be let go from town employment. The response states that this conversation occurred before Gomez contacted an attorney, and therefore claims that her doing so was a final move of desperation to retain town employment.

The letter also seeks to cast doubt on the seriousness of Gomez’s job search. Petrie writes that Gomez had been aware of her “unacceptable level” of job performance, and was eventually cognizant that she needed to find different town employment or be let go. However, the response alleges that Gomez made only “half-hearted attempts to find another position more suited to her skills, and instead focused her energies on filing this frivolous complaint.”

Racial discrimination and retaliation

The letter claims that because all of Gomez’s desired positions were all filled for “legitimate” reasons, there is no case of discrimination.

Additionally, Petrie alleges, that McCarty is clear of discrimination for several reasons. He claims that because McCarty was cognizant of Gomez’s race when she was hired such a short time ago, there is no discrimination in Gomez being “not hired” a mere 15 months later. Petrie also asserts that because McCarty gave Gomez six months to find another job within town instead of simply terminating her as the First Selectman “easily could have done,” she did not demonstrate racial discrimination. Additionally, the response alleges that McCarty gave Gomez “plenty of encouragement, notified her of job openings, and offered to provide favorable references,” and thusly did not discriminate.

The response also claims that there is no proof that Gomez was eventually let go for anything else other than her work performance.

On the accusations of retaliation, the response claims that Gomez’s specified instances are “trivial assertions” which “fail to show that [Gomez] was made to perform any onerous duties.”

When reached, Gomez said that she now has time to send the CHRO a rebuttal to the of the town’s response, which she plans on doing.