Suspended Fire Marshal Takes Heat at Hearing

By Anne W. Semmes
Article Last Updated: 11/23/2007 02:08:45 PM EST

Joseph Benoit, the Town s suspended fire marshal, has a front-row seat for First Selectman Jim Lash s testimony at Monday s hearing in Town Hall. (GREENWICH CITIZEN photo / Anne W. Semmes)

In the past week, Joseph Benoit, a 34-year veteran of the Greenwich Fire Department, sat quietly for two days in the Town Hall meeting room as a host of witnesses - notably First Selectman Jim Lash - built up a lengthy record of complaints of the last three years of his service as the Town's fire marshal and deputy fire chief.

Benoit requested the hearings, which began on Nov. 15, in response to his September suspension by the first selectman for poor performance. The action necessitated hiring a hearing officer, Michael W. Wittenburg from Westchester County, and an attorney, Saranne Murray of Hartford, to represent the Town.

For Benoit's lawyer, Kathryn Emmett, of Stamford, the legal proceedings mark the second time she has confronted Lash for his actions against a Town employee. Her defense of a Greenwich police officer, Lt. Gary Honulik, who claimed that he was unfairly denied a promotion, resulted in a stinging indictment by the judge of the first selectman's action.

With Lash's departure in a week, he effectively leaves both the appeal he has set in motion against the Honulik ruling and the final say on whether Benoit is to be fired to the newly elected Board of Selectmen.

Four More Hearings on Tap

As of this week, with four additional hearings scheduled in December, a final ruling on the future employment of Fire Marshal Benoit will not likely be decided until late January. The hearing officer Wittenburg needs from two weeks to a month to prepare his recommendation to the Board of Selectmen, based on his reading of the recorded proceedings.

"You have not satisfactorily filled the management and supervisory roles assigned to the position, including the budgeting and policy-making functions," Lash had written to Benoit in his Oct. 23 letter recommending his dismissal. "Nor," Lash continued, "have you done what is required in the area of record-keeping and reporting."

In the initial hearing on Nov. 15, Lash was the only witness called. Directed by questions from attorney Murray, he spelled out Benoit's shortcomings over six hours: That only 10 percent of building inspections required annually were carried out; that Benoit had "asked nothing" to acquire needed personnel; that Benoit had failed to send to Lash any firefighting plans.

Though Benoit came under fire in 2004 for not addressing the need for personnel to get his department's new computer-aided dispatch system up and running to file fire reports to the state, Lash had given Benoit a satisfactory marking on his April 2005 performance review.

In the review, Lash emphasized the need for Benoit "to plan and organize the work of his department," adding that he hadn't seen "that kind of effort from him and that we weren't getting the work done."

Kathryn Emmett came to Benoit's defense by stating Benoit had moved to add another inspector, and that fire reports were being sent. Had Lash contacted the state to see if the reports were being sent? Lash replied that he had not.

Benoit was also cited by Lash for delays in "not getting the dry hydrant program going," which would provide water to BackCountry homes from surrounding pools, ponds and streams.

To the accusation that Benoit had provided no succession planning, Emmett countered that Benoit had created the new position of deputy fire marshal. "Isn't that a success?" she said.

But overall in Lash's view, Benoit's performance was proving unsatisfactory.

"I was being stonewalled on the way he was operating his unit," said Lash. "I was getting nothing. I view that as unacceptable."

"Prior to 2005," Emmett pointed out, "Benoit's reviews had been positive." "They are what they are," Lash said.

In Benoit's November 2005 evaluation, Lash first suggested he should retire if not able to improve his performance. But Benoit's response was that financial obligations prevented him from doing so.

Lash asked for Benoit's retirement again in July of 2006, after an unfavorable review, in which Benoit was told if he didn't retire, Benoit could expect further poor performance evaluations.

Emmett had shared this timeline afterward with a further threat made by Lash in August that if Benoit would not retire, he would be terminated to make room for "young people to move up."

"That is age discrimination," said Emmett.

Benoit's colleagues in the Fire Department were featured witnesses for the Town in the second hearing held on Monday. The strongest accusation came from the acting fire marshal, James McDonald. He testified that Benoit had not initiated inspections and that when McDonald offered to inspect buildings on Greenwich Avenue, Benoit instructed him "to stay off the Avenue as there are better things to do."

McDonald stated in addition, "There has not been preplanning the whole time of my tenure."

Fire Inspector Chris Doyle said Benoit had failed to acquire needed additional fire inspectors, and he pointed to a Benoit-approved renovation at the Stanwich Club that was later found not in compliance with regulation fire code.

The third witness, Fire Inspector Larry Roberts, faulted Benoit on lack of support for his public education initiatives. Roberts believed that "Benoit thought it was not the job of the fire marshal to do public education."

Emmett later pointed out to Roberts that "there were two people in the Fire Marshal's office doing public education."

Former first selectman Tom Ragland had been in attendance for both hearings. He stated that he had "heard nothing yet that would cause Benoit's dismissal. Ragland had publicly praised Benoit for his performance as fire marshal in 1999.

A hefty number of Benoit supporters attended the hearings, including Ellsworth "Chuck" McClenachan, who had earlier wondered why Benoit had not been offered an early retirement incentive rather than be fired after his 30-plus years of service to the Town.

Lash, questioned on such an option, stated that the Town last offered a retirement incentive in either 1999 or 2000. "We don't do that," he said, though adding, "Sometimes we offer early retirement as part of a litigation process to end the proceedings." But this, he said, "would not happen with Joe Benoit."

The third hearing will take place Monday, Dec. 3, with others scheduled for Dec. 17, Dec. 19 and Dec. 21. It was unknown whether Benoit will take the stand in his defense.