Former Leg. Counsel Considers Legal Action Against County
Spanning over four decades, Clement Van Ross has made legal determinations for the Putnam County Legislature. Now, the ousted legislative counsel is determining whether to sue the county and potentially run against a legislator up for election this year.
In an interview with The Putnam Examiner a day after the county Legislature removed him from his job, Van Ross said “it’s not out of the question” when asked if he might bring legal action against the county. During the county Legislature’s organizational meeting last week, lawmakers in an 8-1 vote removed Van Ross from his position. A 2015 resolution that gave Van Ross a three-year appointment was rescinded, effectively ending his run with the county.
But Van Ross explained a resolution does have meaning, including his appointment that would have ended on Dec. 31, 2017, and it’s “sort of like a contract” when explaining his reasoning for considering litigation.
Van Ross, usually soft spoken during meetings, had plenty to say about the legislature’s decision to drop him.
Van Ross said lawmakers didn’t care about the legislative staff that he’s worked with and has come to rely on him for legal assistance. He’s been legislative counsel since 1984 except for a short stint when Democrats took over the legislature and he was temporarily replaced.
Van Ross said he was told after the end of the year meeting on Dec. 22 that the legislature was going in a different direction next year and that he should submit a resignation letter before the agenda for the organizational meeting was posted. He never put in that resignation letter, but took all of his personal belongings from the legislative office last Tuesday.
Van Ross believes he was removed because some of the lawmakers didn’t like his legal opinions, including determinations about Open Meetings Law and Freedom of Information Laws. Van Ross said he wants lawmakers to individually face him to explain why they didn’t want him to complete the final year of his three-year appointment.
“Most of them hid behind a curtain and let the chairwoman and vice-chairman talk, relay the message” Van Ross said. “Which is unacceptable to me.”
Van Ross even questioned whether the vote they took Tuesday night was kosher because the motion made about his appointment was not on the agenda prior to the meeting.
“They got a resolution, put it on the agenda,” Van Ross said.
Legislature Chairwoman Ginny Nacerino reserved comment about any pending litigation and any reasons Van Rosssuggestedthatledtohisremoval. She said the item that wasn’t on the agenda about Van Ross is subject to exemption under the Open Meetings Law and was identified in a legally permissive manner.
“It is the prerogative of the Legislature to select their Legislative Counsel,” Nacerino stated. “With an 8 – 1 vote, we were clearly decisive in our resolve to seek new direction. We thank Clem Van Ross for his many years of service and wish him all the best.”
One of the lawmakers that voted to remove Van Ross was fellow Putnam Valley Republican Bill Gouldman, who Van Ross said he’s considering running against in this year’s election. Gouldman’s first term expires at the end of this year. He could not be reached for comment before press time.
The two were both on the town’s Republican committee together for a short time and both have been the chairman of that town committee.
Van Ross said he knows the inner workings of the legislature and its responsibilities more than anyone in the county. He has served on Putnam Valley’s ethics board for a dozen years and has lived in the district for more than 70 years.
“This is in consideration, maybe the residents of the town can be better served by someone who’s a little more independent,” Van Ross said. “It’s something that I’m thinking over. It’s very tempting and I think the residents of this district need a better voice, not one who’s going to rubber stamp everything of the (county executive) administration.”
