RUTLAND — On Friday afternoon, a woman in a red sedan waved and honked her horn as she pulled up to a stoplight in front of city hall, exciting a woman who held a sign reading “Honk 4 Kim.” The people gathered there were supporters of Kim Peters — and they were still making noise three months after the mayor put the longtime director of the city’s rec department on paid leave.
Alaura McClallen, organizer of the group, recognized the driver as a fellow parent. She, like McClallen, sent her kids to a summer camp run by the recreation department. When the light turned green, other drivers sounded their horns, some pumping their fists out the window.
It was the second demonstration of the week for the small group, and the most recent event in a long saga of controversy over the ousting of Kim Peters.
After Rutland Mayor Mike Doenges’s reelection, he announced that he would not reappoint Peters as the city’s recreation superintendent this year, prompting a public outcry and confusion that has lasted for months.
In private, Doenges explained his decision to the city’s Board of Aldermen with claims that Peters didn’t do proper background checks of recreation department volunteers and employees, according to public records obtained by VTDigger. But Doenges hasn’t been forthcoming about that reason publicly.
His statements to residents broadly cite his lack of trust in Peters, leaving many skeptical that he has a legitimate reason for forcing her out of the position. Now she remains on paid leave until the role is filled.
With public disapproval simmering since March, the city’s Board of Aldermen recently sidestepped Doenges and voted to reappoint Peters on June 16. But soon after the city attorney said the vote was invalid — and officials are not on the same page about what happens next.
Background Checks
Back in January, the Rutland Herald published a story that revealed two volunteers for the rec department have criminal records. In the article, Peters said she conducts background checks on all employees and volunteers in the department, but admitted she was unaware of one criminal charge before being informed by the newspaper.
Doenges sent a letter to Peters on March 18 stating she was “placed on administrative leave effective immediately,” according to public records obtained by VTDigger. She would be barred from city buildings and unable to discuss her leave, but would remain on the city’s payroll until the position was permanently filled, records show.
Members of the Board of Aldermen were notified of her leave that day but not offered any explanation, according to city emails obtained by VTDigger. Many board members said they were struck by the decision and caught off guard. Shortly after, Doenges appointed April Cioffi as acting superintendent of the city’s recreation department.
“This has been a very difficult time for Kim Peters,” said Larry Cupoli, a member of the Board of Aldermen and part of the search committee to fill Peters’ role. “Frankly, she’s probably the best thing that’s ever happened to the city,” he added.
Peters declined to comment.
Doenges also declined to comment on his interactions with Peters. He said city attorney Megan LaChance advised him not to speak publicly about personnel matters.
“There was a trust relationship that was broken between myself and the superintendent,” Doenges said in an interview.
But in a March executive session, a meeting closed to the public, Doenges explained his reasoning to board members. He wrote a speech for that meeting in which, public records show, he alleged Peters lied about the department’s practice of running background checks. Doenges read the speech to board members, he said.
“I was directly and intentionally deceived,” wrote Doenges in bold, with “deceived” underlined.
In that written speech, Doenges said that after reading the Rutland Herald article in January, he dug into the city’s records and found out Peters hadn’t been doing proper background checks. Doenges claims Peters lied both to the newspaper and to him a number of times, then tried to cover it up afterward.
“That’s not following procedure — that’s scrambling to fix the appearance of one,” Doenges wrote.
“Imagine your child is coached by someone who seems perfectly fine. But we, as a city, skipped a critical step; and didn’t run a proper background check. // That coach hurts your child. And then you find out it could have been prevented,” he wrote later on.
The city is an institution that must keep children safe — and without background checks, children are at risk, Doenges said. In his speech, Doenges cited the oversight lapses of the Boy Scouts and the Catholic Church, both institutions notorious for sexual abuse claims.
VTDigger asked Doenges why he drew connections between those institutions and Rutland City. “It’s not based on anything,” Doenges said. The city is a trusted organization and officials have to “do our part at all times to make sure that we are taking care of the citizens that are in our care,” he said.
In his written speech, Doenges said he refuses to be someone who looks the other way when child safety is neglected. “I imagined the worst-case scenarios — because that’s what the job requires,” Doenges wrote in his speech.
‘It still did not make any sense’
Even after Doenges’ explanation, many city officials said they couldn’t get behind his decision.
“Some of us — most of us — didn’t buy it,” said Sharon Davis, who also sits on the Board of Aldermen, in a recent interview. “It still did not make any sense knowing Kim and the reputation she had.”
On April 8, Peters reached out to Doenges and formally asked to be reappointed to her position, public records show. Then, on April 11, Peters emailed the city attorney to ask if she could communicate with city officials and recreation department employees — LaChance, the attorney, sent her a cease-and-desist letter, records show.
That same day, Doenges published an op-ed in the Rutland Herald, stating that he didn’t reappoint Peters because he lacked trust in her. The op-ed never mentioned a specific concern related to background checks.
McClallen, who organized the recent city hall demonstrations, thinks the whole dispute between Doenges and Peters feels personal. “It makes me sad,” she said.
“I never ever mistrusted her,” even after hearing Doenges’ concerns about background checks, McClallen said.
If McClallen had known Doenges wasn’t going to reappoint Peters, she said, she wouldn’t have voted for him. Dozens of other people have emailed city officials in the last few months urging them to reappoint Peters, according to public records obtained by VTDigger.
In emails, some residents complain Doenges wasn’t more transparent with residents. Doenges thinks people are upset because they don’t have all the information about the situation, and advice from legal counsel has stopped him from sharing more, he said.
A contested vote
Near the end of a June 16 Board of Aldermen meeting, member Paul Clifford made a motion to reappoint Kim Peters as recreation superintendent. He cited a section of the city charter that allows the board to make an appointment if the mayor doesn’t within 90 days.
The council unanimously voted to suspend the rules to allow the motion, since it wasn’t on the agenda. After taking a short recess to review voting rules and talk to LaChance, the city’s attorney, the board members voted 7-3 in favor of reappointing Peters. Board President David Allaire was the last member to vote, casting his in favor of Peters’ reappointment.
Doenges said that after the vote he called Peters and offered her the position. Then on June 18 LaChance sent board members a memo outlining a number of missteps in the voting procedure.
Two of those missteps made the vote invalid, LaChance wrote.
As board president, Allaire should’ve made the motion for reappointment and “since the nomination was not properly made, the vote is invalid,” LaChance wrote. The president also should not have voted, and “the vote was invalid because President Allaire could not vote on the motion,” she wrote.
After receiving the memo from LaChance, Doenges called Peters and revoked the job offer, he said.
Now some board members think the vote still stands.
“The mayor can accept the fact that Kim Peters has been reappointed by seven members of the Board of Aldermen and move on,” said Davis, who voted to reappoint Peters. Otherwise, the mayor will have to take legal action, she said.
Doenges said he was unsure what taking legal action might look like. “I’m proceeding as if the vote was invalid because that’s what my legal counsel has told us,” he said.
Others have accepted LaChance’s legal interpretation and plan on working with Doenges to move forward. It would be possible for the Board of Aldermen to vote on the matter again, but some members think that move is unlikely.
The search committee to find a new superintendent is still active and ongoing, Doenges said. Clifford told VTDigger he decided to step down from the committee given all the fallout.
Some have gotten sick of the controversy. “It’s not good for Rutland,” said Michael Talbott, a member of the Board of Aldermen who voted against Peters’ reappointment.
City emails obtained by VTDigger show employees scrambling within the recreation department to fill Peters’ shoes, struggling with logistics and to find needed resources without contacting Kim.
McClallen said that while she doesn’t like to be political, she thinks the majority of the town still supports Peters.
The recreation department “needs a leader,” said McClallen that Friday in June in front of City Hall.
“The only person equipped is Kim,” she said.
