City Seeks To Settle With Injured Firefighter

City officials met behind closed doors about the fate of a firefighter and didn’t bother telling him. Now they’re going to have to pay.

Just how much they’ll have to pay is the subject of ongoing negotiations between the city and Gerald Fanfarelli, a 23-year veteran of the city’s fire department.

The case, which centers on an injured firefighter whom the city tried to kick off the force, has turned into the latest freedom of information embarrassment for the DeStefano administration.

Fanfarelli, who’s 55, threw out his back while stepping off a fire truck in October 2006. He spent over a year on medical leave.

When he tried to come back to his job as a driver of the elite Squad One truck, he found the city had other plans for him. The city claimed it had conflicting medical evidence that the firefighter was able to work — and had caught him on videotape at a paid side gig in a jazz band while he was supposed to be on medical leave.

Fanfarelli denied the latter claim. He hung onto his seat on the force only after hiring a lawyer and unleashing a barrage of legal complaints.

The city made an offer a couple weeks ago to put a years-long battle to rest.

It offered to pay Fanfarelli $18,250 if he withdraws numerous legal actions — including two Freedom of Information complaints that produced damning findings against the DeStefano administration. Under the terms of the deal, the city would agree to let Fanfarelli stay on the job — and not charge him with worker’s compensation fraud for his alleged paid guitar-playing.

As of Friday, Fanfarelli and the city were still discussing the settlement.

Meanwhile, a legal battle was scheduled to continue Monday morning in a hearing before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO), one of several arenas in which the firefighter is fighting for his job. The CHRO has found merit in at least one complaint and is holding a fact-finding hearing, according to one of Fanfarelli’s lawyers, Scott Lewis of West Hartford.

The city and its pension board have hired three law firms, and spent tens of thousands of dollars, to defend against this firefighter’s various cases.

Fanfarelli is a 23-year veteran of the force with a clean record, specialized skills and a host of commendations, Lewis said. Fanfarelli barely held onto his job after the city tried to kick him out of the department — and has been ​“harassed” for the past one and a half years by being placed in a lower-paying job with frequent transfers, and by being ​“forced” to take a ​“demanding” physical exam, Lewis charged.

“You have the city trying to railroad a firefighter, a 23-year veteran, decorated, with no prior problem on the force — when they know that he is deemed OK to go back to work full-time,” Lewis said. ​“There’s an element of retaliation.”

Fanfarelli never lost a day’s pay throughout his fight with the city. He remains on the force, paid 50 cents less per hour because he is no longer assigned to a specialized tactical rescue truck.

Reached at the Lighthouse Road firehouse where he now works, Fanfarelli declined to be interviewed for this story.

So far, the city has lost two rounds of a nearly two-year legal fight. In two decisions issued last summer, the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) rebuked top city officials, including the fire chief and fire commissioners, over a historical practice of holding ​“secret meetings” to push injured firefighters toward termination.

It was the latest mar on the record of the Board of Fire Commissioners, which was admonished for flouting FOI law just months before this saga unfolded.

“Secret Meetings”

Fanfarelli’s complaints centered on a series of meetings of the Fire Commission and the Pension Board of the Policemen’s and Firemen’s Retirement Fund in April and May of 2008. Here’s how the turn of events unfolded, according to findings of fact provided by the FOIC:

Fanfarelli was injured in October of 2006. He was out for 14 months. In January 2008, he returned to light duty in the fire marshal’s office. In April, he presented a doctor’s note clearing him to return to full duty. He told his bosses he was eager to come back to work. However, the department had different plans for him. In meetings on April 3, and ​“very likely” on April 30, the Fire Commission discussed Fanfarelli’s medical condition during closed-door meetings. The commission had received conflicting evidence on Fanfarelli’s health: One physician said Fanfarelli was ready to come back to full duty; another disagreed. The commission was concerned he would throw his back out again and leave his unit one man down, according to the FOIC decision.

The problem with the meetings, in the FOIC’s eyes: Fanfarelli’s name wasn’t on the agenda, and he wasn’t notified, so he didn’t find out about those meetings until eight months later.

On May 14, the Fire Commission again discussed his case in executive session without providing proper notice. It moved to recommend him for involuntary medical retirement. The pension board met the next morning at 8 a.m. and took up the application. It recommended Fanfarelli get a medical opinion.

Not until after all those meetings did the firefighter find out, ​“through the grape vine,” that he was on the track to an early retirement. 

He kept his spot on the force by passing a physical test called a ​“functional capacity exam.”

In August, he returned to work full-duty. But he kept on fighting an FOI case he had filed in June.

Not until an FOI hearing in December of that year did Fanfarelli find out that the Fire Commission had met to talk about him in April.

“A Desire To Conceal”

The FOI hearing officer, Victor R. Perpetua, released a harshly worded report in May 2009. It charged that the Fire Commission and pension board, which are made up of mayoral appointees, both held ​“secret” meetings in violation of FOI law.

Perpetua found that top fire officials were less than forthcoming with records and information about the firefighter’s case.

Both boards ​“were motivated by a desire to conceal their actual meetings and deliberations from the complainant,” wrote Perpetua.

The Fire Commission claimed that it recommended Fanfarelli for involuntary retirement based on a ​“genuine misunderstanding.” Perpetua disagreed. ​“Rather, the Fire Chief and at least some members of the Fire Commission were very aware of the complainant’s interest in, and opposition to, his retirement, and nonetheless proceeded without any notice to him,” Perpetua found.

City officials failed to provide Fanfarelli with records in a prompt manner, and in one case the city pension fund waited a month before providing minutes to a public meeting, Perpetua also concluded.

The full FOIC last June upheld Perpetua’s findings that the two boards had violated FOI laws. In a separate ruling in August, the commission found that the Fire Commission made similar violations in two previous meetings, too. The Fire Commission broke state law when it ​“failed to give the complainant notice that his medical condition and medical records would be discussed in executive session,” the FOIC found.

The commission declined to impose civil penalties against the board members. It only instructed them to abide by FOI rules. Click here and here to read the decisions.

Unwanted Precedent

The city wants those decisions nullified, said Carolyn Kone (pictured), a private attorney brought on to represent the pension board on the FOI case. The board appealed the FOI decision against it ​“because the FOIC made certain findings that we thought were wrong” — and because the findings set a dangerous precedent, she said.

The two FOIC decisions give more ammunition to Fanfarelli for his other legal actions — such as the CHRO case due to be discussed Monday at a hearing in Waterbury.

Besides the two FOI complaints, Fanfarelli has filed three CHRO complaints and one workmen’s compensation lawsuit, and he’s ready to pull the trigger on a complaint to the state labor relations board — all about the same set of events. The complaints center on the actions of the fire chief, fire commissioners and the police and fire pension fund. (One CHRO complaint against the fire union has been dismissed.)

The FOIC decisions open the door to liability for the city because by the doctrine of collateral estoppel, the FOIC’s findings against the city boards could be used in other proceedings, according to Kone. That means unless the city appeals, those findings could be used in Fanfarelli’s other legal actions, or potentially by other firefighters who faced a similar situation.

The pension board has appealed the FOIC findings in state Superior Court in New Britain.

Kone said the pension board has paid her $36,000 in public money from the pension fund to work on this case. That didn’t cover her full legal fees. She was paid an additional amount, which she declined to disclose, by an insurance agency retained by the board, she said. Lewis estimated that as of last summer, her fees had exceeded $50,000. The pension board has since decided to use cheaper, in-house counsel to defend against the CHRO complaints. Kone remains assigned to the FOIC appeal.

The DeStefano administration did not answer an FOI request as of press time for information about the full cost to the city of the various suits.

The Settlement

Meanwhile, City Hall lawyers are negotiating with Fanfarelli to make all the cases go away. The city is seeking a ​“global settlement” to address all the claims Fanfarelli brought against the city, according to City Hall’s top lawyer, Victor Bolden (pictured).

As of Friday, two sides were still discussing the terms of the settlement.

The city’s Litigation Settlement Committee voted Feb. 24 to make an offer to Fanfarelli. The vote was 5 to 1, with Hill Alderman Jorge Perez dissenting. Reached Friday, Perez said he disagreed with the recommendation, but was directed by corporation counsel not to discuss the case.

Under the terms of the settlement, the city would pay Fanfarelli $18,250 if he drops his CHRO complaints and reopens the FOI cases to nullify the decisions. In return, the city would let Fanfarelli remain on the force — and would agree not to pursue a workmen’s compensation fraud claim against him, according to sources familiar with the deal.

The potential fraud claim has to do with Fanfarelli’s role in a band called the Waterfront Jazz Project. The band plays Brazilian and American jazz. Fanfarelli (pictured) plays guitar. The city claimed that in 2007, while Fanfarelli was out on medical leave and was accepting workmen’s compensation, a city worker spotted him working at least one paid gig for the band. Working a paid side job would qualify as an abuse of the workmen’s compensation system. Fanfarelli’s lawyer confirmed he is part of the band, but denied he ever worked a side job while he was out on leave.

Bolden declined to comment on details of the case, citing pending negotiations.

Lewis said the money is ​“minuscule” compared to the firefighter’s legal fees, out of pocket costs, and the personal time he spent to get his job back. All the money would go to the lawyers, he said.

He said his client originally rejected the offer because it was missing one piece: A suitable job placement. Before his injury, Fanfarelli was the driver on Squad One, the fire department’s unit that handles specialized calls such as tactical rescues and environmental spills. Now he’s at a non-specialized job in the Morris Cove firehouse, which pays 50 cents per hour less than the job he had before he got injured.

Since he returned to the force in August 2008, he has been bounced around, transferred four to five times, his lawyer said. Now he’s at Engine 16, but he’s there as a temporary transfer. He has lost money and prestige, his lawyer argued. ​“They’re trying to make his work life miserable to force him out.”

Fanfarelli has requested a more stable job and a shot at being a driver if a spot opens up.

“It’s about peace,” Lewis said, ​“restoring Mr. Fanfarelli to a respectable position.”

Fanfarelli has a bachelor’s degree in fire science from the University of New Haven, according to Lewis..

“He loves the job. He has dedicated his life to New Haven, which is his hometown,” Lewis said. ​“He’s exactly the kind of guy you want: Homegrown and loyal.”

“This guy’s squeaky clean,” Lewis added. ​“They picked the wrong guy to fool around with.”