To the Plymouth Community,
I am writing to you today to address the recent column written by Mark Pothier, editor of the Plymouth Independent (PI). His column accuses me of undermining their efforts to report on Town business. While I freely admit this situation was not handled perfectly, I want to clarify the background of this situation and put things in their full context.
First, I sincerely believe in the value of community journalism and a free press, and in providing our town’s newspaper and media outlets with accurate, timely information that allows it to provide our residents with information that impacts their lives and helps them stay connected to Plymouth. In my statement to town officials asking them to temporarily pause their communications with the PI, I included the phrase “until this can be resolved,” as I want to figure out a way to work with the PI in a productive professional relationship going forward. That was my intention when I wrote that message, and it is still my intention today.
Since my return to Plymouth in 2022, working under leadership of the Select Board, we have prioritized engaging the public and ensuring timely information for all. I, nor anyone on my staff, are attempting to hide information. To the contrary, we have spent the last few years developing more ways of communicating with the Plymouth community, including the show “This Week in Plymouth”, multiple social media accounts, an award-winning website and an intuitive online platform that connects residents to whichever town department they need. We also just developed a new magazine called “Plymouth on the Move” so that people can stay up to date on everything that is happening with our Departments, Boards and Committees. We want to be communicative, and we continue to explore additional opportunities to keep our taxpaying residents informed about what is going on in their town government. I recognize that the PI is an important component of our overall communication strategy with residents and taxpayers, and I was looking forward to Plymouth gaining a new community news source in the lead up to the PI’s launch in November 2023, but unfortunately the relationship between the PI and the Town since its launch has been more strained than I had hoped it would be.
There have been stories over the past year printed by the PI that have caused concern for me. As Town Manager, my primary concern must be what is best for the operational needs of our Town. Our residents depend on us to provide them with essential services, from public safety to road maintenance to environmental protection and many others, and the consistent delivery of those services is my main focus. It is important for our elected leaders and community at large to fully understand some of my concerns with the PI, and how those concerns are rooted in our ability to accomplish our mission of delivering these essential services to our residents and taxpayers.
Firstly, in recent years, Plymouth has had difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified employees, as have a number of other municipalities across the Commonwealth. As such, we have a policy to not respond to press inquiries about the departures of employees. By doing so, it protects the former employee, and it assists in them gaining future employment. This past summer an article was published by the PI that implied one of our employees departed under less than honorable conditions. A story written in such a way sends a negative message to our prospective employees about what their experience working for Plymouth will be January 14, 2025 which is something I need to be mindful of. I need to balance the desire for the public to be informed with the Town’s (and the public’s) desire to be able to recruit the best employees to deliver services to residents.
Another concern was again reflected in the article about the restaurant grease traps, which said that restaurant owners had declined to comment for the story in fear of “retaliation from town officials.” The article did not include any examples of past retaliation to business owners for speaking to the media (point in fact, we have never and would never do this,) nor did it give us the opportunity to comment and assuage these fears among our local business community. However, the inclusion of this language without clarification that no retaliation has ever occurred, nor would it occur regardless of what these restaurant owners say to the press, gives the implication to readers and other business owners that such retaliation is a legitimate possibility. This resulted in multiple inquiries wanting to know which business owners the Town had retaliated against, and concern from business owners that they may be subject to such retaliation. For obvious reasons, these sorts of concerns are the last things we need. I wish I, or someone else on Town staff, could had been given the opportunity to respond to this implication, but we were not afforded that opportunity by the PI.
In an effort to resolve this matter, I received correspondence with PI reporter Ms. Estes, who offered in future interviews to conduct an interview via email so that there would be no confusion with any quotes going forward. She also said if we were to do a phone interview she could read my quotes back to me, to ensure accuracy. I appreciated this offer, as I’m sure the PI wants to report factual information, as I want to be quoted factually. On Tuesday, January 7, I said that if Mr. Pothier was agreeable to Ms. Estes proposal that I would be willing to return to our previously established working relationship with the PI. I received no response, and instead the column about their issues with me – with no context as to the work I had done to resolve our issues – was published. This was a missed opportunity to settle our differences.
I understand that the interests and perspectives of the PI and the Town will not always align, as that is not the relationship between news sources and governments, but I do not believe we should have an “adversarial” relationship as suggested in last week’s column. Rather, our collective focus should be on accountability and responsibility. My priority is getting important, timely, factual information to our residents – whether positive, negative, or neutral. We all should strive towards this type of town and media relationship. That is my goal and I hope the PI shares the same.
I believe in government transparency, and those of you who have worked closely with me know this to be true. For those who have not worked with me, I welcome a call or meeting invitation, to answer any of your questions with 100% honesty. Ultimately, I want what we all want: what is best for Plymouth.
I look forward to working with the PI to bring information to the town, and I hope we can reach an arrangement very soon. It is my intention to present a Media Policy to the Select Board soon so that it is very clear on how we plan to move forward with the PI and other outlets.
As always, I am open to suggestions, questions, criticism, and feedback.
– Derek Brindisi
Clarification: Prior to this letter, the last message the Independent received from Derek Brindisi about this matter was a Jan. 6 email. It did not indicate he was willing to rescind his order cutting off communications with the PI.