Leet officials fire police chief with no prior public notice

Leet police Chief Michael Molinaro, who filed a federal lawsuit in June against the township alleging political retaliation, was fired Monday by commissioners.

Molinaro had been on paid leave since April, pending an investigation. Commissioners approved terminating Molinaro after meeting privately during a workshop meeting and then adding it to the agenda, township Solicitor Stephen Chesney said.

People had a chance to comment before the unanimous vote was taken, Chesney said, and “all the procedures were followed correctly.”

Melissa Melewsky, media law counsel for the PA NewsMedia Association, said township officials should be prepared to defend taking such an important action without it being listed on an agenda before the meeting.

“The agenda requirements of the Sunshine Act allow agencies to add items to the agenda during a meeting, but that kind of action should be rarely used since it defeats the purpose of the law,” she wrote in an email. “Agencies insisted on inserting this provision into the agenda requirements, arguing that it would be rarely used due to the obvious inconsistency it creates with the letter and intent of the law.

“Agencies that use this kind of last-minute agenda addition should be ready, willing and able to provide ample justification for their actions to the public they serve, all of whom who were likely unable to witness and participate in such an important decision. I can’t say this violates the letter of the law, but it certainly conflicts with its intent to provide the public with advance notice of important votes.”

The firing came after commissioners reviewed the findings of an internal investigation that began March 14.

“Because this decision is a personnel matter with pending litigation, the Leet Township Board of Commissioners have no further comment at this time,” Chesney said via email.

The solicitor said Tuesday that the township commissioners plan to allow more public comment on the matter and ratify their vote at their Aug. 8 regular meeting.

The commissioners placed Molinaro on paid leave at a special meeting April 15. Stephen Panormios of the Ohio Township Police Department was unanimously appointed as acting chief at that meeting. It is unclear how long he may serve in that role.

Molinaro, a Leet officer since 2013 and chief since March 2021, said in the lawsuit the township violated his civil rights, claiming retaliation against his politics and his speaking out against reinstating an officer.

The officer in question, Nicklas Vigliotti, is accused of making “aggressive, sexual and/or racial comments” to colleagues and residents, according to the lawsuit, and overall “acted inappropriately” toward residents while on duty.

Molinaro said he reprimanded Vigliotti multiple times following complaints about his behavior, ultimately firing him in December.

The township filed a response to the lawsuit Monday. Township officials contend Molinaro’s attempted termination of Vigliotti was “contrary to Pennsylvania’s First Class Township Code” and that only the board of commissioners has the power to hire and fire employees.

Commissioners said Molinaro did not follow township code or the police department’s disciplinary policy.

According to the lawsuit, Vigliotti submitted his resignation to the board of commissioners in January. By then, newly elected commissioners Rody Nash and Daniel Peluso had taken office.

Molinaro said he had supported Nash’s and Peluso’s political opponents as well as candidates who previously ran against board president Martin McDaniel and vice president Carolyn Verszyla.

That same month, Vigliotti submitted a complaint about his termination, according to the lawsuit, and the board voted at the March 14 commissioners’ meeting to reinstate Vigliotti, pending an investigation into his complaint.

Molinaro said he spoke against Vigliotti’s reinstatement at the meeting during public comment. He claims his comments were left out of the public record.

Minutes from that board meeting posted to the township website list the commissioners who were present as well as 19 others who attended the meeting. The minutes indicate that commissioners held an hour-long executive session to discuss police personnel matters.

In its response, the township acknowledged Molinaro’s “inappropriate comments at the township meeting were not placed into the official minutes” and denies that they were required to be recorded in the minutes pursuant to state law or the U.S. Constitution.

Melewsky cited Section 706 of Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act, which says that written minutes of public meetings should include the date, time and place of the meeting; names of members present; substance of all official actions and a record by individual members of the roll call votes taken; and the names of all citizens who appeared officially and the subject of their testimony.

“This requires the agency to include at least the subject of all public comments and the name of the speaker as part of the official minutes,” Melewsky said. “Allowing an agency to subjectively determine what is ‘inappropriate’ raises significant First Amendment concerns as it raises the specter of content-based restrictions on speech. What is ‘inappropriate’ and who determines what is or is not included in the minutes?

“The public has a right to a full and accurate account of what actually occurred at a public meeting, even if what happened is potentially offensive.”

She added that other Pennsylvania agencies have been sued in federal court on First Amendment grounds a result of similar editing practices.

Leet’s response claims Molinaro was insubordinate by not putting Vigliotti back on the schedule and that he “fraudulently completed a form from the Municipal Police Officers’ Education and Training Commission that listed Officer Vigliotti as terminated for a disciplinary record.”

The township also asserted it does not know how Molinaro supported Peluso and Nash’s political opponents or any candidate.

Molinaro’s legal counsel, attorney Joel Sansone, said Tuesday the township’s actions against the former chief are political and have no basis on job performance.

“My client was a supporter of the opponents of the current regime,” he said. “Because that’s true, a good cop, an excellent police chief is being persecuted in favor of a police officer who has made racist comments, who has attempted to have some sort of relationship with a young girl, who has been the subject of numerous public complaints, in essence not a good cop. … They got rid of a good cop so they could hold on to their political office.”

The township held a Loudermill hearing on Friday.It is a pre-disciplinary, pre-termination hearing required for police officers.

Sansone said Molinaro was not permitted union or legal representation at the hearing.

Chesney said the police chief was not in a union and is not a union position, and attorneys were not required at the hearing.

The township alleges in its response that Molinaro attempted to steal money during the execution of a search warrant, confronted a resident about a social media comment and told the person “that if the post was not deleted there would be consequences.”

The township filing also stated Molinaro “purposely frustrated legitimate means of preserving evidence relating to the investigation of domestic abuse allegations” and called an officer’s private cell phone to report an incident to avoid a record of the call.

Sansone said he and Monlinaro vehemently deny all the township’s allegations, and called them smokescreens.

“It’s a smokescreen to cover up a political assassination, and I promise to prove that,” Sansone said. “All of these are excuses in order to justify a political assassination. I pledge that you will find that out in trial.”

Sansone said they are still in the early stages of legal proceedings, and no court date has been set yet.

He said Molinaro wants to be reinstated and to go back to serving the community.

“We’re going to take this as far as the law would allow,” Sansone said.

Chesney said the township stands by its response, and that its investigation revealed Molinaro violated his official duty and demonstrated conduct unbecoming an officer.

“We allege what we believe we can prove,” Chesney said.