Minutes 3-3-26

MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION

OF THE RHODE ISLAND ETHICS COMMISSION

March 3, 2026

The Rhode Island Ethics Commission held its 2^nd meeting of 2026 at 9:00 a.m. at the Rhode Island Ethics Commission conference room, located at 40 Fountain Street, 8th Floor, Providence, Rhode Island, on Tuesday, March 3, 2026, pursuant to the notice published at the Commission offices, the State House Library, and electronically with the Rhode Island Secretary of State.

The following Commissioners were present:

Lauren E. Jones, Chair                                Christopher P. Callahan

Holly J. Susi, Vice Chair                             Frank J. Cenerini

Emma L. Peterson, Secretary                     Scott P. Rabideau

Dr. Michael Browner, Jr.                             Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.

            The following Commissioner was not present: Matthew D. Strauss.

            Also present were Herbert F. DeSimone, Jr., Commission Legal Counsel; Jason Gramitt, Commission Executive Director; Katherine D’Arezzo, Senior Staff Attorney; Lynne M. Radiches, Staff Attorney/Education Coordinator; Staff Attorneys Teresa Giusti and Teodora Popova Papa; and Commission Investigators Peter J. Mancini, Gary V. Petrarca, and Kevin Santurri.

At 9:02 a.m., the Chair opened the meeting.

The first order of business was:

Approval of minutes of the Open Session held on January 20, 2026.

Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:                     To approve the minutes of the Open Session held on January 20, 2026.

AYES:                        Lauren E. Jones; Michael Browner, Jr.;Christopher P. Callahan; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

ABSTENTIONS:      Frank J. Cenerini.

The next order of business was:

                             Director’s Report: Status report and updates.       

            Chair Jones informed that the Commission will convene in Executive Session following the Director’s Report, after which it will return to Open Session and consider the Thorsen matter.          

a.) Complaints and investigations pending

There are three complaints pending, all of which have been noticed for consideration at today’s meeting. Executive Director Gramitt informed as follows:

(1) Pre-hearing motions in the Thorsen case will be considered in Open Session. 

(2) A probable cause hearing in the James Durkin matter has been noticed for today in Executive Session. 

 (3) An informal resolution and settlement in the Jeffrey McCormick case will be heard in Executive Session

b.) Advisory opinions pending 

There are 10 advisory opinions pending, which likely will be heard at the last meeting in March. 

c.) Access to Public Records Act requests since last meeting

There were eight or nine APRA requests received since the last meeting, most of which related to complaint materials. One request relating to historical annual reports was granted, and another relating to the Ethics Commission’s historical purchase data will be completed within the 10-day statutory period. 

d.) Financial disclosure 

Executive Director Gramitt stated that official filing notices will be mailed to all required filers this month. He reminded that the filing deadline is April 24, 2026. 

e.) General office administration

The next meeting is scheduled for March 17, 2026, at 9:00 a.m., and will be devoted to the Thorsen adjudication.

At 9:08 a.m., upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Callahan, it was unanimously

 VOTED:        To go into Executive Session, to wit:

a.) Motion to approve minutes of Executive Session held on January 20, 2026, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4). 

b.) In re: James Durkin, Complaint No. 2025-4, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws     § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4).

c.) In re: Jeffrey McCormick, Complaint No. 2025-6, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4).

d.) Motion to return to Open Session.

At 10:05 a.m., the Commission reconvened in Open Session. 

The next order of business was:

Motion to seal minutes of March 3, 2026, Executive Session.

Upon motion made by Commissioner Browner and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously

VOTED:         To seal the minutes of Executive Session held on March 3, 2026.

The next order of business was:

Report on actions taken in Executive Session.

Chair Jones reported that the Commission took the following actions in Executive Session:

1. Voted (6-0) to approve the minutes of the Executive Session held on January 20, 2026.

[Reporter’s Note: The vote was as follows:

AYES:                              Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

ABSTENTIONS:            Michael Browner, Jr. and Frank J. Cenerini.]

1. Unanimously voted (8-0) in the matter of In re: James Durkin, Complaint No. 2025-4, to find that there does not exist probable cause to believe that the Respondent, James Durkin, an elected member of the Narragansett Town Council, violated R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(a) by his participation in the Narragansett Town Council’s discussions and votes relating to amendments to the town’s zoning ordinance on various dates in 2025, including February 18, 2025, April 21, 2025, May 19, 2025, June 2, 2025, and June 16, 2025. 

2. Voted (6-1) in the matter of In re: Jeffrey McCormick, Complaint No. 2025-6, to approve a proposed Informal Resolution and Settlement. The Informal Resolution and Settlement is a public document, and copies may be obtained from the Ethics Commission upon request.

[Reporter’s Note: The vote was as follows:

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Michael Browner, Jr.; Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; and Holly J. Susi

NOES:      Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.

RECUSAL:          Scott P. Rabideau.]

3. Unanimously voted (8-0) to return to Open Session.

The next order of business was:

Pre-trial motion hearing in the matter of In re: James E. Thorsen, Complaint No. 2023-7 on Respondent’s Motion to Exclude Certain Hearsay, Irrelevant and Unduly Prejudicial Documents.

Chair Jones thanked the parties for providing all documents in a timely manner consistent with the rules. Chair Jones informed that there has been no discussion among the members of the Commission regarding any substantive issues relating to the instant motion. Chair Jones inquired whether any authentication issues remain given the certifications provided by the prosecution. Attorney Bristow responded that Rules 901 and 902 of the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence require more than is contained in the certifications. Chair Jones further inquired whether the Respondent is raising an admissibility question rather than an authentication issue given that the documents are what they purport to be. Attorney Bristow agreed and stated that their principal arguments are based on admissibility, relevance, and undue prejudice versus probative value.

Legal Counsel DeSimone explained that this is a motion in limine hearing, which is designed to exclude prejudicial evidence from being admitted at trial. He informed that the Commission will consider and vote on each piece of evidence as to whether to grant the Respondent’s motion to exclude the exhibit, to deny the motion to exclude the exhibit, or to defer the motion to exclude the exhibit where it is believed that additional information or context is needed at trial to render a ruling on that item. In response to Commissioner Cenerini, Chair Jones stated that if the Commission votes to deny the Respondent’s motion to exclude a given exhibit, counsel again must introduce the item at trial and opposing counsel must renew any objection in order to create an appropriate record in the event of an appeal. Chair Jones further stated that unless the Commission rules definitively to exclude an exhibit, it may reconsider the exhibit’s admissibility as a full exhibit at trial. In response to Commissioner Peterson, Legal Counsel DeSimone stated that the Commission’s rulings today are not subject to interlocutory appeal. Chair Jones stated that the Administrative Procedures Act provides that only a final order may be appealed. 

Attorney Bristow informed that the Respondent objects to 23 exhibits on the bases of hearsay, relevance, and undue prejudice. Upon consultation with Legal Counsel, Chair Jones stated that the Commission will consider one exhibit at a time, with both sides presenting their arguments, and the Commissioners raising any questions as to the arguments presented as to each exhibit. 

Chief Prosecutor Gramitt presented a brief opening statement, informing the Commission that he submitted a proposed stipulation of facts to the Respondent’s counsel, but no agreement has been reached yet. He cited to DePasquale v. Harrington, a case in which the R.I. Supreme Court held that hearsay evidence is admissible in an administrative proceeding and that public records are self-authenticating and admissible. 

The Commission considered 23 exhibits that were the subject of the Respondent’s motion to exclude and the arguments of counsel for the Respondent and the Prosecution. 

After discussing the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #12, Chair Jones informed that Commissioner Browner needed to leave the meeting and would not be participating in the Commission’s votes on the Respondent’s motion. [At 12:21 p.m., Commissioner Browner left the meeting.] In response to Commissioner Ricci, Legal Counsel DeSimone confirmed that a commissioner must be present for the entirety of the adjudicative hearing in order to vote at its conclusion, but they need not have been present for earlier preliminary hearings. Consideration of the exhibits resumed with the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #13.

At 1:00 p.m., the Commission took a brief recess.

At the conclusion of all the arguments by the Respondent’s legal counsel and the Prosecution, at the request of Commissioner Peterson, Legal Counsel DeSimone reiterated the procedure for voting and the meaning of denying, granting, or deferring the Respondent’s motion as to each exhibit. The Commission then voted on each item as follows:

1. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #3, Department of Administration webpage.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Scott P. Rabideau.

2. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #4, Job Posting: State of Rhode Island Division Director, Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DOA).

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Scott P. Rabideau.

3. Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was unanimously

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #5, DOA Request for Proposal (RFP 7602780) dated June 12, 2020.

4. Upon motion made by Commissioner Peterson and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was unanimously

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #6, Scout Proposal in response to RFP760278[0] dated July 15, 2020.

5. Upon motion made by Commissioner Peterson and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #7, Agreement for Predevelopment Services.

6. Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was  

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #8, Invoices from Scout to DOA. 

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Christopher P. Callahan and Scott P. Rabideau.

7. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #9, Email thread between James Thorsen and Everett Abitbol, sent on January 3, 2023.

8. Upon motion made by Commissioner Peterson and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #10, Email from David Patten to Christopher Farrell, with cc: to James Thorsen, sent on January 5, 2023.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Christopher P. Callahan.

9. Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was unanimously

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #11, Email from Jonathan Depault to Lindsey Scannapieco and Everett Abitbol, with cc: to David Patten, sent on January 26, 2023.

10. Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was 

VOTED:   To grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #12, Email Chain Containing, inter alia, Messages from Jonathan Depault to Amanda Rivers, with cc: to James Thorsen, sent on February 9, 2023.

AYES:      Christopher P. Callahan and Scott P. Rabideau.

NOES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

The motion failed.

Upon motion made by Commissioner Peterson and duly seconded by Commissioner Callahan, it was unanimously 

VOTED:  To defer the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #12, Email Chain Containing, inter alia, Messages from Jonathan Depault to Amanda Rivers, with cc: to James Thorsen, sent on February 9, 2023.

11. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was unanimously 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #13, Email from Everett Abitbol to David Patten, sent on February 20, 2023. 

12. Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #14, Email from David Patten to Everett Abitbol and Lindsey Scannapieco, sent on February 23, 2023.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Christopher P. Callahan.

13. Upon motion made by Commissioner Callahan and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was unanimously 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #15, Email from Danielle DeMuro to David Patten, sent on March 8, 2023.

14. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #16, Email thread among James Thorsen, David Patten, Nancy McIntyre, Thomas Bovis, and Christopher Farrell, received by James Thorsen on March 9, 2023.

15. Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #17, Email thread among James Thorsen, Libby Kimzey, Everett Abitbol, Lindsey Scannapieco, and Danielle DeMuro, from March 27, 2023, through April 7, 2023.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Christopher P. Callahan.

16. Commissioner Cenerini made a motion to grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #21, Email from Jeff Britt to Tony Afonso dated March 12, 2023, but this motion was not seconded. 

    Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was 

VOTED:   To defer the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #21, Email from Jeff Britt to Tony Afonso dated March 12, 2023. 

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Frank J. Cenerini.

17. Upon motion made by Commissioner Callahan and duly seconded by Commissioner Cenerini, it was 

VOTED:   To grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #24, Text exchange between Libby Kimzey and James Thorsen on March 9 & 10, 2023. 

AYES:      Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Lauren E. Jones.

18. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Rabideau, it was

     

VOTED:   To grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #26, Email from James Thorsen to Libby Kimzey on March 12, 2023, containing forwarded email from Brianna Ruggiero to Elena Mertus and Paul Dion.

AYES:      Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Lauren E. Jones and Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.

19. Commissioner Cenerini made a motion to grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #27, Email from James Thorsen to Pamela Moscarelli and Libby Kimzey on March 12, 2023, but this motion was not seconded. 

    Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:   To defer the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #27, Email from James Thorsen to Pamela Moscarelli and Libby Kimzey on March 12, 2023.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Frank J. Cenerini.

20. Upon motion made by Commissioner Callahan and duly seconded by Commissioner Rabideau, it was 

VOTED:   To grant the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #28, March 3, 2023, text message between James Thorsen [and] Christopher Farrell regarding visit to Bok.

AYES:      Christopher P. Callahan and Scott P. Rabideau.

NOES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi. 

The motion failed.

Upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was 

VOTED:  To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #28, March 3, 2023, text message between James Thorsen [and] Christopher Farrell regarding visit to Bok.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Christopher P. Callahan; Scott P. Rabideau; and Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.

21. Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously 

VOTED:   To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #29, March 11, 2023, text messages between James Thorsen and Christopher Farrell regarding visit to Bok.

22. Upon motion made by Commissioner Peterson and duly seconded by Commissioner Callahan, it was 

VOTED:  To deny the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #30, March 12, 2023, Memorandum re “BOK Site Visit” from David Patten to Director Thorsen.

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Frank J. Cenerini; Emma L. Peterson; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Scott P. Rabideau. 

23. Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Callahan, it was 

VOTED:  To defer the Respondent’s Motion to Exclude the Prosecution’s Proposed Exhibit #31, March 12, 2023, Email forwarded from Jeff Britt to Tony Afonso with subject line: “Fridays Tour w/ Patten & Thorsen.”

AYES:      Lauren E. Jones; Christopher P. Callahan; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo. L. Ricci, Jr.; and Holly J. Susi.

NOES:      Frank J. Cenerini. 

Chair Jones requested that the parties draft and provide an order for the Commission reflecting its rulings at this proceeding.

The next order of business was:

New Business proposed for future Commission agendas and 

general comments from the Commission.

            There were none.

At 1:48 p.m., upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was unanimously

VOTED:         To adjourn the meeting.

Respectfully submitted,

 ___________________________

Emma L. Peterson

Secretary