In a Jan. 11 press release, the four Republican City Council members criticized the council’s Democratic Majority for an absence of transparency and suppressing any real vetting in consideration of the Municipal Court Judge appointments that were before the body at its inauguration meeting, held on Jan. 2.

“With Majority Leader, Councilman John Donegan, making a motion to take the slate of nominated judges ‘as a block,’ the new Democrat Majority veered from past tradition that allowed for individual votes on each judicial candidate, preventing any substantive discussion on any nominees to the Municipal and Probate Courts,” said Republican Minority Leader and Citywide Councilwoman Nicole Renzulli. “Pushing through a block vote for these important positions of trust was disrespectful to the public and the judiciary. The new Democratic leadership treated these appointments like we were renewing mobile food truck licenses.”

Renzulli said she was shocked by the unprecedented move. She told the Cranston Herald Monday that as far back as people can remember, the selection of judges had not been taken as a block.

During the Jan. 2 meeting, Renzulli motioned to continue all judicial appointments from the celebratory inauguration to the full City Council meeting at the end of the month where members could voice their concerns and ask nominees questions. The motion failed to pass (5-4) and fell along party lines.

Councilman Matt Reilly expressed disappointment in newly-elected Council President Jessica Marino. He noted that, during her Jan. 2 speech, she had promised her presidency would be one marked by leading in “an inclusive manner, with integrity, transparency… and a conversation with the community.”

“The first substantive vote of her tenure was a maneuver by the Democrats designed to negate the views of their Republican counterparts, before we even had a chance to express them,” said Reilly.

The release stated that two years ago, new Majority Leader John Donegan (then a minority member) exclaimed that the process of selecting judges in Cranston “was broken,” that these were not “patronage positions,” and that the process needed to be revisited by the council.

“Two years later when his party controlled the vote, John’s calls for ‘transparency and a thorough process and vetting’ for municipal court judges was all but forgotten,” Reilly said. “I guess the political criticism he voiced two years ago as a minority member doesn’t apply now that he is in the controlling majority.”

Renzulli said if given the opportunity, her caucus would have liked to hear from judicial nominee Emili Vaziri.

“It was in the news last year that Attorney Vaziri had to resign from the Rhode Island Ethics Commission because she coordinated meetings with the so-called ‘Mail Ballot King’ Edward Cotugno and then Providence mayoral candidate, Brett Smiley,” Renzulli said. “While Council President Marino may be correct that all the nominees are attorneys in ‘good standing,’ and we do not doubt their abilities to perform the job duties of a judge, we believe we (and the public) deserved the opportunity to hear Ms. Vaziri’s explanation in regards to the aforementioned situation, as it relates to ethics.”

Councilman Chris Paplauskas also criticized the new Democratic leadership on the appointment of Cynthia Fogarty for Probate Judge.

“We have a Probate Judge Advisory Commission who makes selections based on merit and qualifications. On Dec. 20, 2022, they did not vote to recommend Attorney Fogarty.”

Paplauskas noted that the advisory members instead supported the re-appointment of former Probate Judge, George Cappello.

“While we are not bound by this recommendation, the report was not even read into the record,” Paplauskas said.

“Probate matters are highly technical and the public deserves to know the most qualified person is handling these matters,” Reilly, who is an attorney, added.

Councilman Richard Campopiano said he would have also questioned Fogarty’s appointment given her deep-rooted partisan activities as a former Democratic candidate for Mayor of Cranston and elected member of the State Democratic Committee from District 17.

 “This stinks of political favoritism,” said Campopiano.

Renzulli said if given the opportunity, the Republicans would have nominated some of the individuals who were already on the court last time. She said Joanna Achille, who was on the court for the past two years, worked the most and brought in the most revenue. She said there were a lot of great candidates who could have done the job including Steven Moretti and Nicholas Solitro.

Speaking for her Republican colleagues as the Minority Leader, Renzulli concluded, “Any issue that may potentially undermine the public’s confidence in the integrity of our court should be discussed, for transparency purposes. The two aforementioned nominees deserved the opportunity to publicly address these ethical and political issues and any actions taken that might restore our confidence in them as potentially highly visible symbols of the City of Cranston.”

On Jan. 16, the Democratic Council Majority Leadership issued a response to the Republicans’ release – calling the other party’s release “disappointing.”

“This should be a time of unity with our primary focus on the financial well-being of our city and serving the public in unison,” read Monday’s statement from the Democrats. “Instead, this is what the Cranston Republicans choose to spend their time on, writing a fictional tale.”

The Democratic majority responded to the terms “suppressing any real vetting” and “preventing any substantive discussion on any nominees to the Municipal and Probate Courts” – stating that this was untrue.

“Just as the Republican Party has done in the past when in the majority, including the 2021 inaugural meeting, the Democratic majority presented judicial nominees to be voted on. However, whereas in the past Republican majorities have not allowed debate or discussion on judicial nominees, including when appointing gun lobbyists, all council members were provided the opportunity for discussion on these nominees at this inaugural meeting on Jan. 2, 2023,” the release read.

The party said it is of little significance whether the matter is taken as a block or individually since the council was still free to have discussion on the judicial nominees.

“The Republican council members chose not to vet the candidates at that time despite being given the opportunity to do so before any vote on the judicial nominees. The Republican council members cannot cry foul when the opportunity was in fact provided, and they opted not to vet any candidates,” the Democrat Majority stated.

The party added that all judicial nominees have the requisite experience and are in good standing with the Rhode Island Bar Association. The majority noted that, in the previous term, now-Council President Marino and now-Council Vice President Vargas introduced, and helped unanimously pass, an ordinance raising the minimum experience required for judicial appointments to 10 years. In addition to meeting this higher bar, six of the eight judicial nominees that were appointed have, or currently serve, as a judge in Cranston.

“The fact is that the Republicans are taking issue with two female judicial appointees; one of which, the Honorable Cynthia Fogarty, is now the first female probate judge in Cranston. Both women individually have well over 20 years of experience as good standing lawyers in Rhode Island with the education, experience and institutional knowledge to fulfill their judicial roles,” states the release. “The attempt by Republicans to diminish the education and experience of Judge Fogarty and reduce her appointment to mere ‘political favoritism’ is rather incredulous, especially given the context that in just 2021 the same Republican council members attempted to appoint Steven Frias, a sitting member of the Republican National Committee, as the Chief Judge of the Cranston Municipal Court.”

The party also addressed statements regarding the Probate Judge Advisory Commission.

“The fact is that it is only that, advisory, and its findings were public at its hearing and distributed to all city council members by the clerk. The fact remains that the public was very much informed at the public hearing of the Probate Judge Advisory Commission in December,” read the release.

The Democrats said City Council members were provided the resumes of all judicial nominees days in advance of the inaugural meeting.

“Republican council members had the opportunity to vet all candidates, discuss their qualifications and debate the issue on the night of the vote. Despite these opportunities, the Republican members chose not to,” reads the release.