SANFORD — The arrest of a town councilor ”“ who was released without being charged ”“ has preoccupied the Town Council for more than a month, though it has yet to discuss the issue publicly.

Councilor Alan Walsh was arrested May 15 on suspicion of operating while under the influence, but was released after a Breathalyzer test showed he was not intoxicated, according to police.

Apart from conversation at a recent workshop about an unnamed “incident,” discussion of the incident has been limited to e-mail messages among several, but not all, councilors. Council e-mail messages are subject to the state’s Freedom of Access law and are noted as such in the council’s Code of Conduct. The Journal Tribune requested the electronic messages June 22.

In e-mail messages to other councilors, Walsh has commented on the way he was treated by Sanford Police, his thoughts on why he was stopped and possible action he is considering in connection with the incident.

As well, Councilor Gordon Paul has been calling for a closed-door session on the issue and wrote that he has the support of three other councilors.

And while council Chairman Joseph Hanslip said he originally believed the incident was not a council issue, he now says he will ask the council Tuesday to launch an independent investigation into what transpired on May 15 leading up to Walsh’s arrest and subsequent release without charge.

“It seems to me the council has lost its direction and this issue has consumed members of the council. While it was my hope early on this matter would have died, and my belief early on it was not a council issue, I have come to believe that this is not the case,” said Hanslip in a telephone interview Wednesday. “It has taken on a life of its own and misinformation and lies aren’t doing any good. It needs a thorough investigation by an independent party.”

Walsh made a phone call to police dispatchers sometime in the evening of May 15, allegedly asking them to inform him if there were noise complaints about a party he was attending. Walsh a week ago told the Journal Tribune he made the call because of a discrepancy between the time the town ordinance says noise is supposed to cease and what party hosts were told by town officials.

Police did receive a noise complaint and responded and conversation apparently ensued between Walsh and the officers. Later, police stopped Walsh in his driveway. He was out of the vehicle when police arrived.

An e-mail sent by Town Manager Mark Green to Hanslip and town attorney Bryan Dench May 17, two days after the incident, notes that Walsh’s blood alcohol reading was .06, two points below the .08 limit. Green wrote that Walsh was upset and “he thinks he is being targeted by the police union.”

“I hope that is not the case and would be unpleasantly surprised if it was,” Green wrote. “I suggested to Alan that we treat this like any other complaint and ask the (Police) Chief to conduct an IA (internal affairs investigation).”

Sometime shortly after the incident played out, Police Chief Thomas Connolly, Green and Hanslip were notified. Hanslip notified vice-chairman Kevin Chabot, but has said he didn’t tell other council members because at the time he believed the incident wasn’t a council matter and it was up to Walsh to disclose it to fellow councilors if he so chose.

Walsh on June 5 asked why the police chief, town manager and council chairman were called if the incident was indeed a private matter.

“In my opinion, once the call was made to the chair this became a council matter, after all the chair is the representative of the full council,” Walsh wrote in an e-mail to Hanslip June 5. “Also alarming to me was the fact all three were told I was arrested but none told falsely, maliciously and clearly with the intent either by the officer or on (behalf) of the union as retribution for my votes on the (police) contract and also the fact that I had told the arresting officer two hours prior that I wanted to file a complaint to the attitude and professionalism of the other patrol officers on duty. ”¦ I only ask you how you as a councilor would feel if an officer waited in your driveway to arrest you after seeing you at a party, handcuffed you and threw you in the back of a filthy cruiser.”

Walsh declined to attend a dedication of the new police station and said he would not attend a council goal-setting workshop if it were held there. He said he viewed the location “as a hostile and unsafe environment for me to place myself.”

On June 25, Walsh wrote that he intended to meet with his attorney with the intent of advancing a civil rights complaint. In a separate communication that day, he asked Hanslip whether he would be entitled to legal representation by the town attorney if he could prove the actions that took place transpired because he was a councilor.

When asked for comment on the situation a week ago, Walsh declined, citing the advice of his attorney. However, while again declining comment on the incident this morning, Walsh had this to say: “I don’t want to say anything that would hurt the police department at this point,” he wrote. “I believe Chief Connolly has done an investigation and has handled this as an internal personnel issue.”

Meanwhile, Paul has pressed for a closed-door council session since May 20, five days after the incident took place. He also pointed out that the town’s charter empowers the council to launch an investigation into the affairs of the town and the conduct of any town department, office, or agency.

In an e-mail to Hanslip June 10, Paul lays out 10 points that he believes a closed door session should address, including information about the incident he learned from other councilors, rumors “on the street” that Walsh has allegedly received preferential treatment because of his position as a councilor, and suggestions by others that Walsh’s conduct that night was inappropriate.

“What am I to think as an elected official?” Paul wrote. “Why can’t we meet to discuss this issue? A member of the Town Council was arrested, in the wee hours of a morning, taken to the Police Station and booked, then subsequently released with no charges, the rumors are flying all around town, the (Town) Manager is saying he can’t say anything, the Council Chairman is saying he is trying to ”˜be respectful,’ to the individual councilor, and the rest of us sit back and wonder what really happened.”

Paul a week ago pressed for a notifications policy that would outline circumstances under which councilors would be notified of major incidents.

Councilor Anne Marie Mastraccio said she saw no need for an executive session and felt it would be inappropriate. Vice-chairman Kevin Chabot expressed a similar sentiment.

Hanslip conferred with Dench, the town attorney, who said the request to meet to discuss the issue in executive session under the personnel clause didn’t meet the standard required.

“In my opinion, it would not be appropriate to have a general discussion of a matter such as the arrest of a councilor in executive session under the notion that such a discussion is a ”˜personnel matter,’” Dench wrote May 20.

An executive session has been scheduled for July 20. Dench has written that he intends to explain the legal rights and duties of the council under the Freedom of Access Act and the personnel clause and how the council could proceed. He said he believes it would not be appropriate to discuss the specifics.

— Staff Writer Tammy Wells can be contacted at 324-4444 or twells@journaltribune.com.