Seeks own lawyer for ethics case

A Putnam legislator accused of ethics breaches in a complaint filed by the county attorney over her son-in-law's attempted purchase of a government-owned property is suing to stop his office from choosing who will represent her.

Toni Addonizio, who represents Kent on the Legislature, alleges in a lawsuit filed May 30 in state court that Putnam's Law Department approved her request for a county-funded lawyer but "has outrageously and improperly" asserted that it has the right to choose who will defend her against the complaint filed by Compton Spain, who heads the department as county attorney.

Both Spain and the county are named in the lawsuit, which says that Addonizio asked the department for "a counsel of my choosing" when notified that the Putnam Board of Ethics scheduled a hearing on the complaint for April 28. (Amid the dispute, the hearing was canceled.)

Addonizio's request for a county-funded attorney is based on a state law, adopted by Putnam, that requires it to defend employees in federal and state civil cases for "any alleged act or omission" occurring while they are working.

Municipalities are exempt from the requirement if they are the ones bringing the case against an employee. The law also entitles an employee to choose their attorney if the chief legal officer of a municipality, such as a county attorney, or a judge determines that a conflict of interest exists.

In response to Addonizio's request, the Law Department said its insurer verbally concluded that she was ineligible for legal assistance but, "after careful review," it would select one of the firms from its list of contractors - Roemer Wallens Gold & Mineaux - to represent her. The department also said that Addonizio could choose to pay out-of-pocket for an attorney who is not on its approved list.

"There could not be a more patent conflict of interest than the complainant in a politicized ethics proceeding selecting the accused's attorney," said Jeffrey Gasbarro, who is representing Addonizio in the lawsuit.

Spain's 191-page complaint, filed with the Board of Ethics in June 2024 and also forwarded to the Attorney General's Office, accuses Addonizio of failing to disclose that her son-in-law, Byron Voutsinas, was the buyer initially agreeing to purchase a county-owned property at 34 Gleneida Ave. in Carmel.

According to Spain, Voutsinas sought to use Addonizio's influence with the Legislature to include parking spaces from a nearby county-owned lot in the sale. He also claims that the agreed-upon price, $600,000, represented a "veritable windfall" from a recommended listing price of $900,000 and market studies valuing it as high as $1.2 million.

Spain's office moved to void the contract, arguing that Voutsinas failed to satisfy conditions for the sale to be finalized, including getting the Legislature's approval, which never occurred. After Voutsinas filed a claim accusing the county of breach of contract, Spain successfully petitioned a judge to have the contract canceled.

During a May 2024 meeting of the Legislature's Rules Committee, then chaired by Addonizio, lawmakers accused the Law Department of filing the petition without first getting their approval. Addonizio "spoke frequently and freely on the matter," but should have recused herself, said Spain.

The Legislature's former counsel, Robert Firriolo, defended Addonizio in a response to Spain's complaint sent to the ethics board. He also accused Spain of failing to disclose, when asked on his employment application about criminal convictions, that he was found guilty in 1993 of criminal contempt of court.

A judge found Spain guilty under state Judiciary Law, which does not classify the charge as a misdemeanor. Because the penalty can include jail time, Firriolo argues it is equivalent to a misdemeanor as defined under state Penal Law.