Greenwich Moves To Settle 'Signgate' Lawsuit For $650K

GREENWICH, CT — Greenwich on Wednesday took steps to approve a $650,000 settlement in the civil case involving the town and former Greenwich Police Capt. Mark Kordick.

The case had just completed jury selection and was slated to go to trial as early as Sept. 21.

Kordick previously admitted to paying for and installing fake political signs around town just prior to the 2019 election that connected then-President Donald J. Trump with Republican First Selectman Fred Camillo, who was running for a first term in office at the time.

In April 2020, Kordick, a Democrat, was ultimately fired from the Greenwich Police Department after a 32-year career. Kordick filed a lawsuit against Greenwich in June 2020 claiming he was retaliated against for exercising his "constitutionally protected right to engage in off-duty political speech."

According to court documents, an "offer of compromise" was filed in state Superior Court in Stamford on July 14 for a $675,000 settlement.

The town did not take any action on settlement discussions until this week when the Representative Town Meeting Claims Committee on Tuesday night voted 9-0-1 to approve "up to $500,000 of funds as required under the terms of the town’s obligations in the applicable insurance contract due to the demand of the insurance company to tender the balance of the sir. The insurance carrier will cover the balance of the claims costs regarding Kordick vs Town of Greenwich et al. "

The Board of Selectmen voted 2-0 Wednesday with Camillo recused to approve a $650,000 settlement with some insurance funds, and the Board of Estimate and Taxation followed suit with a 10-0 vote. Members Miriam Kreuzer and Bill Drake were absent.

Kordick's lawyer said no settlement offer had been communicated to them as of Wednesday morning, Greenwich Time said.

BET member Karen Fassuliotis, who is also chair of the BET Law Committee, told the finance board Wednesday morning that the settlement marks "the end of a chapter that wasn't easy" for the town, according to a copy of her statement.

Fassuliotis said her statement reflects her views and those of the full Republican caucus on the Kordick case, and do not represent the views of the full BET.

"Up until a week ago, many on the various Town bodies resisted settlement at the figure that the insurance company is now requiring us to approve," Fassuliotis said.

"The action by the insurance company is contractual and we have little choice in approving their demand. To reject their demand would be irresponsible, would potentially put our insurance policies at risk in the future and would potentially cost the town millions if the town would lose. That is not a roll of the dice I, for one, and I think the majority on this board, are willing to take," she added.

"The insurance clause that the insurance company exercised, quite frankly, has hijacked what would have been a fair hearing in front of a jury - a group of this individual’s peers - to decide, once and for all, whether the town would prevail in the termination of this individual. At the end of the day, this was an employment termination case, nothing more. There may be many who will try to spin this differently."

According to court documents filed on Aug. 22 on behalf of the town, Greenwich, the defendant, "contends that the plaintiff's activities at issue in this case were not constitutionally protected rights guaranteed under the First Amendment," and that Kordick "cannot prove that his employment was terminated because he exercised any such rights."

Several town employees could be called to testify as witnesses in a jury trial, the documents show.