Stonington — The town’s two building officials have charged that First Selectman Rob Simmons improperly disciplined them for allegedly mistreating police Detective Greg Howard.

The allegations by Building Official Lawrence Stannard and Assistant Building Official Robert Chevalier are contained in the grievances that their union has filed on their behalf. The town released the grievances Monday after The Day filed a Freedom of Information request for them.

Howard had complained in March about the way Stannard and Chevalier allegedly treated him in connection with work he had done on his home without a permit. Simmons then ordered an investigation of Howard’s complaint by town Labor Attorney Meredith Diette.

After the report was complete, Simmons informed Stannard that he would receive a written warning. That warning will remain in his personnel file as active discipline until May 18, 2019. He informed Chevalier that he would receive a verbal warning that would remain as active discipline until May 29, 2019.

Simmons wrote the time limits were implemented because the two men had no previous disciplinary history with the town.

The investigative report of the actions of the two building officials released by the town redacted the report’s conclusions. Simmons has said the redactions were done because the two men still had avenues to file a grievance through their union. Their grievances are before Simmons after Director of Administrative Services Vin Pacileo ruled on them. If the two men are not satisfied with the ruling by Simmons, they can move the grievance to mediation and arbitration.

In his grievance, Stannard wrote that when he met with Simmons on March 27, Simmons gave him an immediate verbal warning for not shaking Howard’s hand during a meeting in Simmons’ office. Stannard said that when he met with Simmons to discuss Diette’s report on May 17, Simmons acknowledged the earlier verbal warning which Stannard said was never documented. At that meeting, Simmons issued Stannard a written warning, which Stannard said did not state a specific incident for which he was being disciplined. It did say he acted contrary to several of the responsibilities required of him as a building official.

In addition, while Diette’s report recommended Stannard receive training about “effective communication skills,” Simmons’ written warning did not include the requirement.

Stannard further wrote that Simmons issuing him a written warning after the earlier verbal warning was “double jeopardy.” In addition, he said the written warning does not refer to a specific incident, only that he “acted contrary to several of the responsibilities and abilities required of you as the Town’s Building Official.”

The union requested that the town adhere to the practice of progressive discipline, avoid double jeopardy, document the verbal warning, place it in Stannard’s personnel file for no more than one year and retract the written warning.

In his grievance, Chevalier said that he feels he acted appropriately and within his job requirements when dealing with Howard. He, too, said that Simmons’ verbal warning for acting contrary to his responsibilities as assistant building official did not refer to a specific incident and is “only an assumption derived from baseless accusations.”

Chevalier said that any type of warning to him is inappropriate as Diette’s investigation revealed that “while the manner in which Mr. Chevalier dealt with Mr. Howard may not have been as friendly, professional and effective as it could have been, it does not rise to the level of harassment, bullying or an abuse of authority.”

Both building officials pointed out they had no previous disciplinary history. Simmons previously has said he has spoken to the two building officials on a number of occasions about how to properly interact with the public and even sent Chevalier for training on the subject.

The investigation came after Howard complained to Simmons about “unprofessional conduct” and “bullying” by the two men. Chevalier first went to Howard’s home to inspect work that Howard had done without first obtaining a permit. Howard said he applied for a permit when he learned he needed one. The town has since issued a permit after Howard met certain requirements.

In addition, Howard has charged that Simmons called police Chief J. Darren Stewart and Stannard called police Capt. Todd Olson about Howard’s complaint after he filed it. Howard has said that calling his superiors about a building code and not a police issue was a way to try to intimidate him.

Howard has said he was speaking out on behalf of a large group of homeowners, contractors and business owners who have told him they, too, have been subjected to the “rude, condescending and unprofessional treatment” by the two men.

Howard also has charged they are misinterpreting building codes and exceeding their authority by demanding work that is not legally required. Simmons told Howard last month that if it is found the two men needlessly made him hire a mechanical contractor to conduct an inspection, the town will reimburse him for the $153 cost.

Diette’s report, though, says that after he took office in 2015, Simmons told the two men he wanted more strict enforcement of building codes than in the past, in part to ensure the town could regain its flood insurance discount. The report states the two men have done this.

j.wojtas@theday.com