The Massachusetts Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has found that two former Norfolk officials misused public funds, violated state procurement law, and abused vacation time; and that the town's Select Board failed to properly supervise one of the officials.

The findings, laid out in an August 4, 2026, letter from Inspector General Jeffrey S. Shapiro to Town Administrator Rob Garrity and Select Board Chair Kevin Roche, followed complaints filed with the OIG's fraud hotline in July and September of 2025. The nine findings and 15 recommendations focus on former DPW Director Blair Crane, former Town Administrator Justin Casanova-Davis, and the Select Board itself.

What the OIG found

Procurement violations. According to the letter, DPW Director Crane repeatedly failed to follow the competitive bidding requirements of state procurement law: Four purchases exceeding $10,000 - including $16,890 for emergency vehicle lights and $15,798 for skid steer attachments - were made without soliciting three written quotes.

Raiding other accounts. To pay for those purchases, Crane pulled funds from DPW subaccounts earmarked for unrelated purposes such as "Hand Tools," "Street Signs," and "Clothing Allowance." Some DPW employees who depended on those accounts were left unable to make budgeted purchases because the funds had been depleted.

Unauthorized equipment lease. In June 2024, Crane signed a three-year lease for a Kubota front wheel loader costing $92,172.27, plus $16,843 in attachments, without a Town Meeting authorization vote. Crane also used $8,644 from the town's restricted Water Division Enterprise Fund to help cover the lease, even though the equipment was never used for Water Division work.

A tub grinder that never worked. Town Meeting approved $85,000 in November 2022 for a machine to grind tree stumps and branches, a service the town had been paying a contractor $20,000 to $30,000 a year to provide. Crane traveled to Tennessee and bought a used tub grinder for $38,000 without competitive bidding, then spent roughly $31,000 more trying and failing to get it running. The OIG concluded the purchase wasted approximately $81,000 in public funds. The town resumed paying an outside vendor $22,400 in November 2025 to grind wood.

Personal clothing reimbursements. Between 2020 and 2024, Crane submitted receipts for personal clothing including jeans, ties, sunglasses, and a suit jacket and directed staff to reimburse him $2,821.19. Employees flagged the requests to then-Town Administrator Casanova-Davis, who the OIG says declined to investigate because the town did not plan to renew Crane's contract.

Services for a former official. In June 2025, Crane directed DPW employees to deliver two 30-cubic-yard town dumpsters, free of charge, to the out-of-town home of a former Norfolk town official, then retrieve them once filled with tree stumps and haul the debris back to the DPW. The former official's name and prior town role are not disclosed in the letter. The town typically charges $485 per dumpster; the OIG found the town was shorted at least $970, not counting disposal costs the OIG estimates at $600 to $1,300.

In September 2025, Crane directed employees to deliver three truckloads of screened loam to the same residence (Norfolk residents with a transfer station decal are typically charged $150 per 10-cubic-yard load plus a $95 delivery fee). The former official later paid the town $705 for the loam; the OIG's letter states he should have been charged $735, and a footnote attributes the $30 shortfall to a town billing error, not the former official. Neither the dumpster nor disposal costs have been reimbursed.

Vacation time. The OIG found former Town Administrator Casanova-Davis, whose contract ran from August 2022 to August 2025, took nine personal trips outside the country during his tenure and repeatedly used sick leave, personal time, and an unverifiable "other" time code to avoid reporting those absences as vacation. During one trip, he claimed sick time on days he was in Paris and Johannesburg.

Over two years, the Select Board approved his requests to carry over vacation time beyond the 100-hour (10-day) annual cap his contract allowed. When he resigned in June 2025, the town paid him $18,475.60 for unused vacation time; the OIG determined $5,304 of that payout covered hours he wasn't contractually eligible to carry over. Separately, the Board's earlier approval had given him $926.33 for vacation hours he hadn't yet accrued.

Select Board oversight. The letter's ninth finding is directed at the Select Board itself. The OIG concluded the Board did not exercise due diligence before approving Casanova-Davis's leave requests and failed to track his schedule, work location, or leave balances - oversight lapses the letter says directly cost the town money.

The town's response

Town Administrator Rob Garrity, in a written statement, said: "We thank the Inspector General and his staff for their thorough review of these issues. The Town has been addressing many of these concerns proactively, including appointing a new Chief Procurement Officer and developing new procurement protocols. The Town now has four senior staff members designated as Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing Officials to ensure that proper procedures are being followed. We will continue addressing the Inspector General's recommendations and are committed to sharing our progress with full transparency."

In a follow-up email, Garrity added: "The Town cooperated fully with the IG's staff during its investigation and thanked them for their thorough review of the issues. Town Administration and the Select Board are committed to fully addressing the Inspector General's recommendations in the coming weeks and sharing this progress transparently."

Select Board Chair Kevin Roche, also in a written statement, said: "The Select Board and Administration have worked to strengthen Norfolk's procurement and human resources practices in recent months. As a board, we are responsible for ensuring that every tax dollar is spent wisely. The changes we have made, and will continue to make, are our commitment toward that goal."

Resident reaction

Cathy Brown, a Norfolk resident who ran for a Select Board seat last year, said she was the resident who filed the original complaint that led to the OIG's investigation. She said the former Town Administrator's supervision was inadequate and that departments, boards, and commissions in town do not listen closely enough to residents.

Brown called for a townwide financial audit and said she believes the town would uncover more unreported waste. She said the town should pursue reimbursement for the improperly carried-over vacation pay, budget for outside legal counsel should the matter proceed to a claim, and seek repayment from the former official for the dumpsters and debris removal.

Likewise, Jack Olivieri of the Norfolk Commonsense Coalition, a Norfolk advocacy group, has called for town officials involved in these matters to resign, referral of the findings to the Norfolk County DA and state Attorney General, and a local recall bylaw. He too has called for an audit of town finances.

Residents pack school gym

In response, the Select Board met Monday night, August 17, at Freeman-Kennedy Elementary School, to receive comments from the public. Before the meeting began, board members met in executive session, a private meeting closed to the public, to discuss potential litigation. The board announced it had voted to pursue reimbursement from all three former officials named in the OIG's findings. Officials also said the town will fund an external audit, in addition to its standard annual audit.

Over nearly two hours, more than a dozen residents spoke, many expressing anger over the OIG's findings and calling for greater accountability. Some speakers called for the resignation of Roche and Select Board member Anita Mecklenburg.

In response to a speaker's question, Town Administrator Garrity elaborated on the tub grinder, one of the OIG's findings against former DPW Director Crane. Town Meeting voted in November 2022 to allocate $85,000 toward the purchase of a tub grinder, based on Crane's estimate that the town could save $20,000 to $30,000 a year compared to paying an outside contractor for wood grinding. The machine was never made fully operational despite more than $30,000 in additional spending. Garrity said the equipment will be auctioned, since its parts retain value.

Former Town Administrator Responds

Former Town Administrator Justin Casanova-Davis, in letters dated August 16 to the Select Board and separately to Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro, disputed several of the OIG's findings while saying he takes accountability for "missed opportunities" during his tenure.

He disagreed most strongly with the finding that he received $5,304 in vacation pay beyond what his contract allowed, but wrote that he is "willing to voluntarily make a charitable donation to the Town in that amount" for "the good of the Town." He said the Select Board's approval to carry over the disputed vacation hours came in May 2024, during preparations to open the temporary shelter at the former Bay State Correctional facility, which he described as requiring significant time and effort.

He also wrote that despite having substantial sick time available, he chose to use vacation time - which he said made up nearly 60 percent of his leave - during his paternity leave, to reduce the town's financial exposure.

In his letter to the OIG, Casanova-Davis disputed the finding that he failed to supervise Crane, writing that during his tenure, the town's legal counsel investigated procurement concerns about Crane and that Crane was subsequently required to obtain his MCPPO certification. (The Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing Official program trains public employees in state procurement laws, ethical standards, and contracting best practices for municipal and school projects.) Casanova-Davis also said Norfolk's special act governing the Town Administrator's authority limits his role in disciplining employees, a responsibility he said rests with the Select Board.

Understanding the roles

Kevin Kalkut, who served two three-year terms on the Select Board before stepping down in 2024, said many residents may misunderstand how the town is run. The Select Board sets policy, he said, while the day-to-day operation of departments is the Town Administrator's job. In particular, the Select Board isn't a mayor's office.

Over his six years on the Board, Kalkut said he did not recall the Board ever doing a deep dive into any single department; the Board's time and attention, he said, was focused elsewhere. He noted that it takes significant work to prepare for meetings with the current agenda usually focused on policy.

Jim Lehan, another former Select Board member, wrote in an email that the Board was aware of concerns involving the DPW and had begun looking into them before he left office, informing the OIG in the process, though the investigation wasn't completed until after his departure. He wrote that his final year on the Board was consumed by weekly meetings related to the emergency shelter, which he said he attended alone due to the state's open meeting law.

Scope of the findings

Taken together, the OIG's findings describe two different kinds of problems.

The largest dollar figures - the Kubota loader lease and the tub grinder purchase - involve equipment the town still owns; the violations were procedural, centering on how the purchases were authorized and funded rather than any allegation the equipment or money went missing. The smaller-dollar findings - improper clothing reimbursements, unrecouped fees for dumpster and loam deliveries to a former official - total a few thousand dollars combined.

The vacation-time findings involve $6,230.33, less than the amounts associated with the equipment purchases, but center on a different question: whether a public employee's leave records accurately reflected his time away from the job, and whether the Select Board's oversight caught it.

The OIG's letter makes no criminal allegations; it is a findings-and-recommendations letter, not an indictment.