Better Than Hearsay - Mayberry and Good Ol’ Jewett

JEWETT - It is a good and necessary time to provide a bit of history on this “Better Than Hearsay” column which was created in the late 1980’s

The Mountain Eagle has forever been a weekly publication with only one deadline day that often doesn’t match up with breaking news.

If we get tips on stories that need more time to develop, we put the tidbits in, using reliable sources that we confirm before writing anything.

One very rememberable situation surrounded the closing of the hospital in Catskill, evolving from a series of revelations riddled with rumors but also rooted in formidable facts about patient care and oversight.

Digging through all that wasn’t easy but it comes with the territory, and the absence of a hospital is something that still haunts Greene County, reported, at the outset, with hearsay that wasn’t hearsay.

It is a good time to mention this because the legal cloud hanging over the town of Jewett for the past 10 months is not lifting, and could become darker before light is shed on the unsettling matter.

In early July, 2025, the Greene County Sheriff's Office executed a search warrant at the Jewett municipal hall, the heart of town government.

Not much has been officially shared by police since then other than a brief press release from sheriff’s captain Joel Rowell stating their search was prompted by “allegations of potentially fraudulent activity.”

Rowell further stated that police seized, “electronic devices, paper files and business records,” not specifying what department was the focus.

Town supervisor Greg Kroyer offered no comment, on advice of counsel. Nothing was heard until January, 2026, when town clerk Maya Carl and highway superintendent Robert Mallory filed a potential lawsuit.

Their Notice of Claim alleges that in the wake of the search they have been subjected to a “hostile work environment” by some town officials through “intentional infliction of emotional distress” and “civil conspiracy.”

A second Notice of Claim, filed in April, alleges that violations of Civil Law by some town officials toward Carl and Mallory have increased. 

The next step in the possible lawsuit is not yet determined. Town officials, on the advice of counsel, have not offered comment.

********

It is revealed in the first Notice of Claim that Carl and Mallory, in the spring of 2025, reached out to police, leading directly to the search warrant and their later allegations of retaliatory actions by some town officials.

The document alleges that, “during the Fall of 2024, [Mallory] became aware that a private home was being constructed and a foundation was laid on property owned by Barbara Schobel, the Planning Board Chairperson for the Town of Jewett.

“Around that same time, Plaintiff Mallory mentioned to Plaintiff Carl that the

construction was in progress, and Plaintiff Carl mentioned that that was odd because she had not received a check for a building permit for that property,” the document states.

In April, 2025, prior to contacting police, Mallory and Carl, “requested a meeting with the town supervisor, Greg Kroyer, to discuss the apparently illegal and uninspected construction,” the document states.

A series of events unfolded including talks and correspondences between Mallory, Carl, Kroyer, other town board members and town attorney Tal Rappleyea, ultimately resulting in the search, the document states.

********

The Mountain Eagle is being criticized by some Jewett officials for milking a story they say has no substance, nearly a year after a search warrant that would otherwise be all but forgotten, producing zilch. 

This is all relevant - and being chronicled yet again - after a new policy was adopted by government leaders, last week, that had purportedly already been adopted involving a deepening controversy over municipal keys.

Town board members, at a May 13 meeting, passed a “Key and Security” policy to “help maintain security and safety of all individuals.”

The policy, in particular, “requires all employees, appointees and officials to receive a new key for their respective offices and/or work areas.”

Further, all personnel must sign an Acknowledgement Form in order to be given the key, holding them accountable for its misuse or loss, etc.

Creation of the policy comes after the town, earlier this year, changed locks on interior doors and entrances at the municipal hall and highway garage, also installing security cameras.

Workers were told, at that time, they must sign the Acknowledgment Form to get new keys but town clerk Maya Carl declined to do so, since then being without keys to the building or her office.

Supervisor Kroyer, at the time said, “the town board has set a policy for administering the building. Any elected or appointed [official] has to sign for the key,” noting that he advised Carl of that policy.

“I have never seen it written that having a key is contingent on me signing a paper,” Carl said, claiming the key policy referenced by Kroyer was an arbitrary, “made up policy,” not approved by the full town board.

A policy has now been approved, introduced by Kroyer, last week, where councilman John Pumilia, moments before the board vote, asked Kroyer directly, “so that means that as of right now, [the policy is] not in effect?”

Kroyer replied, “this policy? Correct. But…the board that changed the keys, that updated the locks, has that authority to do so. One-hundred percent.

“Our board is the one responsible for security in these buildings. If we vote for it tonight, it will be in effect, immediately,” Kroyer said.

Carl, in a subsequent interview, said she will not honor the in-reverse-order policy or sign the Form, leaving the town clerk’s office in limbo, accessed only if someone else is in the building and unlocks the inner door.

The issue, as it festers, is not about who is in charge of keys, which used to be as problematic as Otis Campbell and the Mayberry jail, but rather, what happened, if anything, that brought the real sheriff to good ol’ Jewett?