Derby Ethics Board Receives First Complaint In Years

The newly-formed Derby Board of Ethics heard its first complaint in years Monday — then promptly dismissed it on technical and jurisdictional grounds.

Background

Derby has had an ethics board for generations, but it was only recently relaunched after being dormant for years.

Questions about ethics and conflicts of interest with Derby government were constantly raised in 2016, particularly by Second Ward Aldermen Art Gerckens.

The lack of an active ethics board was also pointed out by Aldermanic President Carmen DiCenso during a Valley Indy podcast in November 2016.

That same podcast reported members of the Board of Aldermen employed by the city were helping to negotiate contracts on behalf of fellow city employees.

Mayor Anita Dugatto appointed new ethics board members who were approved at a meeting in February 2017. Click here to read meeting minutes. 

The Complaint

The newly invigorated ethics board — Andrew Baklik, Pamela Ortiz, Kara Rochelle and Peter Campolattano — met June 26 to ​“review case #2017 – 01” in executive session, a closed-door meeting allowable under specific circumstances, according to state law.

While the agenda item sounded like something from an early George Lucas sci-fi flick, the Valley Indy learned the complaint was from Derby’s Laura Wabno and involved the Derby housing commissioners.

More On The Complaint

The Derby Housing Authority, where a financial crisis was recently revealed, operates government-subsidized housing in the city.

The authority employs about nine people and is governed by a five-person housing commission, whose volunteer members are appointed by the mayor.

The housing commission meets once a month to conduct business.

Wabno was the housing commission’s recording secretary for 10 years.

As recording secretary, Wabno’s role was limited to attending housing authority meetings and taking accurate meeting minutes.

In July 2015 she took a job within the housing authority as a ​“family self-sufficiency coordinator,” a full-time job.

She works with about 25 clients to help them find work or educational opportunities.

Wabno said earlier this month Steven Nakano, the Derby Housing Authority Executive Director, told her that housing commission chairwoman Linda Fusco told him Wabno was being replaced as recording secretary due to a conflict of interest.

Wabno said she was told she could not work within the housing authority while also acting as the commission’s recording secretary because it was a conflict of interest.

But Wabno begged to differ. She said her payment for the two positions are coming from two different sources.

Wabno pointed out her salary as family self-sufficiency coordinator is funded through a year-to-year grant.

Her payment for taking meeting minutes were from the housing authority budget — $75 for any meeting, $100 if a meeting went over an hour. That payment included transcribing the minutes after the meeting.

She said all recording secretaries in the city are paid at that rate. Wabno, by the way, was the city’s town clerk from the end of 2005 until the end of the 2013.

Wabno pointed out that most recording secretaries for various city boards and commissions are either full or part-time city employees.

She questioned whether those positions are also conflicts of interest.

Wabno wrote letters to both the housing authority and the ethics board hoping she could argue her role wasn’t a conflict. She wanted to be reinstated.

Ruling

Wabno never got the chance to argue her side in front of the new ethics board — at least not in the manner she wanted.

After meeting in the private executive session while Wabno waited outside, the ethics board unanimously voted to dismiss the complaint because Wabno’s complaint was not a sworn statement, according to a statement read into the record by Kara Rochelle.

Even if Wabno had submitted a sworn statement, the claim itself was outside the board’s jurisdiction, members ruled.

“It was really asking more for an advisory opinion as to actions that were taken by another board with regard to an ethical claim — as opposed to claiming that someone is violating an ethical principle,” Derby attorney Fran Teodosio said after the meeting.

The ethics board, Teodosio said, is a quasi-prosecutorial entity.

“They were being asked to be a court of second opinion” in Wabno’s complaint, Teodosio said.

Reaction

Wabno was disappointed and surprised at the decision. She said the process the had been frustrating, with the city failing to tell her the matter was going to be discussed at the meeting until less than four hours before the meeting.

Wabno thought the letter she sent would get her on the agenda of the ethics board, where she would be given a chance to explain her case in detail, in person.

She thought the ethics board would be talking in executive session about ​“probable cause,” and that Monday’s meeting was just a first step in a process.

In addition, she was frustrated the city shielded her complaint from the public by identifying it as ​“case #2017 – 01.” Wabno said she wanted the discussion about her concerns to happen in public.

Teodosio suggested her complaint would be better suited for the state Department of Labor, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (the agency that has ultimate jurisdiction over the Derby Housing Authority), or civil court.

Click here to learn more about the Derby Board of Ethics.