I was disappointed to read of elected officials appearing before the Charter Revision Commission asking for the change or elimination of the charter provision which requires a unanimous waiver of the Board of Alderman for City Employees, to serve as elected officials.
This provision requires that situations where a conflict of interest could result in unethical behavior are disclosed and a review made.
We live in an era where the public trust of elected officials, government and its employees is low and with good reason.
Just in Derby look at some recent history.
- A tax office employee is forced to resign for allegedly mishandling city funds, avoiding prosecution by agreeing to pay back thousands.
- Our Senior Center Director was removed and charged with larceny.
- Our high school principal was charged with stealing $13,000.
- Board of Education members, in violation of their own existing policies, voted to hire an immediate relative of a board member.
- A sitting member of the Tax Board resigned in disgrace after being convicted of embezzling money from his company.
We need stronger not weaker laws and regulations providing greater oversight and review to discourage unethical and illegal activities.
Some say the existing charter provision thwarts “the will of the people” presuming that the public is aware of such situations. I disagree.
The fact is there is little public information provided of under-ticket candidates by the media or political parties besides their name or picture.
I consider myself an informed voter. I am familiar with the Iacuone family name and their positive community reputation. Yet I had no idea that Mr. Iacuone was a city employee.
It’s also been advanced that City Employees in their role as elected officials would remove themselves from participating where there was a conflict of interest.
First, based on the public discussion, it’s obvious that the standard for a conflict of interest is arbitrary. Second, the examples above demonstrate the unreliability of people to do what is ethical on their own.
Third, removing elected official from participating in the very actions they were elected to serve lessens the effectiveness of that board in achieving its purpose.
It’s been advanced that one man, namely Alderman Gerckens, should not be able to cause a person elected not be able to serve.
It appears our city forefathers would disagree. Maybe they have a greater confidence that if Alderman Gerckens acts inappropriately he would be turned out himself at the next election and no longer be given such an oversight responsibility.
Our city would be better served by the charter revision commission looking to ensure the following were part of the charter: Requirement for disclosure by all candidates of city employment prior to appearing on the ballot, a legal definition of “conflict of interest” and “unethical behavior” that all can be held to, and finally inclusion of Ethics Board including it’s composition, duties, responsibilities, etc.
Then a discussion could be had on changing or eliminating the requirement of a waiver for city employees to serve as elected officials, but not before.
The writer, a Derby resident, is a former member of the Derby Board of Aldermen, the tax board, and the Derby Board of Education.
