Representative Town Meeting (RTM) - Minutes - 12/02/2020

FIFTEEN ROPE FERRY ROAD
WATERFORD, CT 06385-2886
PHONE: 860-442-0553
wwwavatertordct.org
Lane
icy 1
md
sf
&
MINUTES
LEGISLATION & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Dec. 2, 2020 Meeting following Public Hearing Zoom Remote Access Only
BE 3% Hd
Members Present: Susan Driscoll, Tim Fioravanti, Richard Morgan, Danielle Steward-Gelinas, Bob Swansen
Also Present: Ethics Commission members Mark Burnham, Betsy Ritter and Laurie Wolfley
{eo}
1. After public hearing adjourned, Chair called meeting to order at 6:56 p.m.
2. Public Comment: None
3. Consideration/approval of Nov.23, 2020, minutes: Motion by Morgan, second by Swansen, to approve
minutes as presented. Voice vote: Unanimous.
4. Consideration/possible action on proposed Ethics Ordinance changes (RTC 8/3/20): Motion by Morgan,
second by Swansen, to discuss. Voice vote: Unanimous.
After confirming no further questions or suggestions, consensus to move forward. Motion by Morgan,
second by Swansen, to report out this item and recommend that RTM approve the proposed changes, which
strengthen the language within the code of ethics, definitions, and purpose; clarify the operating procedures;
and make the process more accessible for individuals who wish to file a complaint. Voice vote: Unanimous
5. Motion to adjourn at 7:08 p.m. by Fioravanti; second by Morgan. Voice vote: Unanimous.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTES
Dec. 2, 2020 Meeting 6:30 p.m. Zoom Remote Access Only
Members Present: Susan Driscoll, Tim Fioravanti, Richard Morgan, Bob Swansen
Also Present: Town Attorney Robert Avena, Ethics Commission members Mark Burnham, Betsy Ritter
and Laurie Wolfley
Public hearing convened at 6:35 p.m.
Bill Sheehan, author of original ordinances in 1992, was sole member of the public to speak. He summarized
his submitted written comments (see attached). Discussion ensued and Attorney Avena weighed in, noting that
signatures upon receipt are referenced within the ordinance; the previous $50 gift limit is suggested but not
required under state statute; and that giving hiring/firing authority to the Ethics Commission rather than HR or
department heads presented concerns and noted that it wouldn’t apply to elected officials or union members.
Hearing adjourned at 6.55 p.m.
Submitted by
Susan Driscoll, L&A Chair
encl: Sheehan comments
Ethics Commission ordinances—Final Dec.2

Comments on Ethics Ordinance
For L&A Public Hearing
As the author of the 1992 Ethics Ordinance, I approve the changes that have been proposed in the ordinance
under consideration. However, I do have some comments.
I noticed that you reduced the nonpecuniary gift from $50 to $25. The $50 figure was chosen because that is
the value in the State’s Ethics Statute. FYI — the current value of $50 in 1992 is $92.80. By comparison,
$25.00 in 1992 has a current value of $46.40. The cumulative inflation rate from the inflation calculator is
85.6%.
Some years ago, an organization evaluated various Ethics Ordinances in CT municipalities. Waterford got a
C+. I was surprised at the low grade but the major reason was the fact that the results of any Ethics
Investigation was sent to the appropriate Board, Department or Agency for final adjudication. The ordinances
that got As directed the Ethics Commission to take the final action whether an elected official should be
removed from office or an employee was fired, demoted or some other disciplinary action. I apologize but I do
not have a copy of the survey anymore.
Also I have new information. The their letter to management attached to the FY2020 Audit, our Auditors made
the following recommendation:
During the audit it was noted that employees do not sign off on the Town's conflict of
Interest policy or code of ethics. In recent years, issues of conflicts have become more
Visible and many governments have elected to have employees sign such policies.
These policies identify all business relationships and other dealings between the Town
And its board members, key employees, and other such parties with whom the Town
Conducts business. They clarify ethical behavior and what is expected of the Town’s
Employees. As a matter of best practices these policies should be signed by Town
Employees acknowledging their understanding and adherence to the policies.
I hope these comments are useful as you make the final considerations on the ordinance change.
Thank you for your attention.
Sent by Bill Sheehan 12/2/20