Candidate’s Concerns On Ethics Board Agenda

By John Voket

The Newtown Board of Ethics is scheduled to meet Thursday evening, October 4, to reconduct business that was originally transacted at a meeting later deemed in violation of Connecticut Freedom of Information rules because no advance notice of the session was published or made available to the public.

The two major items of business on this week’s agenda are the election of ethics board officers, and reconsideration of a request from first selectman candidate Joseph Borst to determine if his actions as a Legislative Council representative were in conflict with local ethics policies. The first selectman candidate requested an evaluation of his actions in a letter to ethics board member Mitchell Bolinsky because during Mr Borst’s tenure on the council, he also was a paid employee of the Board of Education as a bus driver.

Mr Bolinsky has since told The Bee he will be recusing himself from any future participation on matters related to Mr Borst’s inquiry because he subsequently agreed to become the manager of Mr Borst’s first selectman campaign.

As a council member, Mr Borst deliberated on numerous school board budget requests, and his voting record reflects numerous votes against budget cuts to both the school district and the town’s operating budget. By Newtown Charter provision, the two budgets are presented as one to taxpayers who ultimately must reject or support that single budget line at referendum.

During a contentious council budget session earlier this year, Mr Borst proposed a $250,000 increase to the Board of Education’s budget to specifically fund additional bus routes and transportation department fuel purchases.

During discussions at the ethics board’s illegal gathering, reflected in meeting minutes, members agreed to send a letter to Mr Borst saying they were “…unwilling to provide any judgment on [Mr Borst’s] past activities based on the absence of a formal complaint.”

Ethics board member Peter VanBuskirk, who was elected chair during the invalid meeting, was quoted in the minutes expressing concern that Mr Borst was essentially seeking “an advisory opinion in writing to protect him in the future.” Ethics board member Sara Frampton, who is a Democratic nominee for the school board, concurred.

In the minutes, Ms Frampton observed that “Mr Borst is requesting a ‘blanket’ statement clearing his past actions,” finding “no possibility of any conflict of interest.”

Mr Borst insisted the tie between his employment as a school bus driver was not directly related to any advocacy for the school’s transportation department, or the $250,000 budget increase that he proposed specifically to help underwrite additional bus routes.

According to Section 8.1 of the Newtown Code of Ethics, “Officials and Employees have a responsibility to perform their town duties unencumbered by conflicting demands placed upon them by virtue of their commitment to other employment.”

Section 5.2.5 states, “An official or employee who has any financial or other private interest in any official action under consideration shall disqualify himself or herself from participation in the deliberating and decision-making thereupon.”

When asked directly if he was the one who came up with the idea to request an additional quarter-million dollars for the transportation department, Mr Borst previously told The Bee the suggestion to add money to the school transportation budget was tendered by Mr Borst’s employer and immediate supervisor, Transportation Director Anthony DiLonardo.

Mr Borst said over the course of numerous discussions with his “boss,” he determined there was a “real need” for the extra funding. “I have discussions with Tony [DiLonardo],” Mr Borst said, “He indicated he needed these buses to keep parents happy.”

The ethics rules go on to state in 8.2.2, “Officials and employees shall disqualify themselves from all discussions, attempts to influence the views of others, and decision-making with respect to any issue in which their employment may conflict with their town position.”

Section 5.1 indicates, “It is expected that officials and employees will be acutely sensitive to possible conflict of interest issues and that they will conduct themselves in a manner that will scrupulously avoid any conflict of interest, or the appearance of conflict of interest.”

The Board of Ethics meeting is being conducted after The Bee goes to press this week. Coverage of the meeting outcome is planned for the October 12 edition.