Ethics Board Will Have To Rehear Borst Conflict Query

By John Voket

The local Board of Ethics will have to rehear a first selectman candidate’s inquiry and redo its election of officers because the panel recently convened in violation of state Freedom of Information statutes. According to First Selectman Herb Rosenthal, the town attorney determined an August 2 meeting of the ethics board was illegal because none of its current members posted the required public notification at least 24 hours in advance warning the special meeting was being held.

“In all fairness, the ethics board only meets when it receives a request or complaint, and the board’s former chairman and secretary had previously resigned,” Mr Rosenthal said. It is typically the responsibility of a board or commission’s chair or secretary to ensure proper meeting notifications, minutes, and actions are appropriately filed with the town clerk.

In this instance, the first public notice the ethics board met were minutes filed after the meeting.

That August 2 gathering was not previously scheduled. But ethics board member Mitchell Bolinsky received a letter from Legislative Councilman and Republican first selectman challenger Joseph Borst, prompting Mr Bolinsky to contact other appointed members privately by phone to arrange the August 2 meeting.

In a July 28 letter to Mr Bolinsky, Mr Borst asked the ethics board to determine whether or not he was acting in conflict of interest because, as a council member, he voted on business related to the Board of Education budget.

Since he was elected to the council, Mr Borst has never recused himself from voting on, or advocating for, education spending even though he is employed as a school district bus driver. Mr Borst’s recent council actions included at least one specific proposal benefiting the school district’s transportation department.

During final council deliberations before the 2007-2008 budget was sent to referendum earlier this year, Mr Borst made a motion to increase the Board of Education’s budget by a quarter-million dollars 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.” The board did agree to provide the candidate any advisory opinions on future activities provided Mr Borst resubmits specific questions.

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.”

When the ethics board convenes to redo its meeting with proper public notice, discussion on Mr Borst’s complaint will be conducted again, along with the elections of new ethics board officers. In the future, Mr Bolinsky will be recusing himself from any further participation on the conflict of interest matter because following the illegal meeting, he agreed to become the manager of Mr Borst’s election campaign.

In his capacity as campaign manager, Mr Bolinsky will also be handling campaign duties for selectman candidate Paul Mangiafico, who currently serves on the Board of Education. Contacted for comment on the issue in his capacity as council chairman, Will Rodgers questioned why Mr Borst failed to send or copy his request for an ethics review to all its board members, instead sending it exclusively to Mr Bolinsky who is also a Republican Town Committee member.

In a subsequent call to Mr Bolinsky, it was learned that he was only recently appointed to the Board of Ethics and had, in fact, never attended an ethics meeting prior to calling the meeting on behalf of Mr Borst. Mr Bolinsky told The Newtown Bee he did not accept the invitation to become campaign manager for the Borst/Mangiafico team until after the illegal ethics meeting was concluded.

Contacted after the ethics meeting, Ms Frampton said it appeared during discussion that Mr Bolinsky had no close relationship with Mr Borst. That information is borne out in the minutes, which reflect Mr Bolinsky criticizing the first selectman candidate on points of his letter.

The ethics minutes reflect Mr Bolinsky telling the board that “the letter seems to not give complete information and the information that was given was minimized to lessen the appearance of the possibility of any issues regarding a conflict of interest.”

Contacted August 8 to clarify his concerns, Mr Borst spoke candidly about his presumption of innocence on any conflict of interest matters. During the conversation about perceived conflicts, Mr Borst cited the example of fellow council member Francis Pennarola, whose wife is a teacher in the local school district.

While conceding that neither Mr Pennarola nor his Danbury law firm are on the school district’s payroll, 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 Mr Borst proposed specifically to help underwrite additional bus routes.

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 indicated the suggestion was tendered by his 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.”

No Financial Benefits

Mr Borst added that he is not in any position to enjoy added financial benefits as a result of his council position, although an increase in the school district transportation budget might possibly affect Mr Borst in his capacity as a driver. Mr Borst said he is only paid “$15 per hour,” for a five-hour weekday shift when school is in session.

But in his letter to the ethics board, Mr Borst said he was originally brought onto the school district job for two weeks as a temporary measure. A call to Mr DiLonardo to determine why Mr Borst continued to be retained for more than three years was not returned at press time.

Upon hearing of his opponent’s comments, the first selectman refused to comment directly on Mr Borst’s actions, but reflected on his own experience.

“The first selectman has to be concerned with actual conflicts of interest, as well as the appearance of conflicts,” Mr Rosenthal said. “I often have to think about more than a direct and immediate conflict.”

Mr Rosenthal referenced former high school assistant principal Earl Smith who, during his active service to the district, also served on the Legislative Council.

“Earl Smith never participated in any discussion or votes related to the Board of Education, he only voted on the entire budget,” Mr Rosenthal said. Mr Rodgers referenced another instance where former councilman James Shpunt recused himself from any discussion or votes on Parks & Recreation matters after he became an employee for that department while still serving as an elected official.

Ms Frampton, who has served eight years on the Board of Ethics, said she specifically brought up Mr Borst’s quarter-million-dollar council proposal during the illegal meeting, and was told by Mr VanBuskirk that the specific issue was not a factor because it was not specifically referenced in Mr Borst’s letter, and that the ethics board never received any other complaints alleging that Mr Borst’s proposal constituted a conflict of interest.

“You’re telling me that [Mr Borst’s compensation for bus driving] is not personal gain?” she asked rhetorically. “In any job, don’t think you will make your boss happier by asking for something on their behalf?”

Upon reaching Mr VanBuskirk to confirm comments about the school budget increase proposal, he said he had no comment on anything related to the illegal meeting, except to acknowledge that the meeting’s business will have to be conducted again with the proper public warning.