[D]oes your town have a conflict of interest policy?
It’s supposed to.
A state-imposed deadline for all Vermont towns to adopt a conflict of interest policy or ordinance has come and gone — it was last Monday, July 1.
According to a model policy being distributed by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, conflict of interest policies should help encourage transparency and openness by ensuring that all town or village business “will be conducted in such a way that no public officer of the municipality will gain a personal or financial advantage from his or her work for the municipality,” thereby helping to preserve people’s trust in their government.
The policies apply to all elected or appointed officials in municipal government, including the town selectboard and other elected boards along with town employees and volunteers.
Maura Carroll, executive director of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, thinks transparency and avoiding possible conflicts of interest has “always been a priority for local government.”
“There have been policies in many communities for several years,” Carroll said. “Local government has been the leader in establishing conflict of interest policies.”
Every so often, there’s a question about whether the state government needs a conflict policy, too. The state ethics commission, formed in June 2017, is one product of that discussion, but Carroll said there is considerable debate in the Legislature on whether a statewide policy is needed.
“They did come to an agreement on local government,” though, Carroll said. Passed in 2017, Act 79 requires adoption of a conflict policy by July 1 of this year. Her organization has been helping towns and cities all over the state meet that deadline, writing and sending out a model policy that many communities have adapted to their own liking.
Stowe Town Manager Charles Safford thinks most people working or volunteering in town government want to do the right thing anyway, and he views ethics policies like this as a way to “help honest people be honest.”
“Keep people from tripping up,” he added, although sometimes situations arise when it’s useful to tell certain employees or officials that they need to comply with this policy, or else.
“I’m big into policy governance. If a board adopts a policy, we have a sheet of music to work from, expectations on how to carry it out,” Safford said. “If something is codified in policy, it’s easier for others to know what the expectations are.”
“It’s kind of a good housekeeping thing to have,” said Hyde Park Town Administrator Ron Rodjenski. “Our (select) board has been pretty good about this for years,” and now that unwritten rule has been codified.
Local policies
The majority of the towns in Lamoille County adopted some kind of policy ahead of the July 1 deadline.
The Belvidere, Hyde Park and Morristown selectboards all adopted policies in June. Johnson had one in place before this year’s town meeting in March, and the Cambridge policy dates back to Sept. 4, 2018.
Stowe adopted its policy not long after Safford came on board 12 years ago, and Town Clerk Linda Martin says Wolcott has had a conflict of interest policy since May 2001.
“It was something that VLCT suggested,” Martin said.
The town clerks in two towns, Eden and Elmore, said they were unaware of the state requirement that towns adopt a policy by July 1.
“No, we don’t have one, but I’ll look into it,” Elmore’s Sharon Draper said.
“We’ll look into it, but as of right now we do not have one,” Eden’s Candy Vear said.
She added that town staff and the selectboard have a document, provided by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, that lists potential conflicts of interests, and they regularly refer to that to avoid any problems.
“We go by that, but we haven’t adopted any official policy yet,” Vear said.
Town officials in Waterville were not able to confirm or deny if they have a conflict of interest policy, and one was not readily available on the town website.
While the state set a July 1 deadline, there are no penalties for towns like Eden and Elmore that don’t have a policy yet.
Carroll’s organization doesn’t keep a running count of how many towns have adopted a policy, but she thinks more towns have done so than not.
How to herd the stragglers? “Just encourage communities to do what makes sense to them,” Carroll said. She thinks most town employees do their best to keep up with changing laws, but “there are a lot of them, and sometimes it takes a little bit longer to get things moving.”
What’s in a policy?
Many local towns, including Cambridge, Hyde Park, Johnson and Morristown, simply adopted the model provided by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, with the occasional minor tweak.
Stowe’s policy has some variations in its wording and content, since it was adopted over a decade ago and is based on a similar policy Safford helped craft while working for the Essex village government.
But, while the wording may vary, the policies have the same goals.
Policies define a conflict of interest as “a real or seeming incompatibility” between a public official’s private interests and his or her public responsibilities and duties. Conflicts often arise if there is a “direct or indirect personal or financial interest of a public officer,” or someone associated with that person.
Along with defining several terms, the policies list prohibited conduct, such as participating in any action where there may be a real or perceived conflict of interest, accepting or requesting gifts or offerings for personal gain, using municipal resources that are not available to the general public for personal gain, or participating directly in the appointment of an immediate family member or business associate to any town office or position.
The policies often require public officials to disclose any real or perceived conflict of interest if the situation arises, and to offer to recuse themselves from that particular piece of town business.
The League’s model policy recommends that any municipal official who fails to recuse himself or herself from a potential conflict of interest be disciplined or removed from office.
