Waterford commission suggests penalties for breaking ethics complaint confidentiality

Waterford ― The commission responsible for investigating resident complaints against elected town officials has suggested ordinance changes that would penalize complainants who make their complaints public.Three ordinance changes, which the Ethics Commission unanimously approved Oct. 1, were referred Monday to the Representative Town Meeting's Legislation and Administration Standing Committee, said committee and RTM member Sue Driscoll. The committee has not yet set a date to discuss the changes, she said."It's all in their court now," said Ethics Commission Chair Betsy Ritter Thursday.The Ethics Commission is established under state law as a body to investigate allegations of unethical conduct, corrupting influence or illegal activities against any town board, agency, commission, committee, official or employee. Pursuant to state law, it consists of seven residents who are not elected officials and meets quarterly to investigate the complaints. The proposals end a year of discussion by the Ethics Commission on how the town can maintain confidentiality over its ethics complaint process. Commissioners began discussing the issue at its first meeting in 2024, after complaint filer Ron Elkin had leaked a copy of a complaint ― which he had filed against First Selectman Rob Brule and then-Board of Education candidate Mindy Stone ― to The Day.Elkin, a Democrat running for a position on the town's Representative Town Meeting, had filed the complaint against the two Republicans in October, a month before municipal elections. In it, he alleged that he saw Brule and Stone using a town-owned vehicle to hand out election fliers on Columbus Day/Indigenous People's Day.After Elkin's complaint was filed, commissioners ruled that Elkin had broken town rules on keeping the complaints confidential. According to the town ethics ordinance, "an investigation conducted prior to a finding of probable cause shall be confidential except if it is requested by the person who is the target of the complaint."The commission held special meetings on the issue, and the complaint was thrown out. The allegations made by Elkin in the complaint were never investigated.One of the three proposed ordinance changes adds language that states that ethics complaint investigations would be terminated ― without any follow-up investigation by the commission ― if the filer makes the complaint public before the commission establishes probable cause for an investigation.A second proposed addition to the ordinances states that ethics complaints alleged against more than one person or party have to be filed as two separate complaints ― even if they were involved in violating the same ethics rule. For example in Elkin's case, he would have had to file separate complaints against Brule and Stone.The third addition would add language to enforce the confidentiality process. What the enforcement would look like is still unknown.Ethics Commission members had debated the best way to enforce the confidentiality process. Member Adam Stone, the husband of complaint target Mindy Stone, suggested imposing a fine or jail time on those who might seek to break the ethics confidentiality process. Commission Alternate Sara Gilman Mallari argued that the threat of such a heavy penalty might discourage filers from coming forward with complaints.Though the commission could not come to a solution, it agreed that some kind of enforcement was needed over those who would break the ethics process and forwarded the change to the RTM, with the other two, for review."There was no specific recommendation from the Ethics Commission about a penalty for violation," Ritter said. "Only a request that the RTM consider it."Driscoll said a public hearing would be held prior to any changes being made to the town ordinances. d.drainville@theday.com