Smithfield sets Oct. 15 hearing on ethics guidelines after council debate over due process

The Smithfield Town Council voted Sept. 17 to hold a public hearing Oct. 15 on proposed amendments to the town code titled "ethical guidelines for municipal appointed and elected officials," sponsored by council members Rachel Toppy and Michael Iannotti. The hearing was scheduled after brief introduction by the sponsors and a motion to proceed.

Council discussion centered on whether the document would function purely as guidance or impose mandatory standards and what entity would administer and enforce any violations. One council member raised concerns that the draft lacks an explicit due-process procedure for officials accused of violating the guidelines, saying "there's no due process if someone is found in violation" and that "more work needs to be done" before adoption. The sponsor said the personnel board reviewed the draft and asked the town solicitor to confirm that the language does not conflict with state law and town regulations.

Supporters framed the proposal as a way to set clearer expectations for appointed officials and to prompt routine advice from counsel, such as recusal recommendations: "It's mainly to prevent unethical activity," a sponsor said, noting the town manager would advise employees or appointed officials when conduct is disallowed. Critics responded that without spelled-out procedures and penalties, the document could be ineffective or open to uneven application.

Tom Hodgson, who spoke during public comment and gave a Farnham Pike address, asked that minutes from the personnel board be published in advance of the Oct. 15 hearing so the public can review the board's recommendation prior to the council meeting.

The council took no final action on the substance of the guidelines at the Sept. 17 meeting and instead scheduled the Oct. 15 public hearing to receive input and any additional clarifications. The hearing will be the next formal step before any ordinance amendment is voted on.