Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Conflict Of Interest topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident raises conflict-of-interest concern over SBC alternate with solar business; SBC chair says committee will vet project

Willington Board of Education · May 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident asked whether an SBC alternate who operates a solar company would be recused from any solar procurement or subcommittee; Jim Marshall Fisher, chair of the School Building Committee, said vetting and recusals are part of the SBC's process and welcomed the comment for committee consideration.

During public comment at the May 13 Willington Board of Education meeting, a resident asked the board to prevent any perception of wrongdoing by asking that an SBC alternate with ties to a solar business be excluded from procurement or decision‑making related to solar projects.

"John T. Hen is one of the... I think he's an alternate and he works or has a company that does solar and he's very gung ho about it," the resident said, adding a request that the SBC create a subcommittee or otherwise ensure Hen "is not part of that because that would be unethical, a conflict of interest."

Board Chair and members referred the question to the School Building Committee. Jim Marshall Fisher, who identified himself as chair of the School Building Committee, told the meeting the SBC is responsible for vetting project impacts and budget implications and that the committee would address procurement and ethics concerns. "It is part of the committee's process and work to be able to identify what the potential budgetary impact is... We will be addressing all of that," Fisher said.

No formal ethics determination or recusal was recorded at the meeting. The board recommended residents bring specific concerns and evidence to the School Building Committee so that the committee can consider whether a formal recusal, subcommittee or other mitigation is warranted during procurement and project planning.

Next steps: The chair and superintendent agreed to share residents' comments with the SBC; the SBC chair invited additional public feedback at the committee level. Any official recusal or procurement restriction would be determined through the SBC's process or applicable town/board ethics rules, and was not decided at the May 13 meeting.