Seymour board postpones appointments to ethics commission after members cite short notice and transparency concerns

The Board of Select Persons postponed a planned vote to appoint alternates to the town ethics commission after several members said they had received the appointments list with less than 24 hours' notice and questioned the process by which the candidates were selected.

At the meeting the agenda identified an alternate appointment for Robert Van Eaggan with a term expiring Dec. 1, 2027. Several select persons said they learned of the proposed appointments only the day before and asked why the majority party had not solicited recommendations from the minority party, as had often been done in the past. Members also questioned whether the town charter or the code of ethics authorized alternates and how many alternates the commission should have.

Town counsel told the board the ethics process requires a functioning commission to consider ethics complaints and that, under the cited town code, alternates have been used to secure a quorum. Counsel said an ethics complaint had been filed and that confidentiality rules prevented officials from disclosing details about which commission members would be unavailable; that lack of disclosure prompted some members to object to approving appointments without the ability to vet nominees.

After discussion, Trish moved to postpone the vote until the board’s next regular meeting; Al seconded the motion. The motion carried, recorded on the floor as a 7-0 vote.

The board did not appoint alternates before the scheduled special ethics meeting; members discussed options including rescheduling the ethics hearing or appointing alternates at a later time. The meeting record shows the board debated whether the charter and the code consistently specify the number of alternates and the quorum needed to conduct ethics business.