Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics And Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Darien Board of Ethics elects officers, reviews Code of Ethics and complaint process
Summary
At a remote March 10 meeting the Darien Board of Ethics unanimously elected Jim Cameron chair and David Bayne vice chair, reviewed the town's Code of Ethics and outlined the complaint-handling steps, and agreed to research charter-review options and neighboring-town practices.
The Darien Board of Ethics unanimously elected Jim Cameron as chairman and David Bayne as vice chairman during its remote meeting on March 10. The board, which met at 7:31 p.m., has one vacancy on its five-member panel.
Board member David Bayne led a review of the Town Code of Ethics, telling members the code applies to all town officials and employees and is intended to ensure town affairs are conducted without favoritism or conflicts of interest. Bayne summarized key provisions covering confidential information, gifts and favors, use of position and town property, conflicts of interest, and limits on former officials representing private interests before their former board for one year.
Members then reviewed the board's complaint process. Complaints are filed with the Town Clerk; the board first considers whether a matter falls within the Code during executive session, dismissing matters that do not state a valid ethics claim. If a claim is valid the board may investigate, review documents and hear testimony; only after a determination is made does the matter become public. Members emphasized that confidentiality is essential because allegations can damage reputations in a small community.
The board discussed an invitation from the First Selectman to participate in a Town Charter review. Members agreed to compare Darien's ethics structure with neighboring towns including Greenwich, Stamford, Norwalk, Westport, Fairfield and New Canaan, consider whether procedural rules should be formally codified, and review appointment methods for board members. They agreed to research those topics and revisit them at a future meeting.
The chair also noted two sets of prior minutes requiring action: the Feb. 5, 2025 minutes were not filed after an executive session complaint review, and the Nov. 18, 2024 minutes were submitted but not formally approved; both will be presented for approval at the next meeting. With no public comment and no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
