Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Select Board for independent audit and trustee recusals over village police payments
Summary
Multiple residents demanded an independent investigation into town payments tied to the Village police employment matter, urged trustee recusals and criticised reliance on manager-produced documents.
Throughout the public comment period on July 7, several residents urged the Select Board to commission an independent audit rather than accept records produced solely by the municipal manager. Speakers raised concerns about stonewalling, charged that the manager had "covered" for others, and sought rapid public disclosure of records.
Peter Shoemaker, Allison and other commenters variously asked for an independent review and questioned why the town had not placed involved staff on administrative leave while the matter is investigated. One remote commenter told the board: "Why are you not hiring an independent investigator to look into this?" The board’s action to request an accounting by July 27 responds to those demands but did not itself commission an independent auditor at the meeting.
Context: Commenters said the legal fees and other disbursements tied to the Swanson employment dispute were substantial and that past public-record requests and court action suggest broader use of town funds. Some speakers urged the board to require the Village trustees’ cooperation or to pursue reimbursement if payments were improper.
Board response: Members signaled a desire for transparency and set a near-term deadline for the town manager to provide documentation; the transcript records continuing calls from residents for a separate independent review and concerns about conflicts of interest among trustees and candidates in the upcoming election.
