RTM Moderator: No Conflicts of Interest

The response to a letter posted on Groton Patch from Groton Board of Education member Shelley Gardner prompted quite a bit of discussion. And at the end of the recessed RTM meeting, comments and clarifications by moderator Jean-Claude Ambroise.  

In her letter, which was originally an email to the entirety of the RTM and forwarded to Patch for posting, Gardner suggested there is an accepted practice of voting which she labeled conflicts of interest.  

Her letter read, in part: “I firmly hold the belief that it is immoral and unethical for anyone holding elective office not to obstain (sic) from participating in any vote that could benefit themselves or a spouse in a financial matter. Whether through job security, position, position advancement or a pay raise. I have seen this happen annually during the budget session and I find it highly untrustworthy and dishonest of individuals participating in such a vote. To justify this practice by disclosing your involvement is not an excuse for the continued practice which appears to be a way to justify corruption.”  

Monday night after a more than two-hour long annual budget meeting, Ambroise addressed Gardner’s allegation.  

“There is no conflict of interest,” he said, “based on numerous legal decisions and the town charter.”  

Ambroise said there are “no conflicts of interest with anything.”  

RTM voting members that are also town or school employees, he asked and answered, “No.”  

RTM voting members that have family members that work for the town or the schools, again he asked and answered, “No.”  

RTM voting members that receive pensions from the town or schools, again he asked and answered, “No.”  

“There are no conflicts,” he repeated.  

Though he did say that while no voting conflicts exist, members must simply disclose those types of associations in response to a RTM member question.  

On the original story, commenters included ones like this form Luanne Wells DeMatto, who cautioned, “…Please consider that there could be a misinterpretation or simply a misunderstanding of what constitutes a conflict of interest. Surely the use of inflammatory words such as immoral, unethical, untrustworthy, dishonest and corrupt should be held in abeyance, at least until it is determined whether or not a conflict even exists.”  

Or this from B-Mom: “Ask the RTM Lawyer or the Town Lawyer for a ruling. Using the logic behind Ms. Gardner's thought, no one would be allowed to vote for anything at the RTM - each individual's taxes are affected by their vote.”  

And CJ Boa wrapped with this: “The Council and RTM are elected positions, not appointed positions. So no bias.”