Concerned Citizen Comment

Oct. 12, 2019


I am neither a lawyer nor a member of the Ethics board or a town employee. but offer these comments in response nonetheless. There is no state law nor town ordinance which prohibits a tb member from serving on the IDA board. Past administrations have routinely appointed sitting tb members to the IDA. Mr. Weinstein appointed himself more than once while sitting as supervisor.

So there is no question that there is no legal bar to this coincidental service The question then becomes is it proper and appropriate and does it create the appearance of impropriety which is just as damaging as if a substantive conflict exists. Or simply put, just because it may be legal doesn’t make it right. The current quandary is complicated given 2 of the 4 candidates for tb this election season are sitting IDA board members. I am unaware that either of these 2 candidates have publicly stated their intentions to either step off/ or remain on the IDA board if elected. Further in campaign literature I recd yesterday from each of these gents, neither disclosed that they are at present on the IDA. Curious. Regardless, the tb is the appointing authority and thus retains the power to remove an IDA board member, no reason or basis required for removal, unlike other town statutory boards (like the planning board or ZBA). You raise interesting and substantial questions about motive and propriety that I believe should be directed to the tb. For what its worth, I believe the tb should pass an ordinance expressly prohibiting this practice of concurrent service as part of a larger effort to develop written qualification statements for appointees to the towns most powerful boards (ZBA, Planning and IDA)> Your pointed questions are both legitimate and well .

Leave a Reply