At its latest meeting, the Bethlehem Town Board once again vetted the proposed changes to the town ethics code put forth by a citizen’s advisory committee formed at the beginning of the year. On Wednesday, May 9, members of the Town Board spent time asking members of the advisory committee questions about the proposed code changes. Committee co-chairman John Hudacs said although the group would be happy to justify the proposed changes, they were merely suggestions and any true changes would need to be agreed upon amongst members of the Town Board. “We hope to redirect this code back (to town staff) to be put into local law format for adoption at the next board meeting or the one after that,” said Town Supervisor John Clarkson. The advisory group began its charge by using the state comptroller’s model ethics code for municipalities, which was then adapted to fit Bethlehem’s needs. It also studied the ethics codes of surrounding suburban communities. The group suggested implementing a five-member ethics board with a limited investigative ability depending on resources. The proposed code also called for a limit of no more than two people from one political party on the board and no one who holds an officer position within a political party. Town Board members questioned the need for five members and wondered if allegations that were deemed to be unfounded could be stopped at the ethics board instead of being brought to the Town Board, since those allegations could potentially go public. Councilwoman Joann Dawson asked why someone with an official position within a political party would be barred from the ethics board when he or she worked hard to put Town Board members into their seats. Members of the advisory group said most local municipalities have a five-member ethics board and if the Town Board wished, unfounded ethics allegations could stop with the ethics board. “Our original thought was to promote transparency,” said Hudacs
Recommended changes to the code itself include prohibiting the accepting gifts of any kind with a few exceptions like ceremonial plaques, prohibiting knowingly using the position of a public figure for personal gain and prohibiting using municipal resources for personal use. Children of town officials would no longer be allowed to work for the town under the recommended code, even in seasonal positions. Another recommendation would restrict town officials from seeking employment with companies that do business with the town for up to one year after they leave that position. The committee also recommended a recusal requirement for Town Board members who have private involvement with companies seeking contracts with the town and a financial disclosure recommendation for Town Board members at the request of the ethics board. Dawson asked what power the town had to stop a former official from taking a job with a private company. Hudacs said the town could decide to longer do business with that company. Dawson said she didn’t feel the town should attempt to overreach. The Town Board discussed several potential changes to the draft code. The changes will eventually have to be placed into a local law to be released before a public hearing.