Ethics Board: Florian Should Have Recused Himself

Parking Authority member Matthew Florian should have announced his interest as a downtown property owner and recused himself from a vote on June 15 regarding overnight parking in the town’s central business district, the Board of Ethics ruled in a decision released Thursday afternoon.

Due to the conflict of interest, the board recommended that the vote on draft regulations for the district be rescinded and further discussions or votes be conducted without Florian’s involvement.

“It is the unanimous recommendation of the Board of Ethics that this matter be remanded back to the Parking Authority with the instructions to rescind the action of the June 15th, 2011, vote authorizing overnight parking in municipal lots and the matter be re-debated and re-voted without the participation of Mr. Florian,” according to the letter released Thursday.

“The board unanimously felt that Mr. Florian, under the (town’s) Ethics Code, had an obligation to state on the record that he had interest in commercial buildings in the Southington CB Zone and further was obligated to recuse himself from any discussions or vote on overnight parking that pertained to commercial uses.”

The decision did not suggest any direct reprimand for Florian, who has maintained since the initial complaint was filed two weeks after the meeting by local resident Art Cyr that he “did nothing wrong” and was acting within his responsibilities as an appointed member of the Parking Authority.

See the and stay tuned to Southington Patch for a complete article Friday.

“It’s important to note that they did not find he had violated the town’s code of ethics under the initial complaint,” said Florian’s attorney, Matthew O’Keefe. “The finding was in a different part of the code and the decision was based on the fact that he should have openly disclosed his ownership interest.”

Florian told the Board of Ethics at that he was acting in the best interest of town residents in making the motion and voting in favor of a set of regulations regarding overnight parking in the downtown area.

It was his expertise in the downtown area as a business owner that made him a strong candidate for the Parking Authority and was one of the reasons he was appointed to the board by the Town Council, O’Keefe said.

Both Florian and O’Keefe said he felt obligated to vote and did not see his involvement as a direct conflict of interest because he would not have benefitted from the parking regulations proposed and would not have voted once a final draft was completed and ready for approval by the Parking Authority. Florian, who owns several properties, or any of his tenants are not eligible to apply for overnight parking permits under the proposed regulations that had been passed.

O’Keefe said that at this stage, he has advised Florian to seek an advisory opinion from Town Attorney Mark Sciota regarding his involvement in this or any other further vote regarding issues in the central business district.

Sciota did not immediately return a message seeking comment Thursday afternoon.

The decision was one Cyr said he and others in attendance during the hearing on Monday evening were seeking in this case.

“I felt all along, as did a lot of people talked to in the last two months, that I was right in my complaint. The unanimous decision further shows it was not a partisan issue,” Cyr said Thursday evening. “This was neither personal nor politically motivated. It was a question of ethics. I have a great respect for Mr. Florian but disagreed with his actions in this instance.”

It was the first time in over 20 years that the Board of Ethics held a hearing into a complaint and ruled in favor of the complaintant.

The decision could also put the regulations for overnight parking in jeopardy as it was approved by a slim 3-2 vote with Florian in favor of the proposed regulations. If the other members of the Parking Authority should re-vote and hold their positions, the motion would fail 2-2.

The decision will now be forwarded to the Southington Town Council, which is responsible for referring it to members of the Parking Authority because the authority is an appointed board. The Parking Authority will then be asked to consider the recommendation and determine whether to rescind the motion and vote of the June 15 discussion on overnight parking.

Cyr said if members of the Parking Authority defy the recommendations, he would then like to see the Town Council take action including removing those members.

“I will anxiously wait to see actions of the rest of the members of the Parking Authority,” Cyr said. “The Board of Ethics gave clear recommendations with instructions to rescind. Will they do what they want or what the board has recommended?”