Ethics Complaint: Charter Revision Commission Not a Fair Representation

Details emerged Wednesday regarding a recent ethics complaint filed with the town, one that attacks the decision to establish a Southington Charter Revision Commission that is not representative of the community.

The Board of Ethics last week met in executive session to debate the merits of the complaint, filed by local resident Jackie Willametz, regarding the fact that the commission is comprised entirely of white men over the age of 60 to debate issues that will impact the entire community.

It’s an issue that was brought forward last week by Southington Town Councilman John Barry after he said members of the public expressed concerns that there are no women and no unaffiliated voters – the largest group of voters in Southington – represented on the Charter Revision Commission.

“The collective actions of the town council in appointing all older white men was way off the mark,” Willametz said Wednesday in a public hearing before the Charter Revision Commission. “They have opened Pandora’s box and unfair to do (a charter revision) now.”

Southington Town Attorney Mark Sciota said that due to the nature of the ethics complaint process, he could not discuss any details of the complaint until such point that it would be ready for a public hearing.

The issue Willametz discusses is with concerns that this is the first commission not to contain a woman member. In addition, the average age of the two Democrats on the commission is 64-years-old, while the average age of the three Republicans sits at 72-years-old, officials said.

Republicans have argued that they contacted several women, even before the men selected, but were unable to find a willing volunteer. They added that due to the nature of this charter revision, which looks more specifically at government process and potentially eliminating the police and fire commissions, it was important to get experienced members of the community with a strong knowledge of the process.

Multiple officials familiar with the complaint said Wednesday evening that the complaint is not likely to hold enough merit to move forward to a public hearing stage, but no decisions have been made to date to toss the complaint out either.

The complaint was presented to the Ethics Committee last Wednesday and the committee will have to meet again to determine whether to move forward.

Do you believe there is merit to the complaint? Should it be thrown out? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.