Conflicted Local Party Committee Members

Conflicts of interest are generally not seen to apply to local party committees. There are almost never limitations on membership or voting on such committees by local government employees, contractors, developers, grantees, or others seeking financial benefits from the government.

An article in today's New Haven (CT) Register shows how problematic conflicts among party committee members can be. In East Haven, a suburban town of 30,000, an open primary ballot of the Republican Town Committee (RTC) led to the election of the incumbent mayor over an apparently strong challenger, who wanted to have a closed ballot, so that RTC members who are city employees would not feel obliged to vote for their boss. The town attorney, who is under contract, also sits on the RTC, and the chair of the RTC's rules committee, who insisted that state party bylaws require an open ballot, also represents the town on occasion.

Sadly, the mayor and his supporters made public statements that falsely presented the conflict of interest issue. According to the article, the mayor "said it was ludicrous to suggest anyone was bullied or influenced to vote a certain way. He added that firing someone over a disagreement during a public vote would be illegal and unheard of. 'I don’t like to be accused of this frivolous crap in an election year.'"

Someone who is conflicted does not have to be bullied or influenced in order to fear the consequences of voting against their boss or against an individual who could prevent their contract from being renewed. Also, retaliation is not just a matter of firing. A mayor has many other ways to make life difficult for someone who votes for an opponent. And professional contracts can be ended or not renewed without cause.

The RTC chair echoed the mayor's statement, saying, “As far as intimidation, that’s childish. That’s ridiculous." There is nothing childish or ridiculous about fear of intimidation. Mocking those who speak of intimidation is itself intimidating. If I were a member of the RTC, I would suggest that the chair resigns from his leadership position.

Taking into account the conflicted members of a party committee, a closed ballot is the appropriate way to hold such an election. I could not find a requirement of an open ballot in the state party bylaws. The bylaws appear to leave it up to each town to draft its own rules. If the state party does require open ballots, this rule should be changed to allow a closed ballot on the request of any two members. Conflicted members should not have to ask for a closed ballot themselves.

The alternative is to either (1) prohibit any employee, contractor, or other individual seeking financial benefits from the government from voting on a ballot that includes the mayor, a supervisor, or anyone in a position to influence the individual's contract, permit request, etc. or (2) prohibit such an individual from sitting on a local party committee.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics