Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations

A huge congratulations to Ann Mikulak, president of the Citizens Property Owners Association of New Britain, the oldest taxpayer organization in the State of Connecticut. She and her membership challenged union officials who vote on union contracts in their capacity as elected officials. The Ethics Commission of New Britain supported Ann's position. Taxpayers throughout Connecticut should work diligently within their own municipalities to establish similar criteria to eliminate conflicts by government employees who are elected or appointed to positions of influence. Susan Kniep

NEW BRITAIN -- The city's ethics commission has decided an alderman violated ethics laws when he voted last December to approve a contract between the city and a local labor union.

The commission unanimously found that Fran Ziccardi's vote on AFSCME Local 1303's contract gave the appearance of impropriety in that he could have had an indirect financial interest in its outcome. The ruling became public Thursday, two days after the commission deliberated behind closed doors.

Ziccardi's vote was not crucial. The council voted unanimously in favor of a contract that raises pay 7 percent over four years. Ziccardi, a city employee, is president of a different bargaining unit, AFSCME Local 1186.

The decision, included in a report the ethics commission gave to Mayor Timothy Stewart and the council, sides with the complaint that a local taxpayers group filed alleging impropriety.

"Justice has prevailed. [Ziccardi] did a very foolish thing," Ann Mikulak, president of the Citizens Property Owners Association, the local taxpayers group that filed the complaint, said Thursday.

Ziccardi, elected in November to the council, did not return messages seeking comment on the ethics decision.

City officials declined to comment on the decision Thursday, saying they were still digesting the findings and waiting to speak with Ziccardi.

The commission said the council should censure Ziccardi and instruct him to abstain from voting in the future on any union contract before the council.

The decision recommends that if Ziccardi wants to vote on a city contract, he must first follow ethics procedures and submit a signed statement explaining why, despite a potential conflict, he believes he should cast a ballot.

His supporters have said he had no direct interest in approval of the Local 1303 contract, which covers 47 union members.

But even though Ziccardi had no part in the negotiation of 1303's contract, critics argued that his vote on a sister contract amounted to a conflict of interest.

Political observers said the decision would have far-reaching implications for cities and towns across the state.

Ethical concerns and questions of whether city employees should be allowed to run for public office - and if they do, whether they should be allowed to vote on municipal budgets - are being raised more often.

"This is definitely a precedent-setting case that will affect every municipality in the state of Connecticut," former East Hartford Mayor Susan Kniep said. She is a member of the Federation of Connecticut Taxpayers Organizations, which had been watching the ethics complaint here.

Some officials and city employees say people who stand to benefit from town budgets and contracts should be barred from elected office. Others argue city employees and union officials bring valuable experience to the table.

And they question where one should draw the line in the name of a conflict of interest. Should members of business associations be excluded from public office, they counter, because they may have personal interests in business matters?

Kevin Maloney, spokesman for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, said Thursday municipal officials should err on the safe side in questions of conflicts of interest.

"I would think most towns would feel the right thing to do would be for the council member to recuse themselves from voting in that type of situation," Maloney said. "Generally, the kind of rule most municipalities would apply is, if it doesn't feel right to do it, don't do it. Recusing oneself from voting is going to protect the individual as well as protect the credibility of the council."