The Durham Ethics Commission (DEC) found former Regional School District (RSD) 13 Board of Education (BOE) chair Lindsay Dahlheimer violated the town’s Code of Ethics in four instances by participating in two BOE meetings that involved legal action being taken against her.
The DEC previously found that Dahlheimer had violated the code of ethics but had not previously made any specific recommendations about how the town should address it. The DEC’s final findings recommend the town conduct ethics training and re-hold a vote indemnifying Dahlheimer for her alleged actions in a lawsuit filed by Coginchaug High School football coach Anthony DeFilio.
DeFilio filed the ethics complaint against Dahlheimer after Dahlheimer, along with her husband, allegedly made statements to the high school principal and Department of Children and Families (DCF) officials claiming he was engaging in inappropriate conduct with football players in an attempt to get him fired. Both the school and DCF investigated the complaints and did not substantiate the Dahlheimers’ alleged claims.
DeFilio also filed a civil lawsuit against Dahlheimer as a result of the incident. That lawsuit was at the center of Dahlheimer’s unethical conduct at BOE meetings held on July 16, 2025 and August 13, 2025.
At the July 16 meeting, the BOE entered an executive session to discuss indemnifying Dahlheimer as part of the lawsuit. Dahlheimer presided over the meeting and attended the executive session. While she abstained from the vote to enter executive session, she did not recuse herself, which DeFilio argued made her vote implicitly in support of the motion.
DeFilio cited BOE policy 9367, which states “A member may abstain from voting (with the knowledge that the effect is the same as if the Board member had voted on the prevailing side).”
Dahlheimer also participated in the August 13 meeting, where the BOE voted to indemnify her in connection with DiFiolio’s civil suit and also voted against investigating her conduct. Dahlheimer did not participate in a vote to go into executive session to discuss whether to investigate her conduct, but also did not recuse herself from the vote. She also attended the executive session.
The DEC found Dahlheimer violated the town’s Code of Ethics twice during the July meeting “when Dahlheimer failed to make clear her personal interest in a matter under consideration by the Regional School District 13 Board of Eduction…of which she served as member and chairman and then participated in the Board’s consideration of a matter in which she had a personal interest.”
The ethics commission also found Dahlheimer’s actions during the August meeting twice violated the town’s Code of Ethics.
“In a board of education meeting on August 13, 2025, Dahlheimer again failed to make clear her personal interest in a matter before the board and once more participated in the Board’s consideration of that matter.” the board wrote in its final decision.
The decision asks Durham’s Board of Selectmen (BOS) to “engage in training of public officials in Durham to ensure that these types of violations do not occur in the future.” They also asked the BOS to petition the RSD 13 BOE to vote again on indemnifying Dahlheimer “to cure any taint that Dahlheimer’s impermissible participation may have wielded on the discussion and vote on that issue.”
The board’s finding notes that Durham’s Code of Ethics requires public officials to take two actions when they are involved in a matter where they have a personal interest.
“First, the official must notify members of the body considering the matter about the potential personal interest in the matter, ensuring that the disclosure of the official’s personal interest appears in the formal record of the board. Second, the official must refrain from voting or ‘otherwise participating in the body’s consideration of the matter.'” the findings note.
Based off of redacted video, the DEC found Dahlheimer did not mention her personal interest in any of the agenda items from the July meeting to any of the other board members. “[S]he testified that her personal interest was “understood” by the other board members.” the DEC found. They also noted that minutes from that meeting did not make clear Dahlheimer’s personal interest.
The DEC further found Dahlheimer’s actions did not make clear that she was either abstaining from the vote to enter exeuctive session or that she was not voting on the matter. At a DEC hearing, she testified that “she had engaged in a “silent abstention” on the indemnification matter.” But the DEC found this wasn’t reflected in meeting minutes in violation of BOE Policy 9367’s requirement.
The DEC also reached similar conclusions about Dahlheimer’s conduct at the August meeting, finding she did not note her personal interest to other board members and that while she stated her intention to abstain from the vote, Policy 9367 meant this counted as a vote with the prevailing side.
The DEC made two recommendations based on their findings, including asking the BOS to educate public officials about the Code of Ethics requirements and asking the RSD 13 BOE to rehold the vote to indemnify Dahlheimer.
DeFilio’s lawsuit against Dahlheimer is currently pending before the Superior Court of Middletown. DeFilio also filed a complaint with the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC), alleging Dahlheimer’s participation in the executive sessions during both the BOE’s July and August meetings violated the Freedom of Information Act, which is also still pending.
A second FOIC complaint was more recently filed by another Durham resident, alleging RSD 13 is withholding documents the district submitted to the town’s insurance company in relation to the lawsuit.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
