The Durham Ethics Commission recently found that former Region 13 Board of Education (BOE) Chair Lyndsay Dahlheimer violated the town’s code of ethics by participating in two BOE meetings that involved legal action being taken against her.
Anthony DeFilio, the football coach at Coginchaug High School, filed a complaint against Dahlheimer with the ethics commission over Dahlheimer’s actions at BOE meetings held on July 16 and August 13.
DeFilio has also filed a civil lawsuit against Dahlheimer and her husband over statements he claims Dahlheimer made to discredit him and cause him to lose his job. DeFilio claims Dahlheimer complained to the high school principal about him and also made a complaint to the Department of Children and Families (DCF) alleging he was engaging in inappropriate conduct with football players. Dahlheimer allegedly had her husband corroborate claims she made in her DCF complaint. Investigations by both the high school and DCF did not substantiate the complaints.
DeFilio has also filed a complaint with the Freedom of Information Commission, alleging Dahlheimer and her then-BOE co-chair, Robert Moore, violated the Freedom of Information Act by illegally holding an executive session during a July 16 special meeting where members voted on whether to investigate Dahlheimer. The BOE ultimately voted to indemnify Dahlheimer in connection with DeFilio’s civil suit and voted against conducting an investigation into Dahlheimer’s conduct at an August 13 meeting.
DeFilio’s ethics complaint claimed Dahlheimer violated two provisions in the town’s code of ethics, one that requires town officials to be “independent, impartial, and responsible to the public” and a second that prohibits conflicts of interest.
Dahlheimer presided over the July 16 meeting, including attending the executive session DeFilio is claiming was improper, where the BOE discussed indemnifying her. While Dahlheimer abstained from the vote to enter into executive session, she did not recuse herself, which DeFilio argued in his complaint made her vote implicitly in support of the motion.
DeFilio’s complaint 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).”
Members of Durham’s ethics commission voted unanimously to sustain DeFilio’s complaint. They agreed that the July 16 special meeting could not have gone on without Dahlheimer’s participation and that Dahlheimer had participated in the meeting in a variety of ways, including by setting the agenda, presiding over the meeting, taking motions, and going in person into executive session.
“We don’t have to know whether she said anything. She didn’t do the things she needed to do to make sure she wasn’t influencing the outcome.” ethics commission member Lynne Allen said.
Vice chair Nicole Maletta said that Dahlheimer going into the executive session was what “tips the scale” and said Dahlheimer recusing herself from the meeting would have been an appropriate way for the meeting to continue “without the appearance of impropriety.”
The commission now has 45 days to draft a written decision and send recommendations for actions that should be taken to the Board of Selectmen (BOS). Commissioners discussed potential recommendations they could make, including asking the BOE to discuss ethics, the proper policy for members recusing themselves from meetings, and asking the BOE to vote again on indemnifying Dahlheimer.
The commission will discuss those recommendations either at their next regular meeting on December 30 or at a special meeting.
Both DeFilio’s FOIC complaint and lawsuit are still pending.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
