The Woodstock Village Trustees are expected to rule within a week on whether they will reject the proposed demotion of Police Chief Joe Swanson or will side with municipal manager Eric Duffy to make him an entry level patrol officer.
The trustees heard nearly 14 hours of testimony and legal arguments on March 2 and 3 and gave both sides until late Tuesday afternoon to file legal memorandums or proposed findings of fact/conclusions.
Attorney Linda Fraas, on behalf of Swanson, repeated in her filing this week comments she made earlier that she is not expecting the trustees to budge from their ongoing support of Duffy. Swanson was unable to attend the trustee’s hearing because he is recovering from long-planned back surgery.
“This pleading is therefore likely futile,” wrote Fraas in her 29-page double-spaced memo.
The hearing and written ruling by the trustees are needed for Swanson to file another appeal to Vermont Superior Court in Woodstock. A superior court judge overruled the trustees for the first hearing they held in March 2025.
Fraas then goes on to offer proposed findings to the board, “without waiving the position that this hearing was not lawfully conducted given the failure of trustees with clear cut conflicts and demonstrated bias to recuse themselves, as well additional due process violations raised prior to and during the hearing…”
Fraas also noted that Chief Swanson was unlawfully denied progressive discipline while heading the department. It would have provided for verbal and written warnings, suspensions and an eventual termination if corrective steps were not taken. Progressive discipline was taken out of the town personnel policy on Oct. 11, 2024, four days before he was placed on involuntary paid leave, Fraas wrote.
Burlington lawyer Kendall Hoechst, on behalf of the village, filed a 12-page single-space letter and maintains there are plenty of reasons to support the demotion.
“Viewed in their totality, the facts are more than sufficient to conclude cause exists to remove Mr. Swanson from the position of police chief,” she wrote.
Hoechst admitted that the village contract was poorly drafted. “The employment agreement, admittedly, is not a model of clarity. The pertinent section of the contract …states “Employer may terminate Employee’s employment for just cause at any time during the term of this agreement …”
Hoechst does not represent Duffy, who has his own lawyer, but Fraas could not help but note she was still fighting for him.
“Attorney Hoechst’s advocacy for Mr. Duffy’s position contrary to established law based upon manufactured novel theories will once again lead the Village into protracted litigation until a court once again applies the correct law and overturns the decision,” Fraas wrote in her filing.
Fraas also maintains in her memo that the actions taken against Chief Swanson demonstrate disparate treatment, bias and discrimination based on his sexual orientation.
Swanson, who is an openly gay police chief and married to a male, has been treated differently than heterosexual employees based upon his sexual orientation, she said.
Chief Swanson was subjected to retaliation, discrimination, hostility and mistreatment during the time he worked as an unlawfully demoted patrol officer and placing him in this position again in violation of his contract will cause irreparable harm to Chief Swanson,” Fraas wrote.
Hoechst, who joined the case earlier this year, said she disputes any claims made about Swanson’s sexual orientation.
“While this is outside the scope of what the Trustees need to decide, it is nevertheless false,” she wrote in her letter.
Hoechst declined to provide the Vermont Standard with a copy of her post-hearing memorandum she filed this week with the trustees. The newspaper had to obtain it through Fraas, who has maintained since the beginning of the demotion effort that the whole process, including the hearing and all documents, were open to the public.
The board also was asked to provide copies of the village exhibits submitted during the hearing last week, but they balked. The trustees maintained the public hearing was still a personnel matter.
The trustees also have said they do not intend to release their findings to the public. During the first hearing, the board also balked at releasing their report, but the Vermont Standard filed a Vermont Public Records request, which was eventually successful.
The five current trustees need to have their findings issued by St. Patrick’s Day, when the village residents hold their annual meeting, according to their Hearing Officer, Brian Monaghan, a Burlington lawyer. Two trustees, chair Seton McIlroy and member Frank Horneck are not seeking re-election and will leave the board that day, so the decision must be completed, if all five are to participate in the findings.
For more on this, please see our March 12 edition of the Vermont Standard.
