The five Woodstock Village Trustees have each decided they will not step aside when Woodstock Police Chief Joe Swanson has his second disciplinary hearing, according to the board’s lawyer.
Burlington lawyer Brian Monaghan, who represented the board during Swanson’s demotion hearing last year, offered a one-sentence response to the inquiry by attorney Linda Fraas on behalf of Swanson.
“The Trustees have each considered the requests to recuse, and they have each made the decision to not recuse from this proceeding,” Monaghan wrote in an email last week.
Municipal manager Eric Duffy initially wanted Swanson demoted last year to patrol officer, the lowest rank in the department. After a state judge ordered a new hearing, Duffy says he now wants Swanson fired.
Fraas maintains that at least three village trustees have potential conflicts of interest and that she also intends to call them as witnesses, even though they are expected to rule on Swanson’s case.
“Your email suggests that you asked these Trustees if they wanted to recuse themselves, they ‘considered’ the issue, and then declined,” Fraas wrote to Monaghan.
“It is unclear whether they were provided with any legal guidance as they ‘considered’ recusal, however this seems unlikely given the relevant case law supporting the impropriety of these trustees deciding this case based on these clearcut facts,” Fraas told their lawyer.
She said chair Seton McIlroy has the most serious conflict of interest.
“McIlroy has a personal and financial interest in the outcome of the second hearing, by virtue of her role as a non-immune named individual defendant in a related contemporaneous civil suit brought by Chief Swanson,” Fraas wrote to Monaghan.
She said McIlroy’s decision regarding Chief Swanson’s employment status clearly has a direct bearing upon the $5 million civil lawsuit filed against her and her ultimate liability. Swanson has maintained he was discriminated against due to sexual orientation and faced unlawful malicious acts causing emotional distress, Fraas said in her email exchange with Monaghan.
Duffy, McIlroy, the village and Sgt. Chris O’Keeffe, the interim police chief, are among those named as co-defendants in the civil lawsuit.
“It is also undisputed that Ms. McIlroy is currently represented by Manager Duffy’s attorney,” she said.
Swanson’s lawyer has proposed that an alternative neutral independent decision-making panel could be appointed. Fraas said the American Arbitration Association provides a government panel of arbitrators consisting of neutral, expert third-party professionals (like retired judges, lawyers or public servants) to resolve disputes in the public sector.
“Chief Swanson requests that his hearing be conducted through a fair alternative process such as this in lieu of the absurdity of having the current trustees render a decision which would be biased as a matter of law based upon the history and facts presented,” she wrote.
“The Board clearly has multiple conflicts of interest issues and more than an appearance of bias and lack of neutrality. Members have gone far beyond ‘mere familiarity with the facts’ and have actively participated in adversarial positions and actions against Chief Swanson following the unlawful April 17, 2025 demotion decision,” Fraas wrote.
Attorney Klesch conflict of interest?
Fraas said she also has concerns that attorney John Klesch, who is representing Duffy and the village is also representing McIlroy as the board chair.
In her response to Monaghan, Fraas wrote, “You have indicated that the Trustees intend to allow the Village to pay for Attorney Klesch to appear before them to present and advocate for Manager Duffy’s position on termination despite the fact that they have all been recent clients of Attorney Klesch and Ms. McIlroy remains a current client in the civil lawsuit,” she said.
“Assuming that Attorney Klesch and his firm intend to continue with representation and advocacy for one client before a panel which includes their other former and current clients, I anticipate that the Vermont Professional Responsibility Committee will ultimately rule upon the ethics and propriety of this plan,” she wrote.
The village trustees set Thursday, March 5 as the hearing date. They also have agreed to set aside Friday, March 6 if more time is needed.
There is a good chance Swanson might not be medically fit to attend, according to Fraas.
Chief Swanson had back surgery in December. He is expected to be in recovery for a few months, and it is unclear when Swanson’s surgeon will clear him for participation in the disciplinary hearing, Fraas said.
“He does not even start physical therapy until Mid-March so it is unclear at this time what medical opinion the doctor will render,” Fraas said.
The surgery was for an injury he sustained during a tumble in trying to avoid a homicide suspect as part of a shootout in the village 3.5 years ago. Swanson also was wounded in the arm, then-Police Chief Robbie Blish said at the time. The killer took his own life inside a home on Slayton Terrace after more than a 9-hour standoff, Blish said.
For more on this story, please see our Jan. 15 edition of the Vermont Standard.
