Former Registrar A. Franklin Swift Seeks Reappointment Following Conflict-of-Interest Challenge-October 12, 1978

Former Registrar A. Franklin Swift appeared before the Board of Selectmen last night to formally request reappointment to the board of registrars, a position he held for 25 years before his eligibility was recently called into question.

Swift’s multiple municipal appointments had been challenged by Town Meeting member Kenneth C. Ball, who pointed to a state law dictating that a registrar automatically vacates their position if they accept an appointment to another town committee or office.

In response to the challenge, Swift announced he has already resigned from five separate town committees, retaining only his appointment to the Norfolk County Tourist and Development Council.

“I believe the law says a registrar cannot serve in another position in the town where he is a registrar,” Swift told the board. “It does not mention anything about the county.” Pointing to his lengthy tenure and the absence of prior complaints regarding his performance, Swift asked to return as a registrar “if selectmen see fit.”

Selectmen agreed to seek formal legal advice from town counsel regarding the county position and the proper legal procedures required to reinstate Swift.

The Conflict Discovery and Town Counsel’s Ruling

The controversy erupted after Ball, researching state laws following a disputed September 29 registrars’ hearing regarding candidate eligibility, uncovered the statute prohibiting registrars from holding concurrent town posts.

Town Counsel Justin S. Barton upheld Ball’s challenge, ruling that when Swift accepted a seat on the Airport Commission in July 1977, he legally vacated his post as registrar.

Swift explained that he had previously resigned from the Historical Commission in 1977 and the Beautification Committee in April 1978. He defended his past appointments by explaining he relied on advice given years earlier by former town counsel Walter Gotovitch, who had assured him that serving on advisory bodies like a parking committee created no conflict.

“Perhaps I should have known better, but I based my acceptance of other posts on that advice I had long ago,” Swift said.

Selectman Mary J. Fox, who was not on the board when the appointments were originally made, criticized the oversight. “There is a protective law as well as a corrective law, and I hope in the future town counsel would so advise this board,” she stated.

Resignations and Back Salary Controversy

Following Ball’s initial challenge, Swift resigned Tuesday from the Airport Commission, the Commission to Promote Business and Industry, and the Industrial Financing Authority.

However, the dispute over his tenure immediately pivoted to financial restitution. Ball pressed selectmen on whether the town would seek reimbursement for the $800 annual salary paid to Swift during the period he was technically serving illegally.

“As far as I am concerned, no,” declared Acting Chairman Joseph F. Curran.

Swift defended his record, stating he had “faced my responsibilities and has rendered a service to the town.” Ball, maintaining a firm stance, vowed to pursue back-pay restitution. “Some restitution is due the town of Norwood, even if only for the past year.”

While Ball argued that Swift had served illegally all the way back to 1954 when he joined the industrial promotion commission, town counsel expressed doubt as to whether that early post constituted an official “office,” determining the technical vacancy only occurred with the 1977 airport appointment.

Broader Challenges Involving E. Peter Bamber

Kenneth Ball indicated that his scrutiny of town governance extends further. He announced plans to challenge former Finance Commissioner E. Peter Bamber‘s candidacy for selectman in the upcoming October 24 election, though ballots have already been printed.

Ball is also challenging the registrars’ September 29 hearing through the district attorney’s office, alleging it violated open meeting laws due to a lack of 48-hour posted notice. Furthermore, Ball stated that if Bamber wins the election, he will challenge Bamber’s right to take office, arguing that it was illegal for Bamber to resign from the Finance Commission mid-term to run for another seat—a challenge he intends to maintain until Bamber’s original FinCom term expires in 1980.

Archival Note: This article has been dynamically reconstructed from the original public record print archives of the Patriot Ledger