HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission On Disability - Minutes - 01/13/1992Commission on Disability - Regular Meeting
January 13, 1992
• MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: Shirley Reichenbach
Bob Willmot
Denise Scheberle
Judith Sayre Grim
Debbie Kalin
Ray Sanderson
Angela Bryn
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Wilson, excused
Bob Porter, excused
Roy Beachamp, excused
Arne Anderson, excused
GUESTS: Myrna M. Luger
STAFF: Mike Gebo
Ann Reichert
Boardmember Denise Scheberle moved to approve the December minutes.
• Boardmember Willmot seconded the motion. The minutes were approved.
Board president Shirley Reichenbach distributed a letter from the
Mayor in response to an incident at Rocky Mountain High School. (A
copy of the letter is attached to these minutes.)
ELECTION OF MEMBER AT LARGE
Boardmember Kalin volunteered to serve as Member at Large. It was
voted unanimously to accept.
PLAN REVIEW
The following addresses were reviewed by the Plan Review Committee
15 Old Town Square
1024 Lemay
140 W Oak
105 Troutman Parkway
400 Canyon Ave
A letter was received by Nancy Jackson of the DRS from Progressive
Living. In a previous plan review it was noted to Progressive
Living that an apartment building they were building did not meet
ADA requirements. Progressive will re -draw the plans to meet
requirements.
Board president Shirley Reichenbach distributed a copy of
40
Loveland's minutes. (A copy is attached to these minutes.)
a
Commission on Disability
January 13, 1992
• Page 2
A copy of a memorandum from the Ethics Committee was distributed by
Mike Gebo. (A copy is attached to these minutes.)
N.O.D.
Board president Reichenbach stated we needed a volunteer to serve
as NOD representative. Denise Scheberle volunteered.
Video tapes on the ADA were viewed by the committee as well as
video tapes from the National Forest Service.
It was moved to adjourn.
Next meeting - February 10, 1992, 1:OOpm, 281 North College
SR:aer
•
•
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 6, 1992
TO: All City Boards and Commissions
FROM: Steve Roy, City Attorney ///
RE: Ethics Review Board Opinion 91-2
Under the City Code, the Ethics Review Board of the City Council is
empowered to make recommendations not only to the City Council but
to the boards and commissions of the City. Attached is an opinion
of the Ethics Review Board which deals with the question of board
and commission members making presentations to their own boards or
commissions in a personal capacity, even though they have a
conflict of interest and are prohibited by the City Charter from
influencing the board or commission's decision in any official
capacity. In the attached opinion, the Ethics Review Board has
recommended certain guidelines for board and commission members who
wish to make such personal capacity presentations.
• The members of the Ethics Review Board have requested that I
disseminate this opinion to all City boards and commissions. If
you have any questions about its interpretation or application,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
SJR:whm
Attachment
300 LaPorte Avenue • P. O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6520
91-2
• OPINION OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
September 26, 1991
The Ethics Review Board ("the Board") has been asked by
Councilmember Maxey to review the question of whether a member of
a City board or commission who has a conflict of interest in a
particular decision may appear before his or her own board or
commission to address the matter in a personal capacity, even
though he or she would have to refrain from participating in the
decision in an official capacity. In reviewing the relevant
provisions of local and state law, it appears that neither state
statutes nor the City Charter prohibit such private capacity
appearances, so long as the board or commission member files a
conflict of interest statement and does not participate in the
board or commission's decision in any official capacity.
The City Charter provision which pertains to this matter reads as
follows:
Interests in other decisions. Any officer or employee
who has, or whose relative has, a financial interest and
any officer or employee who has a personal interest in
any decision of any public body of which he or she is a
• member or to which he or she makes recommendations,
shall, upon discovery thereof, disclose such interest in
the official records of the city in the manner prescribed
in subsection (4) hereof, and shall refrain from voting
on, attempting to influence, or otherwise participating
in such decision in any manner as an officer or employee.
(Article IV, Section 9[b][3], City Charter, emphasis
added.)
The City Charter definition of "personal interest" reads as
follows:
Personal interest means any interest (other than a
financial interest) arising from blood or marriage
relationships or from close business, political or
personal associations or concerns which would, in the
judgment of a reasonably prudent person, tend to impair
independence of judgment or action in the performance of
official discretionary duties. (Article IV, Section
9[a], City Charter.)
The City Charter also provides that any contracts made in violation
of the conflicts of interest provisions are voidable by the City.
(City Charter, Article IV, Section 9[b][5].)
• To the extent that state law may be applicable, it states that a
local government official or employee (which would include board
Ethics Opinion .91-2
• September 26, 1991
Page 2
and commission members) is to refrain from performing any official
act in which he or she has a financial interest or is engaged as a
consultant, representative or agent. (Section 24-18-109[2)(d),
C.R.S.) This provision of state law is to be contrasted with the
state rule for councilmembers, which simply states that
councilmembers are to refrain from attempting to influence
decisions in which they have a personal or private interest. The
rule for councilmembers makes no distinction between attempts to
influence the decision in a personal or private capacity.
The Board believes that members of City boards or commissions, as
non -elected citizen volunteers, should not be required to give up
the right to protect their personal interests when they might be
directly affected by a board or commission, even if they serve on
that board or commission. This right should not extend, however,
to representing interests other than their own individual
interests. For example, while a member of the Zoning Board of
Appeals should be able to argue in favor of a variance for his or
her private residence, that same board member should not be
permitted to serve in a representative capacity, with or without
compensation, and make presentations to the Zoning Board of Appeals
on behalf of another person or entity, such as a developer or
neighborhood association.
• The Board recommends the following guidelines for board and
commission members who have conflicts of interest but wish to make
private capacity presentations to their own board or commission:
1. immediately upon discovery that a conflict of
interest exists as defined in the City Charter, a
board or commission member should file a conflict
of interest statement with the City Clerk as
required by the Charter. (He/she may also wish to
file a disclosure statement with the Secretary of
State under the relevant provisions of state law.
The City Attorney should be consulted on this
point.)
2. The board or commission member must thereafter
refrain from participating in discussions of the
board or commission, voting on the matter or
attempting to influence the decision as a board or
commission member.
3. Any presentations made by the board or commission
member in support of the proposal shoula be made in
an individual capacity and not as a representative
of any group or organization.
L
0 •
Ethics Opinion 91-2
September 26, 1991
• Page 3
4. Each time that the board or commission member
addresses the matter, he or she should clearly
state that he/she is doing so in a private capacity
and will not be participating in the decision -
making process. The opportunities for input that
are made available to the board or commission
member should be limited to those which would be
available to any other member of the general public
who is similarly interested in the decision.
The Board does not believe that these limitations should apply to
a board or commission member's ability to make personal capacity
presentations to boards or commissions of the City other than the
one on which the individual serves. Appearances to other boards or
commissions in a representative capacity should be permitted. For
example, an attorney serving on the Planning and Zoning Board
should not be precluded from representing a client in a matter
before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Staff liaisons to boards and commissions are encouraged to work
with the City Attorney's office and the City Clerk's office to
inform board and commission members of the ethical rules of conduct
that apply to the performance of their duties. Members of boards
• and commissions are encouraged to consult with these members of
City staff, as well as their Council liaisons, for guidance on the
handling of conflict of interest situations.
The advisory opinion was reviewed and approved by Councilmembers
Maxey, Edwards and Fromme, as members of the Ethics Review Board of
the City Council, for distribution to the members of the Council
and for distribution to the City Clerk, to be maintained in the
permanent file of opinions of the Ethics Review Board.
Dated this 26th day of September, 1991.
SJR:whm
0
Stephen J. Roy, CitY Attorney