HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Ethics Review Board - 03/29/1993 -C
MINUTES
EThICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING
March 29,1993,at 12:00 Noon
City Attorney’s Office
The meeting of the Alternate Ethics Review Board (“the Board”)
convened at noon on March 29,1993,in the administrative
conference room adjoining the City Attorney’s Office.In
attendance were the following members of the Board:Councilmembers
Gerry Horak,Dave Edwards and Bob Winokur;Marilyn Barnes (Parks
and Recreation Board);Karen Dornseif (Library Board);and Mark
Fidrych (Electric Board).Absent was Board member David Lernesany
of the Transportation Board.Also in attendance were Mayor Pro Tern
Ann Azari and Councilmember Loren Maxey,as well as Ward Luthi and
Joe Lewandowski.The meeting was chaired by Councilmember Gerry
Horak.
The Board members voted to approve the draft minutes of its meeting
on March 10,1993,with one correction.Board member Dornseif
noted that a third item of information had been requested from the
City Attorney (i.e.the Board had requested information regarding
the City’s provision of in-kind support services to groups other
than Challenge Fort Collins).
The Board reviewed the materials that had been submitted by the
City Attorney.Barbara Allison was given an opportunity to expound
upon the allegations in her complaint.She stated that she was
concerned that councilmembers who were stakeholders in Challenge
Fort Collins had improperly participated in City decisions
regarding City support of Challenge Fort Collins and had also
improperly participated in the decision to appoint Chris Kneeland
as the new Councilmember.Ms.Allison also expressed her concern
about the City’s expenditure of funds in support of Challenge Fort
Collins.She stated that she believed that this was a violation of
the City Charter,since,in her view,the Charter prohibits
expenditures in support of any organizations or agencies which are
not under the absolute control of the City.
Councilmember Horak pointed out that Ms.Allison’s concerns about
the expenditure of City funds is beyond the purview of the Board,
since the Board is only authorized to address complaints pertaining
to conflicts of interest and other alleged violations of rules of
ethical conduct.
Councilmember Kneeland was given an opportunity to address the
allegations in the complaint and stated that she did not understand
how she could be accused of conflict of interest in performing her
duties as a councilmember when she was not even a councilmezuber at
the time that the decisions in question were made.
Ward Luthi stated that the City must be vigilant in disbursing City
funds and deciding which community groups should be supported by
Minutes of Alternate Ethics Review Board Meeting
March 29,1993
Page 2
the City and that criteria should be established for making these
decisions.
As to the merits of the complaint,Councilmember Horak pointed out
that Councilmember Kneeland had not,in fact,been a member of the
Council when decisions regarding Challenge Fort Collins were made.
Therefore,in his opinion,she could not have had a conflict of
interest in those decisions.As to the other councilmembers,
Councilmember Horak pointed out that they had acted in reliance
upon an opinion of the Ethics Review Board regarding the Community
Vision Coalition,and that their participation in Challenge Fort
Collins was based upon that opinion as well as the passage of a
Council resolution approving City support for Challenge Fort
Collins.Therefore,he expressed his opinion that no conflict of
interest had occurred up to this point in time.He suggested that
the Board members discuss this question and decide whether the
complaint should be sustained.He also suggested that the Board
direct its attention to how the City councilmembers should handle
similar situations in the future and whether Board members agreed
or disagreed with the earlier Ethics Review Board opinions on this
subject.
Councilmember Winokur expressed reservations about the factors
cited in the Board’s existing opinion on this subject.One of
those factors is whether or not a particular organization or
activity is competing for City support.He indicated that he
thought there was always some element of competition when
organizations are seeking City support and,when that element of
competition exists,councilmembers who are actively involved with
those organizations should refrain from participating in Council’s
deliberations on the subject.
Mark Fidrych and Marilyn Barnes expressed their concern about
limiting councilmember involvement in community activities,since
such involvement seems important and commendable.Mark Fidrych
pointed out that the Council adopts a work plan which calls for
such involvement but councilmembers are faced with a dilemma
because the involvement can later give rise to conflict of interest
allegations.
All agreed that better guidelines are needed for assisting
councilmembers in detendning whether a conflict of interest
exists.There was also agreement that criteria should be
established for determining which groups should receive support
from the City.
Councilmember Horak stated that he believed the City Code offers a
clear way of delineating when councilmembers who are involved with
outside activities have a conflict of interest.That is,the Code
Minutes of Alternate Ethics Review Board Meeting
March 29,1993
Page 3
establishes a procedure whereby the Council can,by resolution,
appoint any of its members to serve on the boards of directors of
private agencies.When a councilmember serves on a board pursuant
to a Council appointment,it is clear that the councilmember is
serving in an official capacity on behalf of the City and would not
have a conflict of interest in subsequently participating in
Council decisions regarding that organization.(Councilmember
Horak suggested amending the Code section to extend its application
to all kinds of Council appointments,whether one is appointed to
serve as a board member of an organization or as a regular member
or participant.)In situations where no formal Council appointment
occurs and councilmembers choose to participate in an outside
organization or activity on their own,the conflict of interest
question is less clear.
There was discussion about whether the nature of the outside
organization or activity makes a difference,as indicated in the
previous Board opinions.
Councilmember Winokur expressed agreement with Councilmember
Horak’s focus on the Code provision which provides for Council
appointments.He reiterated his belief that private capacity
service with outside organizations may well create a conflict of
interest unless a Council appointment has occurred.He stated that
this appointment process should be viewed as empowering
councilmembers to participate in community activities rather than
limiting such community involvement.
City Attorney Roy raised a question as to the level of
“involvement”on an individual basis which is sufficient to create
a conflict of interest if no Council appointment has occurred.The
Board indicated that this determination would have to be made on a
case-by—case basis.
Karen Oornseif pointed out that Council can be paralyzed if a
majority of its members is involved in some outside organization
without appointment.
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Azari expressed her view that collaboration
between the City and the private sector is beneficial to the
community and is a trend which must be acknowledged in rendering an
advisory opinion on this subject.Councilmember Horak stated that
there are any number of agencies which would like to have
councilmembers on their boards.He believes that it is reasonable
to ask councilmembers to refrain from such participation unless:
(1)Council appoints them,or (2)they are willing to conflict out
of decisions of the Council pertaining to those organizations.
Minutes of Alternate Ethics Review Board Meeting
March 29,1993
Page 4
Councilmember Edwards inquired about the particular situation
presented to the Board with regard to members of Challenge Fort
Collins.Even though those members may not have had a conflict of
interest in the past because of the previous Ethics Review Board
opinions and the Council resolution,he inquired whether they might
have a conflict of interest in the future if certain initiatives or
projects recommended by Challenge Fort Collins are considered by
the Council.The Board members concluded that this is a concern
that the new Council should address by resolution before any such
initiatives or projects are considered by the Council.
Ward Luthi commented that councilmembers should not serve as a
member of a particular outside group and then decide whether that
group should receive support from the City and also decide what
other competing groups should receive City support.
Councilmember Kneeland echoed Mayor Pro Tem Azari’s statement that
the trend in government is toward a less hierarchical structure
with more public/private collaboration.For this reason,better
guidelines are needed with regard to these conflict of interest
issues.
Councilmember Maxey stated that,in his opinion,a councilmember’s
decision to serve as a member of a community organization or
activity should not indefinitely preclude that councilmember’s
future involvement in any City review of recommendations made by
the organization.Councilmembers should be ineligible to
participate in decisions pertaining to a particular organization
only when they are simultaneously serving as a member of that
organization.
Councilmember Horak indicated that he thought Council should begin
reviewing the opinions of the Ethics Review Board and that the City
Code might be in need of revision so as to establish that review as
a regular part of the process.In that way,the entire Council
could decide whether to accept an opinion of the Board and this
would give councilmembers better guidance.Under the present
system,a particular opinion might be issued by two councilmembers
as a majority of the three-member Board of Ethics.
City Attorney Roy summarized the opinion of the Board that:
(1)no conflict of interest violation had been committed by
the councilmembers named in the complaint,
(2)with regard to handling of similar situations in the
future,it is clear that councilmembers who are appointed
by the Council to represent the City in particular
activities or in serving on the boards of private
Minutes of Alternate Ethics Review Board Meeting
March 29,1993
Page 5
organizations do not have a conflict of interest when
subjects related to those activities or organizations are
presented to the Council,and
(3)as to those councilmembers who choose to participate in
an outside organization or activity in the absence of a
Council appointment,the question of a conflict of
interest must be addressed on a case—by—case basis,
taking into consideration the timing of the
councilmember’s involvement with the outside organization
or activity,the level of involvement,the nature of the
activity,and any other factors which may be relevant in
determining the councilmember’s ability to exercise
independent judgment on behalf of the City.
The Board recommended that Council consider under its Charter
review process the possible amendment of the Charter provisions
having to do with the City’s support of outside organizations.It
also recommended that the Council consider amending the City Code
to enable the full Council to review decisions of the Ethics Review
Board.
The City Attorney was directed to prepare a draft opinion for
circulation among the Board members as soon as possible.The
meeting adjourned at approximately 1:40 p.m.
Reviewed and approved by the Alternate Ethics Review Board Members
Horak,Edwards,Winokur,Fidrych,Dornseif and Barnes.
S ephen ~.Roy,City torney