Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988 Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes - January-June BOARD OF ETHICS MONDAY - JANUARY 25 , 1988 The Board of Ethics met in regular session on Monday, January 25 , 1988 at 2 : 00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers - 10th floor - City Hall . Present: John Mertz , Donald Cook, Stephen Lowney, City Attorney, Al Knot, Rita M. Bauman - City Clerk Absent; None The meeting was called to order by John Mertz at 2 : 15 P.M. The minutes of the Meeting of June 23 , 1987 were recommended for approval by John Mertz Seconded by Donald Cook - Carried - minutes were approved. Old Business - None . New Business - Election of Officers for the Year 1988 . Motion by Donald Cook that John Mertz be nominated as Chairman for the year 1988 - Motion seconded by Al Knot - There being no other nomination for Chairman the motion carried. Motion by Pita M. Bauman that Donald Cook be nominated for Vice-Chairman for the year 1988 - motion seconded by John Mertz - there being no other nomination for Vice-Chairman - Motion Carried. Reports of Officers - City Attorney Al Knot presented a letter (attached) from Harold Leeman Jr. to the Board asking that the Board review the post election primary statement for the Lindeman for City Council Campaign Committee relative mis-use of funds and ask for an opinion on this matter - discussion was held and a motion made by John Mertz that Board Member Stephen Lowney look into this matter and report back to the Board at the next meeting. There being no further reports or business a motion was made by John Mertz that the next Board of Ethics meeting be held on Monday,February 22 , 1988 at 2 : 00 P.M. - Motion seconded by Don Cook - Motion Carried. Motion by John Mertz that the meeting stand adjourned = Motion seconded by Stephen Lowney - Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 2 : 40 P .M. Respectfully submitted: 122. � Rita M. Bauman Secretary October 8, 41�19 9-7 , Y ;.,.ERK P - ( 3E ?H 7 Council President Tony Benavides and City Councilmembers 10th Floor, City Hall Lansing, MI 48933 Dear President Benavides and Councilmembers: I request that you ask the Board of Ethics to review the post-election primary statement of the Lindemann For City Council Campaign Committee. After review of this statement (located at the County Clerk's Office in Mason) I would hope the Board of Ethics would render an opinion announcing that it was wrong for the councilman from the First Ward to have made a loan from a taxpayer supported account which is called in government circles the "Office Holder Expense Account." The loan of $154.00 from a taxpayer supported account to one's campaign is truly disappointing to all citizens of Lansing and especially those from the First Ward. In closing I would hope that the Board of Ethics would crack down hard on the misuse of taxpayers dollars by elected officials. Sincerely, Harold J. Leeman Jr. 529 N. Francis Lansing, MI 48912 REFERRED TO THE . CITY ATTORNEY BOARD OF ETHICS MONDAY - FEBRUARY 22 , 1988 The Boand ob Ethica met in regutan zezzion on Monday, Febnuany 22 , 1988 at 2 : 00 P. M . in the City Councit Consenence Room - 70.th 6toor City Hatt . PRESENT: Donatd Cook, Stephen Lowney, John Mentz , Metvin McWtttiamz - Ch.Le� A-6zistant City Attorney, Rita M. Bauman - City Cterfz ABSENT: None The meeting waz caned to onden by the ChaiAman-John Mentz at 2 : 10 P. M. Motion by Donatd Cook that the m.Lnutez ob the meeting of January 25 , 1988 be approved - zeconded by John Mentz . OLD BUSINESS - Stephen Lowney pazzed a memorandum to each BovLd Members in neaand to hi,5 netvew o� the regeurt o6 Hanotd Leeman Jn. on the port election pnimany statement o� the Lindemann bon Council campaign Committee neganding a .Loan of $ 154 . 00 6nom the "obb.Lce hotden expense account" . Much dtscus.6ion was held on thi.6 matters pertaining to the wondi ng in the City Chanter, ordinance, and State Law coven.Lng this area. John Mentz made a motion that the Boand of Ethics does not have jun.Lsdiction oven this matter and that Stephen Lowney draw up an opinion which wilt be Jonwanded on to the other members o6 the Boand bon reivew and signing . The signed opinion wilt then . be �mwanded on to Harotd Leeman Jn. NEW BUSINESS : Don Cook rifted ij there were any other otd tettens around The Ctenfz neptyed that there were none that she was aware 0� . Motion by Don Cook that thin meeting stand adjourned-seconded by Stephen Lowney. Motion by John Mertz that the next Board of Ethicz meeting be held on Monday, June 6 , 1988 - Seconded by Rita M. Bauman. Meeting adjounned at 2 : 35 P. M . Respect6utty submitted: Rita M . Bauman Secnetany MEMORANDUM TO: MEMBERS OF LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS FROM: STEPHEN J . LOWNEY RE : OCTOBER 8 , 1987 LETTER FROM HAROLD J. LEEMAN, JR . DATE : FEBRUARY 22, 1988 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In a letter dated October 8, 1987, Harold J. Leeman, Jr . , asked the Lansing Board of Ethics to review the post-election primary statement of the Lindeman For City Council Campaign Committee regarding a loan of $154. 00 from Mr . Lindeman ' s "Officeholder Expense Account" . Upon review, it appears this issue is not within the jurisdiction of the City Board of Ethics . The "Officeholder Expense Account" referred to by Mr. Leeman is not created under City ordinance but appears to be an account created under State law pursuant to the Campaign Finance Act (1976 PA 388 ; MCLA 169 . 201 et . seq . ) . Section 25 of the Act requires a committee supporting a candidate to file a Campaign Statement. Section 15 of the Act provides that the Secretary of State has the responsibility for determining whether there has been a violation of the Act . If the Secretary of State determines a violation has occurred , it can refer the matter to the Attorney General for enforcement . In view of the foregoing, it is my conclusion that the Lansing Board of Ethics is without jurisdiction in this matter. Any alleged violation in connection with the loan from the Officeholder Expense Account appears to be more appropriately under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State . .. : •.,".. .. � '. ., P.�: v r'',c�.a y:.�'` ...., a MINUTES BOA -OF`ETHICS LANSING BO Monday, March 13, 1989 - 2 p.m. 313 -South-Washington Lansing, Michigan The meeting was called'toorder at approximately 2:10 p.m. ROLL CALL: = ', Donn Mertz, Chairman Donald Cook, Vice-Chairman Steve Lowney Rita Bauman Alvan Knot A quorum was present. GUESTS: Jean Tubbs, Candidate for Lansing City Clerk Chris`Goliernbewski Lansing State Journal SECRETARY'S REPORT: Approval of Minutes: The following minutes were approved unanimously by the Board for filing. Special Meeting of 10/27/88, 10/26/88 and ---�► 2/27(D 81 Correspondence Received and Sent Since Last Meeting: Letter was received from Ms. Jean Tubbs asking-fore an opinion from the Board. Disclosure of Conflicts Filed Since Last Meeting: None. Inquiries and Complaints Received Since Last Meeting: Letter received from Councilmember Patrick Lindemann regarding Councilmember Sid Worthington's alleged use of Staff for personal gain. Next meeting Date: March 27, 1989 at 2 p.m. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: Disclosures of Conflicts Filed Since Last Meeting: None. Current Legal Developments of Interest: Request for opinion relative to a person who is serving on the City's Historic District Commission and possible conflict regarding contracting with the City through his occupation. J CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: Meeting Goals and Timetables: Today's agenda. Impleme ntadon of Revised Disclosure Form:, Has been submitted to Rita. Memos will be sent to-all persons who have filed a disclosure to date. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS: Drafting Committee: Disclosure Review Form. Timetable - review by ,n next week for Board consideration. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: CLOSED SESSION: Opinions 7, 8 9 and 10 were reviewed and discussion took place. OLD BUSINESS: Advisory Opinion No. 7 - Recusal of City Attorney. Motion made to approve Draft #2 as submitted. Carried 5-0. (Attached) Ms. Bauman is to forward a signed copy of this opinion to Councilmember Lindemann. Advisory Opinion No. 8 - Contacts with Other City Officials. Ms. Bauman moved to approve Draft #3 of Opinion #8 as presented. Carried 5-0. (Attached) Ms. Bauman is to forward a signed copy of this opinion to the } City Council President and Members, including the Physical Development Committee and Mr. Tubbs. Advisory Opinion No. 9 - Use of Private Resources for Public Benefit. Mr. Lowney moved to approve as drafted. Mr. Cook supported. Carried 5-0. (Attached) Advisory Opinion No. 10 - Sale of Pere Marquette Surplus. Awaiting for information to be received from Mr. Al Tubbs., i ! _ 2 777777 r .. l J NEW BUSINESS (Open Session): Discussion: Mayor's.Service on Board of Governors for City Club. Mr. Knot is in the process of obtaining the details and will not make a recommendation until all information is received. A meeting has been scheduled with the Mayor to discuss this matter. Mr. Knot will make a report at the next Board meeting. Con �b .- flicts Arising f rom Candidacy o iscussion f J. Tubbs. Chair stated that the Attomey,General may want to address the question of whether a possible conflict exists when an elected.official is employed by the City and his/het spouse is also ernplo,�ed by the City as a Department Head. A legal opinion will be prepared on this matter. Mr Knot, stated that after discussing this matter with Rita Bauman, City Clerk, and with Mr. Tubbs, at least on the surface there does not seem to be toproblem -be submitted at at t are pretty much autonomous from each March 27 meeting. u Letter from Councilmember Lindemann regarding Use of Stafp-Time. It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. Lindemann be invited to attend the next meeting to discuss this matter so the Board can make a determination as to whether this matter warrants.further investigation. Letter to be sent to Mr. Lindemann from the Chair. ADJOURNMENT: i 3:25 P.M. k Respectfully submitted, # FRANCESCA DONETH Recording Secretary SIGNED: f _ JOHN MERTZ, CHAIR h {4 3 I Patrick E. Lindemann First Ward City°Councilmember city of Lansing March 8, 1999 Mr. clan Mertz, Chairperson Board cyf ethics 518 Hollister Building Lansing, MI 48933 Re: Councilmember Worthington's Unethical Utilization of Staff Time D-6ar JMr. Mertz: For the past several months, the question of a code of conduct within an L<<�ical standard has been the subject of a great deal of discussion and has caused consternation among local elected officials in the Lansing area. There appears to be agreement within the Lansing City Council that a clear definition of ethical standards is nonexistent and that, although the membership of that elected body is desirous of exemplary behavior, it may inadvertently violate an unclear guideline and find itself guilty of unethical behavior, Specific behx,.,iors may require examination in order to reach clarification and to establish specific standards. It has recently come to my attention that a Lansing city councilmember, who is currently a student at Cooley Lav,7 School, has utilized staff time and public resources for his personal gain. The estimated abuse well exceeds one thousand dollars of public funds. FollcFwing established City Council protocol in matters of complaints involving staff, in December, 1988, a written complaint regarding this matter was filed -v,7ith then-Vice President Louis Adado. Mr. Adado informed the that he had subsequently instructed the staff to cease any personal work for individual councilmembers on city time or involving city resources. After those instructions were issued, the aforementioned councilmember presented additional personal work to council staff, and when staff refused his request, as instructed, the councilrnember then requested that staff perform his request "on their own time." FAWse'. 02L ?919 recycletz Paper I also; requested of Mr. Adado an investigation into the total extent. of the alleged abuse of staff time and city resources by the councilmember. Mr. Adado informed me that there was insufficient. time in'his tenure as Vice President to perform an investigation and suggested that the request be forwarded to his successor after the first of the year. I agreed to honor his request and forwarded the written complaint to Mr. Tony Benavides, the newly-lected Vice President in charge of staff. Pursuant. to Mr. Benavides' instruction; please consider this letter a formal request for a full investigation into the alleged ethical misconduct of a Lansing City Councilmember, in using public resources for his personal gain, by the Lansing Board of Ethics, as cited in the COMPILED LAWS OF MICHIGAN, STAND1,1RDS OF CONDUCT FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, 15.342. Standards Imposed, Sec. 2. (3): A public officer or employee shall use personnel resources, property, and funds under the officer or employee's officiwl care and control iudiciously and solely in ac, ordance with prescribed constitutional, statutory, and regulatory procedures and not for personal gain or benefit. In advance, thank: you for your prompt attention to and expeditious resolution of this matter. erely, ' atric ink m Lansing City Co:runcilrnernber cc Lansing Board of Ethics Lansing City Council Lansing City Council Staff pdnzecl Oil INTO, recycle&gapr DRAFT 2 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 7 SUBJECT: RECUSAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY FROM THE BOARD OF ETHICS DATED: March 13 , 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion whether the City Attorney must recuse himself from serving as a member of the Board of Ethics if he has been consulted by a Councilmember concerning an issue before the Board involving that same Councilmember. Section 5-502.1 of the City Charter specifically names the City Attorney as a member of the Board of Ethics . Section 5-502 .5 provides for replacement of a member of the Board of Ethics if he or she is involved in any issue before the Board. Using the usual dictionary meanings of the word "involved" , it is the opinion of the Board of Ethics that unless the City Attorney is the focus of the investigation, he or she must participate in the investigation and any resulting opinion. Consultation by a Councilmember concerning a matter in which the Councilmember has or may have a conflict of interest is considered to be for the personal interest of the Councilmember not City business . This does not mean that Councilmembers may not make inquiries of the City Attorney concerning matters in which they might have a conflict of interest. It means that any such consultation, regardless when it occurs, does not require the City Attorney to recuse himself from sitting as a member of the Board. The Board of Ethics is the only body in City government that is empowered to render advisory opinions with respect to the meaning and interpretation of those provisions of the Charter and other laws establishing standards of conduct for officers and employees of the City of Lansing. The Board' s advisory opinions are only issued by a quorum of the Board at a duly noticed public meeting. The personal opinion of any member of the Board outside such a meeting is not binding on the Board when acting as a body, any more than the personal opinion of a Councilmember outside a Council meeting binds the rest of the City Council acting as a body in a Council meeting. Only the Chairman is designated by the Board of Ethics to serve as spokesman for the Board. THE LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JOHN F. MERTZ , Chairman The City Attorney did not participate in this decision DONALD COOK, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN J. LOWNEY, Public Member DRAFT 3 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 8 SUBJECT: CONTACTS BETWEEN A COUNCILMEMBER WITH A CONFLICT AND OTHER CITY OFFICERS DATED: March 13 , 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion whether the City Municipal Planning And Development Director properly discussed sale of city-owned property with another Councilmember who had a private financial interest in the outcome of the sale proposal. It is undisputed that the administration officers involved had no private financial interest in the proposed sale of city-owned land. It is also undisputed that the department involved followed all the normal procedures for land use planning and sale of excess city-owned land. All of the contacts with the department were initiated by the Councilmember or his partner. The Councilmember did not disclose his interest in the transaction in writing in advance of the contacts with the department, as required by state law and the City Charter. Identification as a realtor involved in the sale at the start of the contacts was not disclosure to the public. The applicable Statute, Charter and Ordinance provisions are intended to regulate the conduct of those who have a personal interest which conflicts with the public interest. They do not place the burden of compliance on other City officials without such a conflict of interest. Respectfully Submitted, THE LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JOHN F. MERTZ , Chairman ALVAN P. KNOT, City Attorney DONALD COOK, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN J. LOWNEY, Public Member DRAFT 3 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 9 SUBJECT: USE OF PRIVATE RESOURCES FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT DATED: March 13 , 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion whether the City properly accepted the use of private resources to accomplish a public benefit. It is undisputable that the private resources were used for a public benefit. This was determined by a Circuit Court ruling, which may not be collaterally questioned by this body. It is also undisputed that the citizen that donated the resources did not receive any benefit, other than that received by other members of the general public, from any city official. Title to the property was retained by the City. The citizen was assessed the normal amount for the benefits which accrued to his property from the City action. The Board of Ethics does not have jurisdiction to question the conduct of private citizens, but if it did, it would commend the citizen involved here. There is no allegation or proof that any member of City government received any private benefit from the resources donated, or varied the normal procedures for land acquisition. There was no violation of the rules of ethics by any member of City government involved in the acquisition of the property based on the facts submitted by the Councilmember who made the inquiry. Respectfully Submitted, THE LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JOHN F. MERTZ , Chairman ALVAN P. KNOT, City Attorney DONALD COOK, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN J. LOWNEY, Public Member CITY OF LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS TO: OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES WHO FILED DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST PRIOR TO MARCH 1 , 1989 The Board of Ethics has attempted to review a disclosure of a conflict of interest filed by you. Your disclosure contains insufficient information to allow such review, however. To assist you to make the full disclosure required by law, the Board of Ethics has adopted a revised form for use in disclosing conflicts. While you are not required to use this specific form, any disclosure you file must contain the information called for in it. Enclosed is a copy of your original filing, along with a blank form with instructions, which you are requested to complete and resubmit to the City Clerk as soon as possible. If your disclosure pertains to a contract with the City, it must contain the information required by MCL 15 . 323 (c) . To the extent it pertains to other government decisions, it must meet Charter requirements for a full and complete disclosure. "Blanket disclosures" do not comply with either state law or local charter and ordinance requirements. Officers and employees are required to file a separate disclosure for each specific transaction involving an actual or potential conflict of interest before any dealing with the City takes place. A disclosure must also indicate how the officer or employee intends to resolve the disclosed conflict. Your cooperation in promptly completing and returning the enclosed form will be appreciated. THE LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS CITY OF LANSING AFFIDAVIT OF DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST TO: [ ] CITY CLERK [ ] CITY ATTORNEY [ ] MAYOR [ ] CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT [ ] , DEPARTMENT HEAD STATE OF MICHIGAN) COUNTY OF ) (Name) being duly sworn, says under oath: 1 . I am an elected or appointed officer or employee of the City of Lansing, holding the position of (Title) in the Department. This position is: [ ] Fulltime [ ] Parttime ( less than 25 hours/wk) [ ] Unpaid. 2. [ ] I , and/or [ ] my (Relationship) a member of my immediate family as defined in Ordinance 290 . 02 (i) , and/or [ ] (Name) a business with which I am associated as defined in Ordinance 290 . 02 (b) , ( c) and (d) : (Select the option or options that apply) [ ] a. may receive a financial benefit of more than a de minimus nature which is distinguishable from the benefits to the person as a member of the public or as a member of a broad segment of the public, from a decision I would otherwise make or participate in as an officer or employee. The decision involved is described as follows: 5 The financial benefit will be received by the following persons in the following amounts : [ ] b. intend to have business dealings with the City of Lansing, either directly or indirectly. The business dealings are specifically described in detail as follows ( include names of each party, the duration of the dealings , the financial consideration between the parties, the governmental facilities or services involved, the nature and degree of assignment of government employees for fulfillment of dealings, and the nature of any pecuniary interest) : ( ] c. may derive income or benefits, either directly or indirectly, in addition to official remuneration, as a result of Council action. The action involved is described as follows: The income or benefits, in addition to official remuneration, that will be derived, either directly or indirectly, is described as follows: 6 [ ] d. may derive income or benefits, either directly or indirectly, in addition to official remuneration, as a result of a contract with the City. The contract is specifically described in detail as follows (include names of each party, the duration of the dealings, the financial consideration between the parties, the governmental facilities or services involved, the nature and degree of assignment of government employees for fulfillment of the contract, and the nature of any pecuniary interest) : [ ] e. have a conflict between a personal interest and the public interest as defined by state law, the Lansing City Charter, or ordinance. The personal interest that conflicts with the public interest is described as follows : The public interest that the personal interest conflicts with is described as follows: 7 3 . I have attached additional detail on the reverse of this form or on attached sheets , including copies of all relevant documents, memos, resolutions, and contracts. 4 . (Select One) [ ] I will not make or participate in the making of the affected decision and/or governmental decisions concerning the contract and/or governmental decisions concerning the business dealings and/or governmental decisions concerning the conflict, OR [ ] Despite the conflict of interest, I am able to make or participate in the making of the affected decision and/or governmental decisions concerning the contract and/or governmental decisions concerning the business dealings and/or governmental decisions concerning the conflict, fairly, objectively, and in the public interest because: 5. I hereby certify that this disclosure is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 6 . I hereby certify that I have not solicited or entered into any agreement with the City of Lansing prior to filing this affidavit. 8 The foregoing Affidavit of Disclosure of Conflict of Interest was executed on the day of , 19 Subscribed and sworn before me the day of , 19 Notary Public/ Deputy Clerk County, Michigan My Commission Expires: FOR CITY CLERK/CITY ATTORNEY USAGE DATE FILED: COPIES SENT TO: [ ] Mayor [ ] City Council President [ ] Department Head [ ] Board of Ethics ON: BY: FOR BOARD OF ETHICS USAGE REVIEWED: [ ] Approved w/o Comment [ ] Approved w/Comment, See Opinion [ ] Not Approved: [ ] Returned For Additional Information On [ ] Prohibited Activity, See [ ] Other 9 CITY OF LANSING AFFIDAVIT OF DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (Adopted 2/27/89 ) NOTICE THIS FORM IS AUTHORIZED FOR USE FOR ALL DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. IT REPLACES THE ONE PAGE FORM PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED BY THE CITY CLERK 'S OFFICE. THE INFORMATION SUPPLIED IN THIS FORM MUST BE GIVEN UNDER OATH. THERE MAY BE EMPLOYMENT, CIVIL AND/OR CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IMPOSED UPON ANYONE MAKING A FALSE OR MISLEADING OATH OR STATEMENT ON THIS FORM. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING AFFIDAVIT 1. Question 1 asks for identifying information. 2 . Question 2 asks for details of the conflict of interest. Choose the alternative or alternatives that describe your situation, and complete the applicable section( s) completely. Incomplete information will delay review of your filing by the Board of Ethics. 3 . Questions 3 to 6 apply in all cases. 4 . The completed form should be dated and executed, and your signature notarized. 5 . Disclosures of financial conflicts of interest should be filed with the City Clerk. Disclosures of nonfinancial conflicts of interest should be filed with the City Attorney. Two copies of your Affidavit should also be supplied to the City Clerk or the City Attorney so that it can also be sent, as appropriate, to the Mayor or City Council President and your Department Head, if applicable. 6 . After filing, your form will be reviewed by the Board of Ethics for completeness and conformity to state law, the charter, and any applicable ordinances. You will be advised if any additional information or if further action is required. Generally, the review will occur within 2-4 weeks of your filing. If speedier review is required, please indicate the date your review is needed by and your reasons for the request, in a separate letter filed with your affidavit. 1 COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT DISCLOSING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 1. Why do I have to fill out this form? Both state law and local charter provisions require timely, full and complete disclosure, in writing, of actual and potential conflicts of interest. These provisions have been in effect since the mid and late 1970s. 2. When is an officer or employee required to file an Affidavit of Disclosure? As soon as a conflict exists, an officer or employee must promptly file an Affidavit of Disclosure with the City Clerk or the City Attorney, but in no event less than 10 days before any meeting of any governing body at which the matter will be discussed or considered. Where an officer or employee serves on a governing body responsible for approval of the matter in which there is a conflict, the disclosure must be made at the same time as the filing with the City Clerk, to the governing body (the Council President, in the case of Councilmembers) and be included in the public record of the proceedings . Last minute disclosures , except in an unusual circumstances, do not comply with state law or the Charter. However, in the event the issue unavoidably arises for the first time at a particular meeting, the governing body may determine by vote of an affirmative majority of disinterested members if a conflict exists which requires or permits a member to be excused from voting. At the very least, the nature of the conflict and the reasons for excusal or nonexcusal from voting should always appear in the record of the meeting. An Affidavit of Disclosure must then be filed as soon as practible after the meeting. 3. Does a person have to file an Affidavit of Disclosure on each transaction in which they are or may be in conflict, or may the Affidavit be generic in nature? An officer or employee must file an Affidavit of Disclosure on each separate transaction that involves a financial conflict. 4. What level of detail satisfies the requirement to fully disclose a conflict of interest? State law, the Charter and Conflict of Interest Ordinance require complete and specific details in order to satisfy the requirement of a full disclosure. The form is designed so that if 2 fully completed, it will satisfy the disclosure requirement in most cases . 5. Is the purpose of the Affidavit of Disclosure to serve notice that I am unable to speak or vote on a matter, or does it simply serve as notice to other parties in the decision making process that I have a self interest as opposed to a public one? Both. In the appropriate case, it also notifies a governing body (and the public) , on the record, why the officer or employee with the conflict believes he or she can, in light of the conflict, make or participate in making a decision on the matter fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. 6. Is the filing of an Affidavit of Disclosure required even if I have already been excused from voting or participating in the decision of the matter? Yes . 7. What standards of conduct apply if I have a conflict of interest? When there is a conflict of interest relative to a public contract, state law sets the standards of conduct which apply. Officers and employees who contemplate being a party to a contract with the City are referred to MCL 15. 321 et seq. , entitled, "Contracts Of Public Servants With Public Entities" . As a general rule, state law prohibits a full time officer or employee from having direct business dealings with the City. Volunteer and part time officers and employees may, if state law is complied with, have business dealings with the City. Violation of the state statute is a misdemeanor. In all other cases, Chapter 5 of the Charter and Chapter 290 of the Code of Ordinances supply the applicable rules . Copies of the Charter and Ordinance are available from the City Clerk. Any officer or employee may seek an advisory opinion from the Board of Ethics based on the facts of their specific situation, if they are uncertain about what rules apply to them, or about what they are required to do to resolve a conflict of interest. 8. Who am I allowed to communicate with about this matter, once I have filed an Affidavit of Disclosure? If you have a conflict of interest, whether or not you have filed an Affidavit of Disclosure, you may not officially or 3 unofficially participate in the discussion or consideration of the item in conflict in any way, shape, or form, either directly or indirectly, either in furtherance of your public responsibilities or of your private interests, at any stage of the consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict, except in compliance with State law or Ordinance 290 . 9. Does being excused from voting or late filing of an Affidavit of Disclosure absolve any prior actions I may have taken on behalf of the matter in which I have a conflict of interest? No. 4 I I I LANSING � : i t o f - 11 �:. • 1. c y •• 1,. I N T E R 0 F F I CE C 0 M M U N I CAT I ON �..:�••�- a TO: Councilmember James Blair FROM: Rita M. Bauman - City Clerk DATE: 3/14/89 SUBJECT: Opinions adopted by the Board of Ethics Attached are opinions #7,8 and 9 as adopted by the City of Lansing Board of Ethics at their meeting of Monday, March 13, 1989. - n ny7 - MAR 1 41989 DRAFT 2 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 7 SUBJECT: RECUSAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY FROM THE BOARD OF ETHICS DATED: March 13 , 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion whether the City Attorney must recuse himself from serving as a member of the Board of Ethics if he has been consulted by a Councilmember concerning an issue before the Board involving that same Councilmember. Section 5-502. 1 of the City Charter specifically names the City Attorney as a member of the Board of Ethics . Section 5-502. 5 provides for replacement of a member of the Board of Ethics if he or she is involved in any issue before the Board. Using the usual dictionary meanings of the word "involved" , it is the opinion of the Board of Ethics that unless the City Attorney is the focus of the investigation, he or she must participate in the investigation and any resulting opinion. Consultation by a Councilmember concerning a matter in which the Councilmember has or may have a conflict of interest is considered to be for the personal interest of the Councilmember not City business . This does not mean that Councilmembers may not make inquiries of the City Attorney concerning matters in which they might have a conflict of interest. It means that any such consultation, regardless when it occurs, does not require the City Attorney to recuse himself from sitting as a member of the Board. The Board of Ethics is the only body in City government that is empowered to render advisory opinions with respect to the meaning and interpretation of those provisions of the Charter and other laws establishing standards of conduct for officers and employees of the City of Lansing. The Board' s advisory opinions are only issued by a quorum of the Board at a duly noticed public meeting. The personal opinion of any member of the Board outside such a meeting is not binding on the Board when acting as a body, any more than the personal opinion of a Councilmember outside a Council meeting binds the rest of the City Council acting as a body in a Council meeting. Only the Chairman is designated by the Board of Ethics to serve as spokesman for the Board. THE LANSINQ BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JO F. MERTZ , irman The City Attorney did not l ,�-- participate in this decision DONALD COOK, ice-Chairman d4 STEP EN J /LOWNEY ublic Member DRAFT 3 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 8 SUBJECT: CONTACTS BETWEEN A COUNCILMEMBER WITH A CONFLICT AND OTHER CITY OFFICERS DATED: March 13 , 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion whether the City Municipal Planning And Development Director properly • discussed sale of city-owned property with another Councilmember who had a private financial interest in the outcome of the sale proposal. It is undisputed that the administration officers involved had no private financial interest in the proposed sale of city-owned land. It is also undisputed that the department involved followed all the normal procedures for land use planning and sale of excess city-owned land. All of the contacts with the department were initiated by the Councilmember or his partner. The, Councilmember did not disclose his interest in the transaction in writing in advance of the contacts with the department, as required by state law and the City Charter. Identification as a realtor involved in the sale at the start of the contacts was not disclosure to the public. The applicable Statute, Charter and Ordinance provisions are intended to regulate the conduct of those who have a personal interest which conflicts with the public interest. They do not place the burden of compliance on other City officials without such a conflict of interest. Respectfully Submitted, THE LANSIN BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JOHL TZ , h irman CIL P. . 9 - ALVAN P. KNOT, City Attorney D ALD COOK, Vice-Chairman S EP N J .'LOWNEY, ublic Member DRAFT 3 ADVISORY OPINION NO. 9 SUBJECT: USE OF PRIVATE RESOURCES FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT DATED: March 13, 1989 A Councilmember has asked for a Board of Ethics opinion wheth.pr the City properly accepted the use of private 'resources to accomplish a public benefit. It is undisputable that the private resources were used for a public benefit. This was determined by a Circuit Court ruling, which may not be collaterally questioned by this body. It is also undisputed that the citizen that donated the resources did not receive any benefit, other than that received by other members of the general public, from any city official. Title to the property was retained by the City. The citizen was assessed the normal amount for the benefits which accrued to his property from the City action. The Board of Ethics does not have jurisdiction to question the conduct of private citizens , but if it did, it would commend the citizen involved here. There is no allegation or proof that any member of City government received any private benefit from the resources donated, or varied the normal procedures for land acquisition. There was no violation of the rule-s of ethics by any member of City government involved in the acquisition of the property based on the facts submitted by the Councilmember who made the inquiry. Respectfully Submitted, THE LANSING BOARD OF ETHICS RITA BAUMAN, City Clerk JOH MERTZ , airman ALVAN P. KNOT, City Attorney ?1 5ALD COOK, Vice-Chairman 1�,4 f)A 0 STEPH 1 J ./l�WNEY , P lic Member MINUTES LANSING CITY BOARD OF ETHICS SPECIAL MEETING OF MONDAY, MAY 1, 1989 The meeting was called to order at 2 : 00 p.m. at the Foster Building, 313 South Washington Square, Lansing, Michigan. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John Mertz , Chair Steve Lowney Don Cook Rita Bauman Alvan P. Knot OTHERS PRESENT: Kathleen Frantz, Admn. Assistant to City Attorney (as Recording Secretary) AGENDA APPROVED AS SUBMITTED BY CLERK BAUMAN. SECRETARY'S REPORT: Correspondence Received and Sent: None. Affidavit of Disclosures filed: David Hilliard Re: Full-time City employee wants to work for Time Energy Systems, Inc. after his regular hours with City. Mr. Knot is to draft opinion regarding this matter and submit Draft #1 at the next Board meeting. Inquiries and Complaints Received Since Last Meeting: None Next Meeting Date: May 22, 1989 @ 2:00 p.m. at the Foster Building, 313 S. Washington Square, 3rd Floor Conference Room, Lansing, Michigan. -1- CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: OLD BUSINESS: 1 . Mr. Mertz provided the Board members with a copy of Draft 41 of a response letter to Mr. Lindemann' s letter of March 8 , 1989 regarding City Councilmember Worthington and use of Council Staff for personal business. The letter was reviewed and discussion ensued regarding revisions. Mr. Mertz will present the revised Draft #2 of the letter at the next Board of Ethics meeting. 2 . Mr. Knot provided the Board members with a letter to Alan Tubbs in response to his inquiry regarding the candidacy of his wife running for City Clerk. The members reviewed said letter and all members signed same which indicated to Mr. Tubbs no conflict existed if his wife ran for the office of or became City Clerk. 3 . In regard to the Mayor' s City Club inquiry, Mr. Mertz will draft a letter to the Mayor advising that no conflict exists for the Mayor to serve on the Board of Governors of the City Club. NEW BUSINESS: None. PUBLIC COMMENT: None ADJOURNMENT: APPROXIMATELY 3:20 P.M. Submitted by: Kathleen Frantz Recording Secretary -2- MINUTES LANSING CITY BOARD OF ETHICS REGULAR MEETING ON MONDAY, MAY 22, 1989 The meeting was called to order at 2 : 15 p.m. at the Foster Building, 313 South Washington Square, Lansing, Michigan. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John Mertz , Chair Don Cook Rita Bauman Alvan P. Knot BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Stephen Lowney OTHERS PRESENT: Kathleen Frantz, Admn. Assistant to City Attorney (as Recording Secretary) SECRETARY'S REPORT: Correspondence Received and Sent: None. Affidavit of Disclosures filed: None. Inquiries and Complaints Received Since Last Meeting: None. Next Meeting Date: June 19, 1989 @ 2:00 p.m. at the Foster Building, 313 S. Washington Square, 3rd Floor Conference Room, Lansing, Michigan. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: OLD BUSINESS: 1 . AFFIDAVIT OF DISCLOSURE OF DAVID HILLIARD: Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Hilliard' s disclosure wherein Mr. Hilliard indicates he is a full-time employee of the City of Lansing who would like to work on a contract basis for Time Energy Systems providing maintenance on the heating and cooling system at City Hall. John Mertz entertained a motion that Al Knot prepare an opinion regarding this matter. Motion made by Rita Bauman; Don Cook seconded the motion; carried. -1- 2 . AFFIDAVIT OF DISCLOSURE OF LARRY INGALLS: Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Ingalls ' disclosure wherein Mr. Ingalls advises that he is a full-time City employee and inquires whether there is a conflict of interest if he provides maintenance services to the Lansing Police Department emergency helicopter on a contract basis after his regular working hours. Mr. Mertz entertained a motion that Al Knot prepare an opinion regarding this matter. Rita Bauman moved that Al Knot prepare an opinion; seconded by Don Cook; carried. 3 . AFFIDAVIT OF DISCLOSURE OF VIRGINIA SWANSON: Discussion ensued regarding this affidavit wherein Ms. Swanson indicates she is a full time employee of the City and wishes to participate in the Urban Renewel Program. Motion was made by Rita Bauman that Al Knot prepare an opinion regarding this matter; seconded by Don Cook; carried. Mr. Mertz advised the Board members that the remaining Disclosures be discussed at the next regular meeting on June 19, 1989 . NEW BUSINESS: None. PUBLIC COMMENT: None ADJOURNMENT: APPROXIMATELY 2:30 P.M. Submitted by: Kathleen Frantz Recording Secretary -2- BOARD OF ETHICS MONDAY - JUNE o, 1988 The meeting of the Board of Ethics was called to order_ at 2:10 P.M. by Vice-Chairperson Donald Cook. Roll Call was taken: Present Donald Cook, Stephen Lowney and Rita M. Bauman - City Clerk Excused Absence - Al Knot, City Attorney and John Mertz. Motion by Stephen Lowney that the minutes of the meeting of February_ 22, 1988 be approved - seconded by Don Cook - Motion Carried. Old Business: In regard to the letter from Harold Leeman vs Patrick Lindemann - Stephen Lowney remarked that he would stop by the office of John Mertz to pick up some former opinions in order to put some answer in writing for Mr. Leeman. Reports of City Officers - None New Business - None Seeing that there was nothing else to come before the Board. Motion by Vice Chairperson Don Cook that this meeting stand adjourned - motion seconded by Rita Bauman - Motion Carried. The meeting adjourned at 2:17 P.M. Respectfully submitted. , .L, Rita M. Bauman Secretary November 22, 1988 Mr . Harold J. Leeman , Jr . 529 North Francis Lansing , Michigan 48912 Re : October 8 , 1987 Request - Advisory Opinion No . 4 Dear Mr . Leeman : By letter dated October 8 , 1987 , you asked the Lansing Board of Ethics to review the post-election primary statement of the Lindemann for City Council Campaign Committee regarding a loan of $154 . 00 from Mr . Lindemann ' s "Officeholder Expense Account" . Upon review, it appears that this issue is not within the jurisdiction of the City Board of Ethics . The "Officeholder 7xpense Account" referred to by you is not created under City Ordinance but appears to be an account created under State law pursuant to the Campaign Finance Act ( 1976 PA 388 ; MCLA 169. 201 et . seq . ) . Section 15 of the Act provides that the Secretary of State has the responsibility for determining whether there has been a violation of the Act . In view of the foregoing , it is our conclusion that the Lansing Board of Ethics is without jurisdiction in this matter. As was indicated to you by the Board in a recent meeting , we apologize for the belated nature of this response . Very truly yours , LANSING BOA�D OF ETHICS J n F . Wirtz , a ^man Dona &Cook , Vice-Ch, irman a Ste ahe J . Lod ey,'-"Publi/ ember C� p - Alvan P . Knot , City Attorney Rita M. Bauman, City er