Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Conduct and ethics

Proposed city codes raise questions about their efficacy, purpose

The city of Durango is holding two meetings to take public input on drafts of proposed codes governing the conduct and ethics of city officials. The meetings will be at noon and at 4:30 p.m. Monday in the council chambers at City Hall.

These workshops deserve to be well attended, and the city should get plenty of public input. Much of that should take the form of questions, for there is much to question in the drafts.

Start with two basic thoughts: What is the purpose of this? And, as an old saying goes, who watches the watchers? In specific, why not have an independent ethics board from outside city government?

The code of conduct tells city officials how they should behave, while the code of ethics lines out what they should not do. Both have merit. But both also raise disturbing questions.

The conduct code, for example, has a paragraph about how city officials should act if something comes before them in which they have a personal interest. It essentially says any city official “shall disclose” any conflict of interest as “soon as reasonably possible after the interest has arisen.”

Good – except it provides an official with two routes. The conflicted official can disclose the interest in an open meeting of the board or commission on which the official serves or disclose it in writing to the City Council or the board or commission on which the official serves, as well as to the city manager and city attorney.

But the written notice procedure does not say anything about letting the public know. That might work for many boards or commissions. The elected City Council could decide the gravity of the issue. But what if the conflicted official is a city councilor? Why keep the public in the dark then?

Other parts of the code read like elementary school rules: “Focus on the issue being discussed.” “Once a decision is made, move on the next issue.” “Seek common ground. ...”

But if one or more city councilors have something on their minds and want to address it, who is to say they should not? They are elected, presumably to address issues that concern them.

So, how much of this is really about control? How much of this is meant to address citizen concerns about conflicts of interest and how much is intended to assuage an institutional irritation with democracy?

In the ethics code, the first item is an admonition not to disclose confidential information, specifically including anything learned in an executive session of City Council. But there are times when councilors have a duty – perhaps even a legal obligation – to tell the voters what the city is doing in secret. Is that not the kind of call councilors are elected to make?

State law addresses actual criminal behavior, but what happens to a city councilor who talks out of turn or does not play well with others? Is there a provision, besides recall, for unseating a councilor?

With these codes comes a three-member Board of Ethics to rule on whether a code violation occurred. It would consist of the city manager, the city attorney and the municipal judge. (Except Durango has two municipal judges, another question.)

But any allegation about the conduct (and ethics?) of those three would be referred to “their respective professional organizations” – not City Council or any local entity. So no one in Durango would have a say?

These proposals warrant attention – but with an eye toward greater transparency and accountability from city officials and more involvement of Durango residents.

Ask questions.



Reader Comments