Debate Over Employment Of Councilmembers Results In Ethics Policy

What happens when a Norman city councilmember's employer has business with the city? That's been the debate of Norman's leaders the past couple of months, and they decided 6 to 3 Tuesday night to adopt an ethics policy.

This new policy does not have the force of law as Ward 2 councilman Tom Kovach wanted. Kovach and fellow councilmembers Bob Thompson and Hal Ezzell wanted an ethics ordinance.

"We have seen in national government the idea of self-policing without consequence is meaningless and dangerous because it give a false sense of security and allows for wolves in sheep's clothing," Kovach said.

However, the primary debate among councilmembers the past couple of months has centered around employment. Even if a councilmember's employer's business with the city can be handled without actual undue influence on behalf of the councilmember, isn't there the perception of a conflict of interest?

"It only makes sense that if your employer had an issue before you, it would be difficult to make an unbiased decision since your livelihood might be affected," Kovach said.

Ward 4 councilwoman Carol Dillingham said she voted for a policy over an ordinance because the possibility of criminal or criminal-like sanctions against an ethics violator could discourage qualified and willing citizens from participating in city government.

Dillingham: "While I don't disagree with the thought of doing an ordinance, the Planning Committee, after lengthy study and advice by the City Attorney unanimously thought that it would be most appropriate, given the framework of existing city and state legislation to craft a policy rather than an ordinance that would help all on council and all of our many boards and commissions understand and recognize ethical issues, and by so doing increase our constant awareness of the importance of the highest standards for our conduct without imposing criminal, or criminal-like sanctions that would make it more difficult than it presently is to find folks to volunteer their time for council and boards/commissions."

The core of this primary debate, Kovach explained, was whether or not a councilmember's employment was an actual conflict in any and all cases where the employer would be doing business with the city.

Kovach underscored that he didn't believe there to be any existing conflicts of interest on the council, and Dillingham said: "I can say without hesitation that we have an engaged, intelligent, passionate council with the highest ethical standards and the will to roll up our sleeves and make Norman an even better place to live."

However, The Norman Files has been told off the record by multiple sources (not a million, but more than two, none of whom are councilmembers) that Mayor Cindy Rosenthal's employment with the University of Oklahoma is at least some of the impetus for concern about councilmembers and employment.

In previous news reports, Rosenthal has noted that because her professorship is tenured, she can feel free to oppose university efforts as she pleases. For those of you who aren't aware of what being tenured means for professors, it means "job security."

The debate over ethics and the Norman City Council isn't quite over either. Dillingham said there would be some work on amendments to the policy or, perhaps, the creation of an ordinance sometime in the future.

But the question remains: Is each and every instance that an employer and city councilmember interacts necessarily a conflict of interest? Leave your comments below, and you can always e-mail us at thenormanfiles@gmail.com.