During its meeting Tuesday, the Clark County Council had its first look at a proposed ordinance to create a new ethics review and oversight commission.
The ethics commission is the result of the charter amendment approved by voters in November that requires the council to adopt an ordinance establishing a code of ethics and penalties for violations of the code by July 31. The code would apply to all county departments, elected or appointed officials and entities receiving funds through the county budget.
Along with the ethics commission, the amendment also requires the creation of an ethics oversight office operated by the county manager and a complaint hotline.
Not all of the language included in the proposed ordinance was taken from the charter amendment. Lindsey Shafar, senior legislative assistant, told the council the code was written to follow state statute by “prohibiting elected officials and county officials from using their position for the basis of personal gain.”
County officials and staff would also be prohibited from giving or accepting money, gifts or rewards that give the “appearance of impropriety,” Shafar added.
Anyone violating the ethics code would be subject to review by the ethics review commission. Although the charter amendment does not specify the penalties for violations, the ordinance says council members could be subject to public admonishment, censure or removal from committees. In the case of an employee violation, the county manager may take action in accord with state law, county policy or union agreement.
Who will be selected to serve on the commission has yet to be decided. The ordinance, which was modeled on Pierce County’s policy, calls for one member to be a licensed attorney and one member be employed in or retired from the private sector.
“Although there are many different forms that an ethics review commission can take, and there are many different examples within the state, the charter amendment doesn’t specify the commission,” Shafar said.
Including language that wasn’t in the charter had some council members wanting a closer look while another felt is was lacking in some places.
“This process really depends on the quality of the people the county manager picks,” Councilor Gary Medvigy said. “But there’s nothing in here about what the prosecuting attorney’s role should be or could be.”
Medvigy also said he was concerned about potential impacts to the budget, especially if outside legal counsel is retained as the ordinance would allow.
County Manager Kathleen Otto said the ethics review commission and oversight office is not a funded department, adding “we will have paid staff to support them, like we do with our other boards and commissions.”
Depending on how quickly the commission is convened, it could be charged with reviewing a recently filed ethics complaint over the county council’s handling of the redistricting process. The council suspended its review process for councilors accused of violating its code of ethics in September 2020.
At that time, Councilor Julie Olson said, “The way this is set up right now, we just don’t have the ability to do it, I think, in a transparent, fair and predictable process.”
“I would like the opportunity to re-read this,” Chair Karen Bowerman said, adding she wanted to do a side-by-side comparison of the proposed ordinance and charter amendment to better understand the differences.
Olson also said she wanted more time to review the two documents.
“I want to make sure whatever we adopt in an ordinance is manageable, enforceable and has meaning. I think we still get some confusion between conduct and ethics. There’s a difference between political behavior, which we may or may not like, and ethical conduct. I want to make sure we’re really clear on that,” Olson said.
The council is scheduled to review the ordinance again at its 10 a.m. meeting on March 1.
