The City Council has approved a recusal ordinance, meaning that Council members who feel they have a conflict of interest -- but who haven't been excused from voting by the Accountability and Disclosure Commission -- can skip a vote. It's a win for helping individuals avoid the appearance of impropriety, but it may also open the door to a new type of political shenanigans. A Council member could, for example, skip voting on a politically sensitive topic by making a tenuous claim of conflict of interest. Or somebody could try to pressure a Council member into abstaining from a vote. And so on.
By the way, several commenters over at the LJS are a little confused about all this. For example, "Outside the Box" said, "Why not address the real problem: If you have a financial interest with the city, you cannot be on the council." The thing is, conflicts of interest aren't just about having a direct or even indirect financial interest in something. Consider, as an example, the case of a Council member who attends a church that has an issue before the City Council. Vote for and be seen as an instrument for the church; vote against, and risk being ostracized by other church members.
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
No comments yet! Be the first.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.