What should we do with Jon Camp and the Haymarket? He's in a tough position. The man knows the Haymarket as well as anybody in town and he owns several properties there. But that property ownership means any Haymarket-related issue that comes before the City Council is a potential conflict of interest for Mr. Camp. How can Lincolnites trust him to vote "correctly" when his own interests are so clearly at play?
The State Accountability and Disclosure Commission says Camp is in the clear, at least on matters currently before the Council. Camp declined to vote anyway. The move was purely symbolic, however. Monday's vote was 6-0.
Should Camp never be permitted to vote on Haymarket-related matters? That seems overly harsh. Likewise always permitting him to vote is too lenient. The answers lies somewhere in between, but there are oodles of shades of gray we could fight over. There are situations where Camp's financial interests are provably involved, for example. Then there are cases in which there's nothing more than a widespread perception of personal gain or loss. Is perception enough?
I don't know what the answer is. And to be clear, I'm not trying to pick on Mr. Camp. His interests are just particularly visible because he's so actively involved in a chunk of the city that's receiving a lot of attention right now. There are plenty of community members out there who, if they were on the City Council, would have far more conflicts than Mr. Camp.
And not that personal interests are such a horrible thing. Active, intimate involvement in the community gives a person valuable knowledge that the City Council can and should tap. That the knowledge is colored by personal interest (with the possibility for gain or loss) doesn't automatically render it worthless.
I'm just thinking out loud here. Feel free to do the same.
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
It strikes me as a catch-22 situation. I dislike Buffington for 2 reasons - she has no experience that I can see, and she says something stupid every time she opens her mouth.
If we want better candidates in Lincoln to step up to the plate and run for office, and we don’t want them to be carpet-baggers that just swoop into town to hold office, then we will need people from the community that have some kind of experience.
If that’s the case, we’ll run into this all the time. In the specific case of Camp, I think it’s tricky. He doesn’t come across as a very likable guy, and I think that hurts his public perception.
I think I be less trusting of him and his Haymarket involvement if he had just been elected now that all the activity is going on in the Haymarket. As it is, he’s been a very vocal proponent of the entire Haymarket area, and he has been for a long time, and he’s held the office for a long time. He strikes me as being consistent.
I don’t have a huge issue with his involvement in the discussions about what’s happening down there. We keep electing him, and then we voted for an arena in the area. That’s not his fault. With that arena and all that money will come development. That’s not his fault.
When his specific properties are (or may be) involved, then there’s definitely a conflict. But if a neautral third party gives blessing to him taking part, why wouldn’t we want a voice there that knows more about the area than most of us ever will?
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.