Ethics Commission members said Monday they hope legislation recently filed to fund the Office of Ethics, Compliance and Oversight will restart discussion of the confirmation appointment of its chosen director.
City Council member Clay Yarborough filed the legislation that, if approved, would transfer $142,509 from an Office of General Counsel account for an Ethics Office and place it into an account for the Office of Ethics, Compliance and Oversight.
The compliance and oversight office was added to the City’s Charter to replace the former office for the 2011-12 fiscal year, but has not been funded.
The Ethics Commission appointed former Ethics Director Carla Miller to lead the new office, but without funding, Miller has been working on a voluntary basis.
Mayor Alvin Brown appointed Jon Phillips, senior assistant general counsel, as the acting City Ethics Officer on Jan. 26 to fill the vacancy.
Phillips attended Monday’s meeting.
“I hope what that means is this legislation — and it has got a lot of support right now — passes, that the appointment we propose for the new ECO director will go through,” said Braxton Gilliam, Ethics Commission chairman.
“I hope that we won’t then have discussion, debate and controversy over the appointment … that will delay the process.”
Miller’s appointment has been deferred at the committee level and members said that a legal opinion could be warranted if the issue dragged on to the point where Miller would need to be reappointed.
The legislation introduced by Yarborough is co-sponsored by Council members Don Redman, Matt Schellenberg, John Crescimbeni, Denise Lee, Bill Gulliford, Robin Lumb, Kimberly Daniels, Johnny Gaffney and Lori Boyer.
Ten supporting votes are needed to pass it through full Council with a simple majority.
Ethics Commission members raised questions on where ethics complaints were being reported and the confusion of having two ethics hotlines.
“When I go to the (City) home page and I see a hotline number, I want one number,” said one public commenter.Phillips said the Office of General Counsel would administer whatever outlet is necessary to accept those ethics complaints.
The proposed legislation would repeal parts of the ethics code that, as stated, “the purpose of the repeal is to eliminate any perceived conflicts, redundancies, and ambiguities associated with the interplay” of the old and new office.
Under the legislation, the old Ethics Officer position would not necessarily be appealed.
“Nothing contained in this ordinance is intended to limit or diminish the authority of the mayor to utilize available executive branch resources in the furthering of ethics education, administration, enforcement,” the legislation states.
Tension arising from the situation was apparent, but discussion remained civil. Ethics Commission member L.E. Hutton defended Phillips but said he still supported the legislation.
Phillips responded by saying that the goals of the two entities are the same.
“The goal here is to promote ethical culture in the City, we all have the same goal,” Phillips said.
“I am having a little difficulty with some of the inferences that are being drawn that there is somehow some nefarious purpose with me being appointed to a position that’s within the ordinance code and will not be repealed with this legislation,” he said.
356-2466