Ethics policy proposal aims at preventing developers, lobbyists
from gaining undue influence
Gilroy – A proposed ethics policy would force residents to think twice before bringing complaints to city leaders, according to some city councilmen bristling at the thought of publicly airing their day-to-day conversations about city business.
The “Ex Parte Communications” policy, scheduled for council debate Monday night, aims at preventing developers and others who lobby elected and appointed officials from gaining undue influence. But some councilmen say the policy would bury city leaders in paperwork and discourage interaction with constituents. Worse, it could scare off residents who fear having their names revealed in public.
“There are a lot of people who want to express their opinions but they don’t want the world to know what they are,” Councilman Craig Gartman said. “That anonymity is important.”
Before public debate at council meetings, officials frequently disclose if they have met with neighbors or visited a development site. Gartman regards such informal contact as a routine part of his homework as a council member.
But the new policy goes too far, he said, by requiring officials to disclose any details of the conversations “germane to the pending matter.” The policy defines “pending matters” as an “application for a permit (that) has been filed with the appropriate city department” – a step that often occurs months before a permit reaches council for review. The policy governs all “quasi-judicial matters,” including road designs for a housing project, permits for a summer festival or hearings to suspend a business license. The policy would not require disclosure on broader policy or zoning issues, such as expanding growth boundaries or changing zoning to allow more homes on a piece of land.
Still, Councilman Dion Bracco called the proposal “really constraining.”
“People call us all the time and say ‘is this something that can be done?’,” Bracco said. “A lot times people call us to help them with the process at City Hall. … Most of my conversations are probably at Nob Hill while I’m grocery shopping … I don’t think I should have to carry around a book and keep records of who I talk to and what time I talk to them.”
The language for Gilroy’s policy was lifted verbatim from council rule books in Morgan Hill. The policy has worked well for Gilroy’s northern neighbor for more than a year, said Morgan Hill Councilman Larry Carr. He said the city instituted an Ex Parte Communications policy as part of a broader package of ethics reforms in the last few years.
The changes have helped keep council members on the same page, since each official inevitably hears from different segments of the public, Carr said. He and fellow council members apply the disclosure policy by broadly describing at meetings who they talked with, whether an architect, developer or residents. Rather than naming every individuals related to a specific topic, Carr said council members rely on general descriptions such as “a group of neighbors.”
“I don’t think as a policy it’s unreasonable at all,” Carr said. “Certainly, a person could follow the logic that for every meeting I’m in, a scribe has to be there. But that’s certainly not the spirit of it.
“It’s not meant to stop councilmen from having those conversations,” he added. “It’s about how we can have those conversations in an ethical fashion.”
Common sense would dictate how to apply the policy, said Gilroy Councilman Peter Arellano.
“I don’t think we’re there to try to record verbatim the meeting and have it put in the record,” he said. “We don’t have to go that far. I think it’s enough that we say we spoke with them.”
The origins of the policy remain unclear. City Administrator Jay Baksa said it emerged from informal council policy talks more than a year ago and was re-affirmed during another round of policy discussions last month. Gartman, however, said that council only discussed the issue in July so all members could reach a “gentleman’s agreement” about standards of disclosure. He said council never requested a formal policy and called the proposal an example of city staff members over-reaching their authority.
Council will debate the policy at 7pm meeting Monday at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna St.
