Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate
Topics
This coverage is made possible by a grant from The Saint Paul Foundation.

Minneapolis considers conflict-of interest rule changes for city boards

The city’s Ethical Practices Board worries that personal appearances by members involved in a project could erode public confidence in commission decisions.

In Minneapolis, builders and developers serve on the city’s Planning Commission. Architects and real estate professionals serve on the Heritage Preservation Commission, and citizens involved in zoning matters serve on the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

City ordinances actually require some board slots to be filled with professionals from the represented field of interest.

That practice, though, has created problems and, last spring, prompted an ethics complaint.

Some Planning Commission members recuse themselves from an agenda item, citing conflict of interest, and then appear before their fellow commissioners on behalf of that item.

Article continues after advertisement

The city’s Ethical Practices Board became concerned that such personal appearances could erode public confidence and ordered a study of how other cities have handled this or similar problems.

That study was presented to the City Council’s Ways and Means/Budget Committee with the suggestion that it is possible to amend the city’s ethics ordinance but that the option needs further study.

“A quick fix creates other problems,” said Susan Trammell, who serves at the city’s ethics officer from the City Attorney’s Office.

She recommended instead that the development boards take a look at their individual bylaws and make changes there when possible. She also said changes to the ordinance are needed but require more study.

“In my opinion, what the city attorney has offered us is a woefully inadequate solution,” said Dan Cohen, a former City Council member currently serving on the Planning Commission.

“This doesn’t pass the smell test,” said Council Member Meg Tuthill, who added that most of the complaints she hears about the boards and commissions focus on the fact that they are not elected, so voters have no say in who is chosen to serve.

The study includes comparisons of the Minneapolis system with those in 13 other cities and a total of 39 boards and commissions. The study includes the structure and membership of boards, conflicts of interest, recusal procedures, term limits and the requirement that members who recuses themselves leave the room during deliberations.

“The state of Minnesota has an open meeting law and our meetings are public,” said Trammell, explaining why a board or commission member should not be asked to leave the room. Leaving the room could also, according to Trammell, cause a board or commission to lose a quorum.

“We have never had a quorum issue as a result of recusals in the four years I have been on the Planning Commission,” said Cohen, who further complained that commissioners who have recused themselves may now sit in the public seats with other spectators while commission members discuss their projects.

Article continues after advertisement

The study found no incident where development-related professionals were prevented from serving on boards or commissions but acknowledges that there is a built-in potential for conflict-of-interest charges because of the professionals’ financial interests in the development community.

Of the 13 cities studied, only Denver prohibits board or commission members from addressing fellow members in a professional capacity.  Only Atlanta and Wichita require members to leave the room or dissociate from the meeting after a conflict of interest is declared.

In 2012, the Planning Commission recorded the most conflict-of-interest recusals (44) among the city’s three development boards. In 2011, it had 28 recusals. Commissioner Lauren Huynh, a green-building consultant, had 15 recusals, and former commission President David Motzenbecker had 9, as did Cohen. Motzenbecker resigned from the commission earlier this month.

Cohen said his recusals were done to protest the system that allowed others to retain their private interests and continue to serve.

The Heritage Preservation Commission had nine recusals in 2012, up three from 2011, when there were six. The Zoning Board of Adjustment had one recusal in 2012 and one in 2011.

Term limits are in place for about half of the boards and commissions in the study, but Trammell said she is not recommending term limits because the number of recusals typically decrease the longer a member serves.

“This needs more thought,” said Trammell after the committee accepted the study. “We need to think it through a little more thoroughly.”

In the ethics complaint filed last spring, the Ethics Board ruled that there was no violation because the member had declared a financial interest in a project and then recused himself.

* **

Article continues after advertisement

Here’s a look at development boards in both Minneapolis and St. Paul:

Minneapolis

Planning Commission: Serves as an advisory board to the City Council.
Members: 10
Terms: Two years with no limits.
Professionals are currently serving and are not prohibited from serving by the City Charter or by city ordinances.
The charter specifies that the commission include the mayor, one member of the School Board, one City Council member, one representative from Hennepin County and five citizens.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.

Historical Preservation Commission: Serves as an advisory board to the City Council.
Members: 10
Terms: Three years with no limits.
Professionals are currently serving on the board.
The membership should  include a representative of the mayor, at least two licensed architects, one real estate agent or appraiser, one resident or owner  of a landmark property in a historic district and one member of the Hennepin County Historical Society as specified in the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances.
No City Council members are currently serving on the commission.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.

Zoning Board of Adjustment: Hears and decides applications for zoning variations, appeals from orders by the zoning administrator and applications for non-conforming use.
Members: 9
Residency required but no list of required representatives.
Professionals are allowed to serve on the board.
No City Council members are currently on the board.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.

St. Paul

Planning Commission: Serves as an advisory body to the mayor and City Council.
Members: 21
Terms: Three years with a three-term limit.
Professionals are currently serving on the commission but are not required to be part of the board.
City Council members are not currently serving on the commission.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.

Heritage Preservation Commission: Serves as an advisory board to the mayor and City Council.
Members: 13
Terms: Three years with a three-term limit.
If available, the commission should include three licensed architects and one member appointed by the Ramsey County Historical Society.
Professionals are currently serving on the commission.
City Council members are not currently serving on the commission.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.

Board of Zoning Appeals: Holds public hearings on challenges of decisions by the zoning administrator and on requests for zoning variances.
Members: 9
Terms: Three years with a three-term limit.
Professionals are allowed to serve.  Residency is required.  City officials and employees are not allowed to serve.
The nine-member board should consist of six regular members, two alternates and one representative from the Planning Commission.
City Council Members are not currently serving on the board.
Decisions may be appealed to the City Council.