Springfield City Council continues to grapple with code of ethics revisions

Springfield City Council members appeared to agree that revisions are needed in the City Charter's rules about financial conflicts of interests. But a year after discussion began, a solution to the code of ethics problem remains elusive.

Council met Monday to discuss the most recent proposed changes to Section 19.16 of the charter, which as currently written prohibits City Council members, employees and other officials from having a "financial interest, direct or indirect, in any contract with the City, or be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in the sale to the City of any land, materials, supplies or services, except on behalf of the City as an officer or employee." Any violations of the section are supposed to result in an immediate forfeiture of the person's position.

One complicating factor is that any changes to the charter, which acts as the city's local constitution, must be approved by voters. So far, council members and staff have not been able to boil down the complex issue into a proposal they think would be easily explained — and palatable — to voters.

During a discussion early in 2023, council members and staff raised concerns that the current charter provision is too vague, as it does not offer definitions of what "direct or indirect" means in terms of financial interest. The one-size-fits-all punishment of being booted from office or fired from a city job also was a concern.

"The challenge sometimes is thinking about all the possible scenarios and what would be the end result," City Manager Jason Gage told councilmembers.

City staff have proposed adopting the ethics standards used by the state of Missouri, but some councilmembers worried during earlier discussions that the state rules are too lenient and would not garner the necessary public support at the polls. State standards would allow council members and city employees to do business with the city, only limiting the amount that could be spent on a single transaction or within a year. Adopting the state standards would also give more authority over city ethics to the state legislature.

The city has since gone back to the drawing board, tasking the Finance and Administration Committee with coming up with an apt alternative. Turnover on council has led to new members joining the committee, delaying the pace of progress.

What's in the new draft?

Councilman Matt Simpson, now the chair of the Finance and Administration Committee, was part of the effort when the earlier proposal was being drafted. Simpson said one of the main goals of any changes was to protect city employees who might suffer the consequences of the policy without having any true control over financial decisions or situations that involved family members. He also said the committee wanted to ensure that councilmembers and administrators were held to a higher standard.

"One of our driving factors was to make sure that we'd have a charter not causing unfairly people who have no role or say in financial decision-making process to lose their job," Simpson said.

The new draft of Section 19.16. adopts the state definition for what constitutes a "substantial financial interest" and, as drafted, would not allow employees to be involved with transactions with the city when either they, their spouse or dependent children own 10% or more of the company involved, or have an interest valued at $10,000 or more; or when they, their spouse or dependent children receive compensation of $5,000 or more a year from "any individual, partnership, organization, or association."

The charter language would also be altered to say that anyone who "willfully conceals" the substantial financial interest or "willfully violates" the section would forfeit their position. This would account for those who may not have been aware of the situation, allowing an alternative path for internal resolution.

More: City Council delays ethics overhaul, wants consensus before sending change to voters

The substantial interest language in the draft would also apply to councilmembers during votes, setting a threshold for when they should disclose their interest and recuse. Councilman Craig Hosmer said that there should not be a certain threshold of interest to meet in order to disclose. Simpson noted that currently disclosure and recusal are not noted in the charter at all, and this provides an avenue to include it.

The new draft still keeps the spirit of prohibiting any financial interest for any councilmember, city manager, deputy or assistant city manager, department head or purchasing agent overall, though the punishment for councilmembers would be adjusted to note that only those "who knew or should have known of such violation" would have to forfeit office.

Additionally, the proposed changes include a provision that would require City Council to maintain and review a code of ethics every other year. While such a code of ethics already exists, it is not required in the charter and this addition would create mandate for it.

More work needed before submitting proposal to voters

All the changes proposed likely would need to be presented to voters in a single ballot question. With so much ground to cover, Councilwoman Monica Horton questioned whether the draft was too dense and complex for all factors to be taken into account.

Councilmembers on Monday agreed that protecting city employees is paramount. With the complexity involved in distinguishing between city employees and higher-ups, councilmembers agreed to revisit the discussion at a later meeting, with edits focused on protecting employees, while keeping the current interest prohibitions for councilmembers. Changes requiring council to maintain a code of ethics would be kept in the proposal, as well.

More: Council drafting new ethics charter amendment, staff proposal seen as too 'permissive'

Council also agreed not to rush to get the question on the ballot in April, saying it was more important to ensure the changes are done thoroughly and councilmembers reach consensus first.

"It's important that we fully address the needs of this section before we take something to a vote of the people," Councilman Brandon Jenson said.

Marta Mieze covers local government at the News-Leader. Contact her with tips at mmieze@news-leader.com.

This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Springfield code of ethics overhaul still on the drawing board