By Megan Kelley
Review Writer
LAKE ORION — The Lake Orion Village Council held a special workshop meeting May 3 to discuss a potential ethics ordinance designed to create a set of minimum ethical standards of conduct for the council, village appointees and employees.
The council was joined by James Robb, chair of the Board of Ethics for the City of Birmingham, and village attorney Mary Kucharek from Beier Howlett, who drafted the proposed ordinance.
The intention of the code is to avoid action which might result in or create the appearance of private gain, preferential treatment, affecting the confidence of public or integrity of the village, loss of independence or impartiality and decision making outside of village channels, according to the draft policy.
The ordinance would also create a Board of Ethics in the village that would be appointed by the council and consist of three members whose purpose is to interpret the Code of Ethics, conduct hearings and issue advisory opinions.
The ethics board, which would likely be made up of residents who have legal, administrative or other desirable qualifications, would assess questions or complaints that apply to the ethics code by holding hearings and issuing their advisory opinion.
The selection process would include an application and interview process, after which the village council would vote on the appointments.
Later in the meeting, village resident Harry Stephen suggested that when the council does vote on the appointments, the vote should require more than just a simple majority of the council for appointees. Kucharek said that she felt that was a good idea.
Council member Sarah Luchsinger asked what qualified as a conflict of interest and what the processes would be should a conflict of interest be found. Luchsinger also asked what would occur if a conflict of interest were found in a matter after a council vote were already cast, especially if the vote of a council member found to be in conflict would have changed the overall vote.
Kucharek responded stating that if that were to happen, proceedings would be based on state law but noted that she was not sure what state law outlined.
Council member Michael Lamb was concerned with the section of the proposed ordinance that outlined affidavit and disclosure statements, saying that a member having to disclose property that they and their family own, as well as property interest, could potentially harm the council member making the disclosure.
“I would not feel comfortable with this property disclosure and the family property disclosure and five percent business interest. I don’t know what Birmingham is like, you have a huge business community, people own huge buildings but this is the village. If I was trying to purchase a lot down the street from my house and I was going to tear the house down and build, it could harm me. There are other competitors here,” Lamb said.
Council member Ken Van Portfliet posed the question on what the ethical standard would be for council members speaking out against decisions that the council made as a whole after a vote.
Kucharek said that council members do have their right of free speech as private citizens and suggested that if a council member were to speak out against a decision made by the council, that they be sure to do so as a private citizen by not invoking their title as council member.
Three residents spoke during public comment offering their support for an ethics ordinance, and several council members voiced their support as well, including Councilmember Nancy Mosier who had previously said that she did not feel the village needed an ethics ordinance, stating that she felt the council members were ethical in their practice already.
There was no action taken at the special meeting, and a timeline for the creation of the Board of Ethics and when applications will be accepted is still unknown.
The council gave feedback on the draft to the village attorney and is expected to readdress the proposed ethic ordinance at a future meeting.