Selectmen tackle ethics code

The Board of Selectmen began tackling the proposed Code of Ethics for Public Officials at a work session yesterday. Although both Doug Lambert and Skip Murphy of Budget Committee have questioned both drafts, neither was present as the board indicated that it would not be taking public comment.

Town Administrator Evans Juris said that neither code was intended as an ordinance. He said that the report on the government of the town prepared by Municipal Resources, Inc. in 2003-2004 identified "some general provisions that needed to be addressed," including a code of conduct for elected officials as well as the code of ethics for public officials.

"We did not need to reinvent the wheel," Juris explained, adding that codes have been adopted by a number of New Hampshire municipalities and the ethics code of Sunnyvale, California is widely touted as a model. "Much of these things are being done in Gilford," he said, "and it is just a matter of putting it into writing."

The original draft of the Code of Ethics, referring to conflicts of interest contained a provision that read "in accordance with the law, members shall disclose investments, interests in real property, sources of income, and gifts; and they shall abstain from participating in deliberations and decision-making where conflicts may exist." Lambert and Murphy both took exception to the financial disclosure requirement for elected officials, which would apply to members of the Budget Committee, and the language was deleted from the second draft presented to the work session.

Juris told the board that municipalities are authorized by state statute to enact ordinances bearing on conflicts of interest, which may require financial disclosure.

RSA 31:39-a provides that such ordinances "may include provisions requiring disclosure of financial interests for specified officers and employees, establishing incompatibility of office requirements stricter than those specified by state law or establishing conditions under which prohibited conflicts of interest shall require removal form office. Serving officers and employees are exempted from the ordinance for not more than one year after its adoption and any removal proceedings are conducted in superior court.

The board was not inclined to require financial disclosure of elected officials and struck the lone reference to it in the code, which appeared in a provision requiring compliance with federal and state laws "pertaining to conflicts of interest, election campaigns,financial disclosures, employer responsibilities and open processes of government."

Connie Grant expressed misgivings about a phrase in the preamble to the Code of Ethics requiring that deliberations be conducted "in an atmosphere of respect and civility," suggesting that "it's very subjective," and Gus Benavides said that the responsibility rested with the chair of boards and committee to ensure that "all sides are heard but both sides are respectful. We need to set some standards."

Likewise, Grant was concerned by the requirement that officials sign statement affirming that they had read and understood the code of ethics. When she asked how such provisions would be enforced, Juris replied that all appointed officials are extensions of the Board of Selectmen, which could exercise its powers of appointment to encourage compliance. Grant said that she was more concerned about elected officials, like the members of the Budget Committee, than appointed ones. Juris said that short of adopting a code of ethics as an ordinance, which would require a vote of Town Meeting, the selectmen could not compel compliance from elected officials.

The board will continue its review of the draft codes following its next regularly scheduled meeting on April 11.