There are at least two kinds of conflict of interest. One is legal conflict of interest and the other is political conflict of interest. Legal conflict of interest is legally defined and it basically means that you vote to feather your own personal financial nest. It’s a very narrow concept. And voting with a conflict of interest is prohibited by law.
On the other hand, political conflict of interest is a charge that one is too close to an issue to be able to make an independent judgment. It is NOT defined by law but only in the lexicon of political operatives to be used in trying to create a campaign issue.
What Cutting is doing, by citing the legal definition of conflict of interest, is to try to make it sound as if he his making a legal charge (of an inevitable future violation of law) when he is, in fact, making a political charge. And, I’ll also note, how broadly Cutting makes his political charge while attempting to sound as if he’s making a narrow legal charge. He goes from a matter of whether Bill Svrluga could vote on Lucy Gerrold’s salary to, somehow, claiming that the whole of the police budget is forbidden territory. He then tries to stretch his point to the breaking point by claiming that the entire city budget is off limits apparently because a dollar more for some department might be a dollar less for the Police Department for which Lucy happens to work.
The fact that he is making a political charge and not a legal charge, should be amply demonstrated when you factor in that Cutting is a campaign operative for Cara Letofsky. (Knowing that also goes very far to explain to any readers who are supporters of other candidates of Cutting’s review of Tuesday’s event. It’s no wonder that he gave a favorable review of Cara’s position while giving a “Thumb’s Down” on the performance of literally everyone else.)
The fact is that IF a matter comes before the City Council that affects Lucy Gerrold’s specific job particularly including her salary, that Bill Svrluga, if he were a councilmember, would have to abstain. That’s ALL the law on conflict of interest requires.
But, political conflict of interest is not only not a crime, it’s something to be expected every day when we expect to elect ordinary citizens to public office. Except for that magical man from Mars, who arrives here without any prior connection to anyone or anything in the city, everyone comes in with some kind of connection to the city. It may be as slender a connection as someone who runs for the council because he or she is really, really mad about the way the snow is plowed or the garbage is picked up. Or they may be related to someone who works in city hall or, somehow, does business with the city. But, only if a direct financial benefit is involved, must a council member abstain – and abstention on that particular vote rather than resignation from office is all that is required.
Most people put a high value on citizens volunteering from time to time to serve in public office. If anyone but someone from Mars is to be excluded from consideration, then the field of candidates is going to be particularly narrow.
I’d also answer a question posed by Bill Kahn. I understand from Bill Svrluga that he is aware of the possibility of a legal conflict of interest. (Note, it’s a “legal” and not a “political” issue.) Because of that, he asked for a formal legal opinion from one of the city’s large lawfirms on what the requirement of the law was. I haven’t seen the letter, but I’m sure that the lawyer’s opinion was along the lines that I previously suggested. That is, if and only if he’s feathering his own financial nest must he abstain from voting. And the fact that he noticed it, considered it, and got legal guidance shows both the knowledge and ethics behind Bill Svrluga.
I conclude with an additional comment of substantial disdain to Cutting’s giving Cara Letofsky a pass on her own political conflict of interest. (Please note that I label it “political” and not attempt, as Cutting did, to confuse people on whether a legal charge is being made.) He claimed that there was no problem because her husband, Rep. Davnie, has already established his credentials as voting in favor of Minneapolis interests. Give me a break! I won’t complain about a political conflict of interest for Cara if Cutting doesn’t complain about a political conflict of interest for Bill Svrluga.
And, to make a public disclosure so people know where I’m coming from, I am now a supporter of Bill Svrluga for City Council. I make that disclosure to note again that Cutting is a supporter of Cara Letofsky. And that goes a long way to explain his comments (as well as mine).
Steve Cross Prospect Park
REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
