Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo Re City Attorney Update for 2020 final To: Board of Ethics Fr: Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Date: December 4, 2020 RE: City Attorney Update for December 9, 2020 Meeting Attached to this memorandum please find several emails related to opinions and advice that has been provided by the City Attorney’s Office over the past year. These include: • City-County Pedestrian Traffic Safety Committee conflicts of interest (November 16, 2020); • Post-employment activities for a former city official (November 2, 2020); • Conflicts with City Commissioner’s private and financial interests (Commissioner Cunningham and Run Dog Run/Cottonwood Enterprises) (August 18, 2020) • General statement to members of City Boards regarding obligations upon a conflict of interest (August 7, 2020) • Conflicts of interest for members of the Trails, Open Space, and Parks Bond Committee related to funding requests for a shared use pathway along the Frontage Road (January 2, 2020) During our update we will also briefly discuss other conflict of interest issues. These include city board members acting in their official capacity on matters where they have a private interest, city commissioner recusals, staff questions related to working on land use projects near where they live, how city employees handle private entities suggestions of gifts for action taken, city employees’ involvement in decisions on contracts with their former employers, etc. In addition we will provide a overview of a training conducted by our office and the city clerk this past October for staff who serve as liaisons to the various city boards. A component of that training involved ethics issues especially conflicts of interest. From:Greg Sullivan To:Taylor Lonsdale; John Vandelinder Cc:Mitch Reister; Anna Rosenberry; Jeff Mihelich; Chuck Winn; Karen Stambaugh; Anna Saverud; Tim Cooper; Michael Wallner; Mike Maas; Shawn Kohtz Subject:Conflicts and the PTSC Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 1:54:00 PM HI Taylor and John. Here’s my guidance on the ethics situation you described regarding members of the Pedestrian & Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC). You may share this with the PTSC as you determine appropriate. I copied Commissioner Wallner as he is the commission liaison to the PTSC. Your question is whether and to what extent members of the PTSC can represent or appear on behalf of a separate entity before the PTSC in a matter that is under the PTSC jurisdiction and which also is advocated for by an organization which they are a director. You specifically asked about PTSC members Marilee Brown and Ralph Zimmer in their capacity as members of the board of directors for the Gallatin Alliance for Pathways (“GAP”). You also inquired about Jason Delmue, a member of the City’s Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board (the “Bike Board”). The PTSC was created by an “inter-local cooperative agreement” in December of 1976. The parties to the agreement include the Bozeman High School District and School District NO. 7, Gallatin County, and the City. The members of the PTSC consist of individuals appointed by the governing bodies of the school district, county and city, and two members selected by the appointed board members. Mr. Zimmer is appointed by the Gallatin County Commission. Marilee Brown is appointed by the other board members to an “at-large” position. The PTSC is charged with “consider[ing[ pedestrian-traffic safety, establish[ing] priorities, and [] mak[ing] such recommendations to the governing bodies consistent with said priorities which will promote public safety and in their opinion reduce traffic deaths, injuries, and property losses resulting from traffic accidents.” The agreement also lists three goals. From these provision it is clear the work of the committee is foremost to benefit the safety of the public. Individuals who are members of inter-governmental boards appointed by the Bozeman City Commission are subject to City’s Code of Ethics. All officials of local advisory boards in Montana are subject to statutory provisions regarding ethics, as appropriate. Your question asks, for Mr. Zimmer and Ms. Brown, whether individuals who are not appointed directly by the Bozeman City Commission to the PTSC have conflicts of interests between their role on the PTSC and their role as directors of GAP in regards to the frontage road pathway. The City’s Code of Ethics does not apply to members of inter-governmental boards or committees that are appointed by another governing body. As for Marilee Brown, I recognize she is appointed in part by vote of those who are appointed by the Bozeman City Commission. Again, it is not clear from the 1976 agreement whether Ms. Brown is subject to the City’s Code of Ethics. Absent a specific provision in the cooperative agreement I determine neither Mr. Zimmer nor Ms. Brown are subject to the City’s Code of Ethics. I note that county appointees to City boards, such as the planning board, are subject to the City’s Code of Ethics as the board is a city board. Notwithstanding the above, the City Code of Ethics provisions regarding conflicts of interest can be helpful in understanding best practices for members of the PTSC in terms of addressing any potential conflicts between their duties and obligations on behalf of the public as members of the PTSC and their private role as directors of GAP. The City’s Code of Ethics is based in the Bozeman City Charter which states, “The use of public office for private gain is prohibited.” Bozeman Charter, Sec. 7.01. This section places an obligation on the Bozeman City Commission to implement this prohibition through the adoption of an ordinance; the Commission has done so through the Code of Ethics. This section of the Charter also clearly indicates the prohibition of using public office for private gain applies to “acting in an official capacity on matters in which the official has a private financial interest clearly separate from that of the general public…” and also “appearances by officials before other city agencies on behalf of private interests.” The Code of Ethics implements these Charter provisions at Chpt. 2, Art. 3, Div. 4, BMC, specifically under 2.03.490 (Standards of Conduct) and 2.03.520 (Conflict of Interest). I believe both of these provisions should be considered by members of the PTSC and act as guidance. The Standards of Conduct provision in the Code of Ethics specifically states, “No official shall act in a private capacity on matters acted upon as an official.” 2.03.490.A, BMC. Next, the Conflict of Interest provisions in the Code of Ethics has a number of provisions that should be considered. Most importantly, 2.03.520.F, BMC, states, No official whether paid or unpaid, shall represent or appear on behalf of any individual or entity in transaction or matter of concern to the agency on which that official serves, either before that agency or any other agency of the city, or before the city commission, or take any appellate proceedings from any action of such agency or the commission. Such representation may be made by the official's associate or partner, provided no reference to the participation of the involved official is made except for certification or other required identification on prepared documents. The involved official shall not engage in deliberations concerning a transaction or matter represented by an associate or partner, shall disqualify himself/herself from acting on the transaction or matter, and shall not communicate about such matter with any person who will participate in the action to be taken on such transaction or matter. The above provision prohibits an official from representing or appearing on behalf of an entity in a transaction or matter of concern to the agency on which that official serves. As noted, I recognize Mr. Zimmer and Ms. Brown are not appointed by the Bozeman City Commission. I suggest, however, this prohibition could guide them in establishing practices for how to address their responsibilities and obligations as members of the PTSC in relation to their responsibilities and obligations as directors of GAP. In doing so, Mr. Zimmer and Ms. Brown should consider the following practices: 1. Refrain from taking part in any discussion at PTSC that involves a project advocated for or sponsored by GAP. If a project which is advocated for by GAP comes before PTSC in terms of seeking support, financial or otherwise, the representation of GAP should be conducted by a different member of GAP. 2. Disclose on the record of the PTSC that they are directors for GAP and recuse themselves from any participation in the discussion of the project or request. This includes refraining from answering questions posed by other PTSC members related to the project. PTSC members may direct any such question to a GAP representative not holding a PTSC position. I also point out the Montana Code of Ethics (Title 2, Chpt. 2, Part 1, MCA) indicates “the holding of public office is a public trust” and that “a public officer shall carry out the individual’s duties for the benefit of the people of the state.” 2-2-103(1), MCA. In addition, 2-2-121(2)(e), MCA, states, “A public officer [] may not perform an official act directly and substantially affecting to its economic benefit a business or other undertaking in which the officer [] either has a substantial financial interest or is engaged as counsel, consultant, representative, or agent…” Moreover, 2-2-121(5), MCA, states, “A public officer [] may not participate in a proceeding when an organization [] of which the public officer [] is an officer or director is: (b) attempting to influence a local, state, or federal proceeding in which the public officer or public employee represents the state or local government.” I provide the foregoing as additional examples of ethics rules that should provide guidance to appointed members of advisory boards created pursuant to inter-local agreement to which the city of Bozeman is a party. In addressing how these statutes apply, I encourage board members to consult the legal counsel for the organizations which appointed them. As for the Bike Board and Mr. Delmue, the City’s Code of Ethics directly applies as the Bike Board is a City board. As such, the provisions in the City’s Code of Ethics I reference above are applicable to Mr. Delmue in his role on the Bike Board. Given the inter-local nature of the PTSC, I recommend the PTSC consider adopting rules of procedure for its members in relation to standards of conduct and ethical practices. Please let me know if you have any questions, Greg Greg Sullivan City Attorney City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 121 North Rouse Ave. 406-582-2309 gsullivan@bozeman.net From:Greg Sullivan To:Chris Naumann Cc:Jeff Mihelich; Brit Fontenot; Anna Rosenberry; Kristin Donald Subject:RE: Consult request Date:Monday, November 2, 2020 3:27:00 PM Attachments:image001.pngimage003.pngimage004.pngimage007.png Hi Chris. Here’s my opinion on your situation. First, I am not issuing you an opinion on the implications of 2-2-201, MCA. I suggest you talk with an attorney that would represent your interests and/or legal counsel for your future employer. The following is based on 2.02.560, BMC. This provision of the city of Bozeman’s code of ethics prohibits a former public servant from “making a formal or informal appearance before, or negotiating with any decision maker regarding a transaction or matter which was under the former public servant’s direct responsibility or which the former public servant participated personally or substantially.” That section also prohibits a former public servant from “representing or appearing on behalf of an individual or entity other than the city in connection with any transaction or matter which was under the former public servant’s direct responsibility or which the former public servant participated personally and substantially as a public servant.” The code of ethics defines a public servant as “officials, members of the parking commission and library board and employees [of the city].” Officials is defined by the code of ethics as “officers and members of the city’s agencies, whether elected or appointed, whether paid or unpaid, etc.” Employee is defined as “individuals employed by the city and its agencies.” I determine you are a public servant in your employment as the executive director of the Downtown Bozeman Partnership (the “Partnership”) as that entity is comprised of three separate entities, two of which are city of Bozeman entities: the Downtown Urban Renewal District and the Downtown Business Improvement District. You asked whether in your new role as an employee of Sanderson Stewart you may participate in work that is subject to a contract between the Partnership and Sanderson Stewart and which also includes the city. As I understand, the current professional services agreement with Sanderson Stewart is a contract wherein either the Partnership, for the downtown area, or city staff for the other urban renewal districts, request Sanderson Stewart perform professional services through the issuance of task orders. You specifically asked if the above cited section of the city’s code of ethics prohibits you from (i) working for Sanderson Stewart on task orders issued in the downtown area; or (ii) prohibits you from working for Sanderson Stewart on task orders issued for the other urban renewal districts. I determine 2.02.560, BMC prohibits you, for a period of 12 months following the date you no longer work for the Partnership, from participating in any task order issued under the contract with Sanderson Stewart for the downtown area. As you have indicated you have done no work on behalf of the city in the other urban renewal districts; as such, I determine this section of the ethics code does not prohibit you from working on current or future task orders issued by other city staff for work under the contract outside of the downtown area. Please know that if any task order currently issued by city staff or any future task order has any overlap with or direct connection to the downtown area you will be prohibited, for the appropriate 12 month period, from working on the task order. Please also recognize the provisions of 2.02.570, BMC, allow you to conduct such activities if you file the notice required by those sections. Please note that this section does not provide the ability to overcome the issues raised in 2-2-201, MCA. Let me know if you have any additional questions. Greg From: Chris Naumann <chris@downtownbozeman.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 4:47 PM To: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Consult request Greg, My previous email attached the original URD Term Contract PSA. Attached here is the most recent Task Order I issued via the URD Term Contract. Let me know if you need any additional documents. Thanks in advance for your time. Chris Naumann Executive Director Downtown Bozeman Partnership 222 East Main Street #302 | Bozeman MT 59715 406-586-4008 | www.downtownbozeman.org The Downtown Business Improvement District and Downtown Urban Renewal District are City of Bozeman entities administered by the Downtown Bozeman Partnership. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. From: Chris Naumann Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 3:01 PM To: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Consult request Attached is the PSA in question... Chris Naumann Executive Director Downtown Bozeman Partnership 222 East Main Street #302 | Bozeman MT 59715 406-586-4008 | www.downtownbozeman.org The Downtown Business Improvement District and Downtown Urban Renewal District are City of Bozeman entities administered by the Downtown Bozeman Partnership. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. From: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 10:21 AM To: Chris Naumann <chris@downtownbozeman.org> Subject: RE: Consult request Phone. . From: Chris Naumann <chris@downtownbozeman.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 9:21 AM To: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Consult request Yes, sir. Your office, my office, or phone? Any of the above work for me. Chris Naumann Executive Director Downtown Bozeman Partnership 222 East Main Street #302 | Bozeman MT 59715 406-586-4008 | www.downtownbozeman.org The Downtown Business Improvement District and Downtown Urban Renewal District are City of Bozeman entities administered by the Downtown Bozeman Partnership. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. From: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 8:58 AM To: Chris Naumann <chris@downtownbozeman.org> Subject: RE: Consult request Hey. How about 4pm today? g From: Chris Naumann <chris@downtownbozeman.org> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:04 PM To: Greg Sullivan <gsullivan@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: Consult request Greg, I am hoping you would be willing to meet with me to discuss Sec. 2.03.560. – “Post employment/service activities” as it may relate to my new job. If so, I am willing to meet in person or via the phone at your convenience this week or next (but not a big rush as my last day of work is 12/18/20). Thanks. Chris Naumann Executive Director Downtown Bozeman Partnership 222 East Main Street #302 | Bozeman MT 59715 406-586-4008 | www.downtownbozeman.org The Downtown Business Improvement District and Downtown Urban Renewal District are City of Bozeman entities administered by the Downtown Bozeman Partnership. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2,Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’srecord retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2,Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’srecord retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. From:Greg Sullivan To:Jeff Mihelich Subject:Commissioner Cunningham conflict issues x 2 Date:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:20:40 AM Jeff,   Terry called me this morning to discuss two conflict issues. Writing this to keep you in the loop and memorialize my conversation.   Briefly:   1. His company, Cottonwood Enterprises, is working on a mask promotion related to the pandemic. His company has been fundraising and receiving funds from the state, the hospital, etc. He is also scheduled to go before the Gallatin County Commission at a 1:30 work session soon to request county support. At some point, he will also seek the Board of Health’s participation. a. I told him he is not prevented from engaging in this including discussions with the County. I advised him he must put on the record that he is doing the work in his personal capacity and is not representing the City in the project. b. I told him since the Board of Health is a agency created out of interlocal agreement between the City and the County he should have an associate make the request and follow 2.03.520.F, BMC (the City’s “sole practitioner” rule”). He indicated his wife, Laura, will make the request to the BoH. 2. He also operates a non-profit called Run Dog Run – a group that advocates for expanding non-human recreation (i.e. dog parks). He indicated his group has put in a request to the UDC amendment website to have major developments that provide over five acres of parkland be required to set aside a certain percentage for dog parks. I told him this will be a direct conflict and he must recuse himself. Another with RDR can represent them before the City – just not him. We went through the rule process.   g   Greg Sullivan City Attorney City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 121 North Rouse Ave. 406-582-2309 gsullivan@bozeman.net   From:Greg Sullivan To:Addi Jadin; Alex Nordquest; Bob Risk; Brian Krueger; Brian LaMeres; Brit Fontenot; "Chris Naumann"; "EmilyCope"; Jessica Parks; John Vandelinder; Josh Waldo; Julie Hunter; Katherine Maines; Lacie Kloosterhof; MartinMatsen; Melanie Eubank; Mitchell Overton; Phillipe Gonzalez; Steve Crawford; Susan Gregory; Tanya Andreasen;Taylor Lonsdale; Tom Rogers Cc:Jeff Mihelich; Chris Mehl; Cyndy Andrus; I-Ho Pomeroy; Terry Cunningham; Michael Wallner; Mike Maas; Kelley Rischke; Karen Stambaugh; Tim Cooper; Anna Saverud Subject:Ethical Considerations for City Board Members Date:Friday, August 7, 2020 2:55:17 PM Importance:High All:   You are considered a staff liaison to a City board. Please forward this to your boards as soon as possible.   Thanks,   g     To members of City of Bozeman Boards and Committees:   Please take a few minutes to read this email and please don’t hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions.   Jeff Mihelich, Bozeman City Manager, requested I send you all a note reminding you of a board member’s obligations under the City’s Code of Ethics regarding conflicts of interest. This email addresses the Code’s provisions on conflicts of interest and provides information on best practices for addressing conflicts. I also provide guidance on how to proceed when you wish to provide public comment on that issue before the board upon which you serve, before another City board, or before the City Commission.   As you know, City board members, including those appointed to a city board by another entity, are considered city officials under the City’s Code of Ethics and thus subject to its standards and requirements, including the rules for conflicts of interest. Specifically, under 2.03.520.B, BMC, “No official [] shall engage in any employment or business which conflicts with the proper discharge of such official’s [] duties.” In addition, 2.03.520.C states, “No official [] shall take or influence official action if the official [] has a financial or personal interest in a transaction or matter with the City.” Financial and personal interests are defined by the Code of Ethics. See 2.03.470. Please review these definitions.   In addition, the Code’s conflict of interest section at 2.03.520.F, establishes a prohibition on an official representing or appearing on behalf of any individual or entity in a transaction or matter of concern to the agency on which that official serves. This rule prohibits representation on behalf of a person or entity before the board on which the official serves agency (the member’s own board or committee) and also before the City Commission. The result is that a board member is prohibited from representing an individual or an entity, be it a for-profit or not for profit group or organization, on an issue before their board or the City Commission if the board on which they serve has jurisdiction over the issue. This is the case regardless of whether the board’s role is advisory. This section of the Code also provides a mechanism for how the individual or entity may be represented at a City board or committee or City Commission meeting: “by the official’s associate or partner, provided no reference to the participation of the involved official is made.”   When a conflict exists, the Code requires an official to take certain steps. Under both 2.03.520.F and 2.03.520.D, the official must publicly disclose on the record the existence of the conflict of interest and refrain from engaging in deliberations and discussion with those who will act on the matter. The best practice is for the official to place the nature of the conflict on the record, recuse from the discussion, and leave the room. For meetings occurring by WebEx, I urge the official to log out of the virtual meeting until the agenda item has concluded and the next agenda item is called.   The Code recognizes that at times an official must address their own personal interest before the board upon which they sit. See 2.03.520.A. This is authorized. If a board member has a personal interest (for example, a board member seeks a certificate of appropriateness for a remodel of their personal residence), the official may appear on their own behalf.  The Code, however, distinguishes between an item that is clearly personal in nature from personal or financial interests that may arise due to affiliation with a business or other entity, such as serving  on a board or acting as an officer of a non-profit organization. An ownership interest in a business entity, or membership on the board or advisory committee of a group or organization, will, in most situations, create a personal or financial interest establishing a conflict of interest.   The Code of Ethics contains a “Declaration of Policy.” 2.03.460, BMC. These policies, which form the foundation for the specific rules in the Code, are critical to ensuring public trust in how City officials (and employees) operate. To implement these policies, avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, and comply with the Code, full disclosure of a conflict of interest is appropriate.   When board members speak on their own behalf on items that are under their jurisdiction as a board member before the City Commission or another board, they must put on the record the capacity in which they are speaking. If, for example, a board member, speaks before the City Commission on an item under the jurisdiction of the board upon which they serve and the board member wishes to provide comment to the Commission separate from the recommendation of their board, the board member must identify the board upon which they serve and indicate on the record they are not speaking on behalf of the board but rather in their individual capacity. In another example, if the board member desires to speak before the City Commission on a matter that is not under the jurisdiction of the board upon which they serve, the board member must nonetheless identify the board upon which they serve and indicate they are speaking on their own behalf and are not speaking on behalf of their board. This later example requires disclosure of their role as a city official even if the matter upon which they are speaking is personal in nature. The above does not supersede the Code’s prohibition on representation as discussed above.   I recognize that at times the determination of what qualifies as a personal or financial interest may be difficult to draw and that all of you are all members of this community interacting with community organizations, friends, and family. It is precisely because of your involvement in the community that you have volunteers to serve. Please remember the City provides resources to help determine whether a relationship creates a conflict of interest requiring disclosure and recusal. I encourage you to contact me directly at 582-2309 or by email. You may also contact your staff or commission liaison to seek advice.   Thank you for your service,   Greg   Greg Sullivan City Attorney City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 121 North Rouse Ave. 406-582-2309 gsullivan@bozeman.net   From:Karen Stambaugh To:Mitchell Overton; Addi Jadin Cc:Greg Sullivan Subject:CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION - TOP member conflict of interest analysis Date:Thursday, January 2, 2020 3:50:28 PM CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION – DO NOT FORWARD.   Hi Addi and Mitch – as we discussed, I’ve been looking at whether Tom Starner or Doug Chandler have a conflict of interest, and if so, whether disclosure and recusal is required.  Mitch – please communicate the conclusion to Tom.   All city officials and employees are covered by the Code of Ethics, including citizen advisory board members (“officials” means all officers and members of the city’s agencies; “agency” includes boards and committees of the city.  2.03.740.A).  Therefore, the Code of Ethics is applicable to Mr. Starner and Mr. Chandler as Trails, Open Space, and Parks (TOP) Committee members.   There are five voting positions in the TOP committee, but one is currently vacant (an appointment is on the agenda on 1/6).  Mr. Starner occupies the “Real Estate” position.  He is a broker at Gene Cook Real Estate.  He is the listing broker for the lots at Nelson Meadows Subdivision, a commercial subdivision with lots actively listed.  Mr. Chandler occupies the “Finance” position.  He is the President of Allied Engineering.  They had some involvement in the Nelson Meadows subdivision – they were not the engineers (it was Morrison-Maierle) but they did produce a geotechnical survey for Barnard.   The TOP application proposes to fill in a section of the frontage trail that would eventually link Bozeman to Belgrade adjacent to the Nelson Meadows subdivision.   The proposed new trail sections would connect to the trail section being installed by Nelson Meadows (see map at p. 3 of application).   Per the Bozeman Ethics Code:   No official or employee shall take or influence official action if the official or employee has a financial or personal interest in a transaction or matter with the city.  2.03.520.C.   No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee’s city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official, employee, or others.  2.03.490.D.   If the official has a financial interest, when the matter comes before the board the official must (1) publicly disclose on the record the existence of such financial interest, and (2) “shall not engage in deliberations concerning the matter or transaction, shall be disqualified from acting on the matter or transaction and shall not communicate about such matter or transaction with any person who will participate in an action to be taken on such matter or transaction.”  2.03.520.D.   The PROST Plan considers trails “amenities” of the City.  PROST at 7-31.  It defines “amenity” as “Aesthetic or other characteristics of a development that increase its desirability to a community or its marketability to the public.”  PROST at 12-1 (emphasis added).   Discussion   In order for this provision to apply here to Mr. Starner or Mr. Chandler, they must have a financial interest in the TOP grant decision “which will result in a monetary or other material benefit … which has a value of more than $15.00.”  2.03.470.A.6.  The completion of the trail system along the frontage road would likely increase the marketability of the subdivision as a desirable place to locate a business.   A completed trail system would improve accessibility to employees and customers of the businesses who may wish to access the subdivision by foot or by bike.    Because Mr. Starner is actively selling the Nelson Meadows lots (presumably for a commission), and the trail system would make the development more desirable/marketable, I believe he has a “financial interest” under the Code and should recuse himself from further decisions on this TOP application.  This conflict of interest has been raised by GVLT members to Addi.   Whether Mr. Chandler has a financial interest is much less apparent.  Allied did some work for Barnard on the Nelson Meadows development application.  The only identifiable financial interest here is the hope of ongoing or future business from Barnard.  However, if that were enough to qualify as a “financial interest” under our Code, he would likely have to recuse himself from all TOP applications that involve any engineering work.  At most, he may want to disclose that Allied did some work on Nelson Meadows, that Addi consulted with our office and we did not find he has a conflict of interest.  I do not think disclosure is strictly required.     Karen Stambaugh | Assistant City Attorney City of Bozeman | 121 N. Rouse Ave. | Bozeman, MT 59715 | 406.582.2309 Email sent to or from me can, in some circumstances, be considered privileged and/or confidential. Therefore, please do not read, copy or disseminate this communication unless you are the intended addressee. If you received this communication in error, please respond to this email and call me immediately at 406 582-2309.