Ethics Commission dismisses challenges

by Mayor L.B. Davis

An important event occurred last week that I thought needed to be shared with the citizens of Gallatin. First, some quick background. In June of this year, three complaints were filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission against the City of Gallatin. The City was not informed by whom the complaints were filed. The complaints, with all of their supporting documentation, concerned the “provisions of the constitution or state statute or order, ordinance or resolution of any political subdivision relating to the official conduct of officials or employees of the state and political subdivisions.”

Specifically, the complaints alleged: 1) the electric lease for the City of Gallatin is in violation of Section 91.290; 2) a violation of state law sections 250.150, 91.150, 91.090, 91.300, 91.160, 91.170, 91.210, 91.230, 91.260 as based upon the 2000 audit, natural gas lease, and electric lease; and 3) violations of state law sections 79.360, 71.010, and 91.210. References to these statute numbers should be familiar to readers of this paper but, in summary, they refer to topics including segregation of waterworks and sewerage system revenues, how certain utilities may be constructed or acquired, when such construction requires a vote of the people, management of such utility to be provided by a Board of Commissioners, city ordinances shall conform with state law, and a misdemeanor penalty for officials who vote or allow a claim on an account under color of a contract or agreement not authorized by law and ordinances.

On August 28, 2001, the Missouri Ethics Commission met to consider the above listed complaints. The commission found absolutely no merit to the complaints and “voted to take no further action on this complaint and to close our file.” The action taken by the Ethics Commission should now finally put to rest any uncertainty or challenges by those who disagree with the legality of the electric and natural gas leases as well as with the city accounting system which have all been in place and accepted for a number of years. Furthermore, the claims that oaths of office are arrogantly being disregarded by elected officials and staff members should immediately stop. A majority of the Board has been and will continue to be focused on the future by working through important issues facing the city rather than taking words or phrases out of context and obsessing over accepted and legal activities.

Another topic frequently voiced is that the Board of Aldermen is not following Robert’s Rules of Order during board meetings as required by ordinance. Again, rather than taking words, phrases, and even pages out of context, a thorough reading and understanding of such rules would in fact prove that the board is indeed following Robert’s Rules of Order. Unseconded motions have not been recorded in the minutes because Robert’s Rules of Order do not require such. Board minutes are the official history and record of the actions taken at meetings and are not a propaganda tool or news article as one board member and citizens in the past claim they should be.

It truly is unfortunate that misinformation has been spread and dangerous claims have been made insinuating illegal and improper activities. Too much time by elected officials and staff has been spent dealing with these old matters, rather than on important topics facing the city, such as the sewer project, street resurfacing, fund-raising for the pool renovation project, continuing to improve operations of the utility department, and other needed projects. As the saying goes, “hindsight may be 20/20” and not everyone may agree with decisions made in the past. But rather than simply agreeing to disagree with those past (and legal) decisions, elements of some personal agenda continue to emerge apparently just for the sake of arguing. As board members elected by citizens, I believe it is our collective responsibility to look to the future to do what is right and what is best for everyone in this city.