Minneapolis' ethics officer is reviewing conflict-of-interest rules for city boards and commissions after complaints about planning commissioners with too much business before their own board.
In recent months, members of the Minneapolis Planning Commission have increasingly sat out votes on development proposals because they're somehow involved in the projects.
On one recent occasion, a member left the dais and testified before her colleagues. One panel member now recuses himself out of protest whenever his colleagues abstain because of a conflict.
"We are concerned that the risk of an appearance of impropriety may erode public confidence in the work of development-related Boards and Commissions," Mayor R.T. Rybak wrote in a July letter explaining the review, along with the chair of the city's Ethical Practices Board. The ethics officer, Susan Trammell, expects to make recommendations in the next several months.
Commission President David Motzenbecker did not want to address specific questions about recusals until Trammell's review is complete, but said, "There's nothing wrong or ethically challenged about what we are doing."
The issue poses a quandary for city officials, who strive to attract qualified individuals to serve on the city's boards but simultaneously want to avoid any conflicts. The nine-member Planning Commission is one of the city's most influential citizen boards. It's responsible for advising the City Council on most major development projects that pass through City Hall. Its membership is split between local government representatives and mayoral appointees whose suggestions often shape even the most minute facets of a project.
Surging development in the city means more projects for the commission, whose nongovernment members skew heavily toward the development industry.
Mystery to public