Bias Is Not a Conflict

Is it a conflict for a council member to be an officer of a neighborhood association? This issue arose recently in Tulsa, according to an article this week in the Tulsa World.

A county commissioner petitioned to get a metropolitan planning commissioner removed from office because she voted on a matter involving a property in the area where she was president of the neighborhood association. The vote was on an application for a new store, an application on which the association did not publicly take a position.

The county commissioner who led the removal effort said of the conflict provision in the county ethics code, "The clear intent of this section is to avoid even the appearance of bias."

But is bias what conflicts of interest are all about? Let's assume it was a bigger issue, and the neighborhood association took a strong position on the matter. Is it a conflict for an elected official to be part of, or even lead, a group that takes a strong position on a matter? What is such an official's personal interest here? Her views may differ from the majority view, but do her personal interests conflict with the public interest? Does it appear that she is voting to help herself, or just to vote what she believes?

Is bias an issue even if it does not constitute a conflict? Are NRA members expected not to vote on gun control matters, and Common Cause members expected not to vote on good government matters? Put like this, it seems ridiculous. We vote for people based on their views. Unless they lied about their views, when they vote what they believe, they are only showing the bias voters expected them to show.

Elected officials are not judges. They are not expected to be unbiased. They are only expected not to use their positions to help themselves, their families, their friends, and their business associates.

Leading a community organizations becomes a conflict issue only if the community organization is involved in litigation or other serious, non-ideological disputes with the local government. In that case, an official who is an officer of the organization must recuse herself from involvement in the matter.

It's true that it can look bad when an organization led by a local legislator leads a crusade against a government policy. In such a situation, the legislator should certainly not be the organization's spokesperson. But think of it the other way: isn't leading a community organization just the sort of experience we want in a local legislator? The legislator should take a less visible role in the organization on issues that come before her. However, while this is due to an appearance issue, it is not the appearance of a conflict of interest, but instead the appearance of unprofessionalism, that is, a failure to recognize that it is best to speak out wearing only one hat.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---