The Kodiak Island Borough Assembly clarifies what’s considered a conflict of interest

Mitch Borden/KMXT

At the center of the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly discussion of what constitutes a conflict of interest lies the phrase “substantial financial interest,” but neither the borough nor Alaska state law defines it. Well at least, not until last Thursday night when the assembly clarified its interpretation of the phrase.

The night began with the release of a legal opinion detailing three situations where Assemblyman Matthew Van Daele may have or could have a conflict of interest. Two of which because he’s the deputy city manager for the city of Kodiak.

Before the assembly went into an executive session to discuss potential conflicts of interest among its members, it voted to release the legal opinion at the urging of Assemblyman Van Daele.

“Maybe it’s a quirk of my millennial generation, but I do believe in being open and sharing with people and I do believe good government is open and honest. And therefore I’d like the public and that is all of our constituents not just mine but all of our constituents to be able to hear exactly what is going on.”

Shane Levesque, the borough’s attorney, wrote in his opinion that it was appropriate in the past when Van Daele was excluded from discussing the sale of a parcel of land the borough owns known as Killarney Hills because of the city’s interest in it. He also pointed out that Van Daele shouldn’t be involved in future discussions concerning a borough surcharge that funds the city’s E-911 system, and projects that concern Otemloi Drive since he owns property in that area.

Levesque concluded the borough hasn’t been exposed to any significant legal liability related to the subjects outlined in his opinion. Assemblyman Kyle Crow was happy to hear this but wanted more direction from Levesque concerning what the borough should do about its conflict of interest policy.

“Here again we are left with the second opinion we’ve asked for that provides us with a document that anybody can read it seems like and find whatever they’d like to.”

For months, Van Daele’s job as deputy city manager has mired the assembly in discussions of what’s considered a conflict of interest. These talks have led to an effort to clarify the borough’s code on the topic. Levesque explained to the assembly that it’s complicated figuring out what a conflict of interest is.

“This is not something where there always black and white answers and that’s just the fact of conflicts of interests. That’s the nature of this kind of animal.”

He recommended the assembly further clarify its conflict of interest policy and later in the meeting, it did. Assemblywoman Rebecca Skinner wrote an ordinance that’d define the term “substantial financial interest,” because it doesn’t have a specific definition but it’s at the heart of the borough’s process of determining if an individual has a conflict.

Currently, if an assembly member, municipal official, or employee has a direct or indirect substantial financial interest in a topic they can’t participate in discussions or decisions relating to it. Skinner’s proposed ordinance explicitly limits a person from discussing and deciding on contracts and policy relating to an organization if they’re an owner, director, officer or employee of it.

In her opinion, Skinner doesn’t think her ordinance alters how the borough handles a conflict of interest.

“All I did was added a definition of substantial financial interest. I was not intending to change our standard and I was not intending to change our process.”

Assemblyman Scott Smiley doesn’t like Skinner’s ordinance because he thinks it’s too limiting.

“Merely holding a job or a relationship with an entity means that you’re excluded from voting on any issues that come up pertaining to that entity.”

Assemblyman Van Daele also worries Skinner’s definition restricts too many people from participating in important discussions.

“It’s just too broad. It’s too blunt and it’s going to be disenfranchising too many of our public servants and our population”

The assembly voted 4-2 to adopt Skinner’s definition of substantial financial interest into borough code. Assemblyman Smiley and Van Daele voted against. Assemblyman Andrew Schroeder was not at the meeting, so he didn’t vote.