St. Michaels has an ethics problem. The ethics code in the town charter is confusing and contradictory. Don’t take our word for it. Take it from the judge. In his ruling on January 2nd, Circuit Court Judge Stephen Kehoe wrote, “The Ethics Commission’s Rules not only fail to comply with its statutory mandate, they set up standards that are so confusing that the complainant cannot be reasonably assured of the process that will be used.”
For this, and many other reasons, we were not surprised that the Ethics Commission has again dismissed our complaint against Commissioner Bill Boos. How could they rule otherwise? They once again relied on a town statute that needs to be rewritten and clarified. And, if they had ruled against Mr. Boos, they would have been indicting their own chair who has the same apparent conflict of interest that was at the heart of our case against Mr. Boos. She was given an opportunity to recuse herself, but declined.
What we find even more alarming is some of the rationale behind the Ethics Commission’s dismissal of our complaint. They apparently believe that public officials don’t have a conflict of interest unless their monetary gain crosses an undefined threshold. Mr. Boos is regional manager of the Curtis Stokes Yacht Brokerage which has a contract to sell yachts donated to the Chesapeake Bay Maritime Museum. Yet he continues to vote on matters affecting the museum. Curtis Stokes testified at the February 25th hearing on our complaint that his company made just $36,796 from selling museum boats. Mr. Boos also testified that he earned a mere $13,000 from selling other boats, which the commission determined is “not material to his economic well being.”
The first time the Ethics Commission rejected our complaint last May, we didn’t get a fair hearing and took them to court. In January, the court ruled in our favor, ordering the commission to hold a proper hearing. The court said it had used “unlawful procedures” to reject our complaint. Among those procedures, Judge Kehoe cited the role of the town attorney. His honor noted that the commission’s rules require it to “follow the recommendations of its attorney, thereby delegating its decision making authority to its attorney.” When the Ethics Commission deliberated on April 1st, it did so with the town attorney present. There is no public record of their deliberations so we have no way of knowing the extent of his influence this time around. In St. Michaels, the town attorney represents and advises both the town commissioners, and the Ethics Commission. That’s like having the prosecutor, the defense attorney and the judge all working for the defendant.
How can we be assured of future accountability with a conflicted Ethics Commission and a confusing ethics code? We have independent news outlets in our community, including the one you are reading now. But, given the current economic climate, they don’t have the resources to provide our citizens with a true watchdog function. The last time a reporter attended a St. Michaels commissioners meeting and wrote about it was on January 14th. The commissioners have held 15 public meetings since then, and none of them were covered. We have no watchdogs in the media and certainly not in town government. We could rely on an effective ethics code and an independent Ethics Commission, but we have neither. The St. Michaels code of ethics is clearly broken and needs to be fixed. The voters will have a chance to do just that when a new board of town commissioners is elected on July 13th.
John Novak
St. Michaels Action Committee
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.