Ethics investigation slows as more conflict of interest allegations stem from emails

[ad_1]

ITHACA, NY The City of Ithaca and the Tompkins County Ethics Advisory Board (TCEAB) appear to be at an impasse.

TCEAB is investigating a broad ethics complaint filed by City of Ithaca Alderperson Cynthia Brock since May. But over the past four months, the city has continued to argue that, on most fronts, the TCEAB lacks the power to conduct the investigation it has undertaken primarily on the Ithacas Reimagining Public Safety initiative. and the conduct of former Mayor Svante Myrick.

And in their latest action against the TCEAB’s authority to conduct its investigation, City Attorney Ari Lavine and former Mayor Svante Myrick have turned their attention to Council Chairman, Tompkins County Legislator Rich John. All current investigation letters and disclosures can be found in full here.

Both Myrick and Lavine wrote letters in December accusing John of colluding with Brock to compose the ethics complaint she submitted to the county ethics advisory board. Myrick and Lavines’ allegations are based on the wording of an op-ed that Brock submitted to The Ithaca Voice and was published on April 4, 2022, which prefaces the ethics complaint that she submitted to the TCEAB in the following weeks.

Emails between Brock and John surfaced following a FOIL request the city was filling out, showing that Brocks’ op-ed had been extensively edited by John prior to its submission. According to Myrick and Lavine, this irrevocably taints the investigation process and should prevent it from continuing.

Mr. John is trying to serve as judge and jury for an ethics complaint he helped create, Lavine wrote in a Dec. 3 letter to the ethics advisory board, a charge Myrick made echoed in his own letter to John and the council.

Lavine says in her letters that the TCEAB’s reaction to the allegations could determine the level at which the city is willing to allow its employees to participate in the investigation.

The city urges council and Mr. John to voluntarily take the necessary steps to remedy the flawed process they are currently engaged in, Lavine wrote. Actions taken (or not taken) can be expected to affect, among other things, the extent of the city’s continued cooperation with the council’s investigation, including the production of officials for any council interviews.

In their separate letters, Lavine and Myrick ask John to step down from the perceived conflict of interest investigation, stating that a balanced investigation into the RPS process is impossible with him in charge.

Your failure to disclose this clear conflict of interest and to recuse yourself accordingly is wholly inappropriate and now puts you in the position to investigate your own complaint, Myrick wrote. As a lawyer, you certainly know that [it] is neither ethical nor appropriate for someone to judge a case they have initiated. Given how tainted this process has been from the start, it should be obvious to all that a fair investigation is not possible.

John responded to Lavine specifically in a rare letter, as previous communications between the council and the city of Ithaca had been handled by Ferrara and Lavine, respectively. John acknowledges that he had concerns about certain aspects of the RPS process, although he does not elaborate, but continues that he had my concerns exactly because of my connection to the process.

John said he originally wrote his own op-ed (published in The Ithaca Voice on March 29, 2022) and also commented on Brocks, also offering several edits on his own. Brocks’ op-ed laid the groundwork for his ethics complaint, which would be formally filed a month after the op-ed was published on April 4.

In his letter to Lavine, John maintains that he was unaware that Brock was planning to file an ethics and TCEAB complaint and that when he edited his opinion piece, he thought it would only be an editorial.

It is important to dispel any insinuation that I somehow coordinated the filing of an ethics complaint before any agency, authority, board or panel with Ms. Brock. I do not have. As far as I know, it was his only decision. Furthermore, I categorically deny having conspired with anyone. Your accusation is entirely false, said John.

He continued, Based on the reasons given and the limited impact of a non-binding advisory opinion which has no legal impact on the City, I do not believe that I have a conflict of interest that prevents me from pursuing in this process.

John said he didn’t know what comments he made on the editorial that would be considered inappropriate, although his edits were certainly significant. Edits to the first two paragraphs of the editorial can be seen below, and it appears that Brock accepted the vast majority of Johns’ edits throughout the article, compared to what was published. After reviewing Myrick and Lavines’ concerns, TCEAB’s legal counsel determined that none of Johns’ actions constituted a need to quash the investigation or for John to stand down.

A selected portion of Rich Johns’ edits to Cynthia Brocks’ editorial.

Perhaps most relevant, John also added this passage to the end of the Brocks column, which she included in the published version: In order to achieve the highest level of trust in government, NYS Ethics Laws offers clear rules to prevent corruption. , favouritism, undue influence and abuse of government position. Donations of services to the city and county themselves that may result in influencing legislation should not be accepted or permitted, and should be actively avoided and discouraged.

Brock supports John’s version of events, insisting that his comments were not material to the substance of the editorials. She also said her earlier emails to Mayor Laura Lewis and other city officials from March, which raised questions about the reimagining process, show her concerns existed independently of John’s contributions to her op-ed. John and other county and city officials who were members of the community justice center advisory committee were, however, included as recipients of these emails.

Rich Johns’ comments on my draft Op-Ed were elaborate, but did not add to or alter the core arguments of my article which sought to provide a comprehensive list of concerns about the extent of outside influence on the Ithacas RPS process, Brock said. To say that Rich John crafted my ethics complaint is completely unfounded, as the documents I submitted show that it was the series of email exchanges in March and April that laid the groundwork for the complaint to TECAB, and that my complaint was expanded when new information became available.

Myrick also alleges that John’s motives in the investigation should be questioned due to a disagreement between the two during Myrick’s tenure as mayor of Ithaca. Myrick states that John asked him to evict all homeless residents of the jungle, which would have benefited a nearby development that John is involved in. Myrick says he refused the request.

According to the County Legislatures Annual Financial Information, John is employed by Taber Street One LLC, which acquired the three plots of land in November 2020 for $240,000. Adjoining lots associated with Taber Street One are addressed as 805-807, 809, and 811-813 Taber Street. The lots are mostly empty parking spaces and are occupied by a small building, a garage and a shed.

The lot associated with Taber Street One.

The revelations also reveal that John works as an attorney for Ports of New York Winery, which is on Taber Street, whose owners have publicly insisted that the city of Ithaca fix the homeless situation in this neighborhood of the city.

In response to a request from The Ithaca Voice, John declined to comment further on the matter, but said TCEAB’s work would continue. The board met again on January 10.

But the TCEABS’ stalled efforts to compel the city to participate in their investigation contrasts with the completion of the city’s own internal investigation in December, which was also spurred by Brocks’ public announcement of his ethics complaint in April. This is the result of city officials who still oppose the investigations methodology and even its legal authority to prosecute.

In that report, Myrick and other city officials were criticized for some decisions that fostered a lack of transparency about the reimagining process, but Kristen Smith, the outside investigator, felt nothing was up to the mark. of an ethical breach or undue influence on the City process outside of the parties.

Faced with what could be a major stalemate, the months of back and forth between the city and the TCEAB are the most determining thread of the commissions’ investigation to which the public has access, since the majority of the cases they This is not the first time city officials have been accused of dodging investigation by county officials, though they have consistently pushed back against such allegations.

In a letter to Lavine, Paul Ferrara, TCEAB’s legal counsel, notes that while city officials have refused[ed] to meet directly with council, including Lavine, Mayor Laura Lewis, Alderman Robert Cantelmo and other city officials, all of whom were interviewed for the city’s internal investigation. Lavine said the TCEAB must address the city’s concerns about the scope and authority of the investigation before proceeding, which he says has not been properly addressed.

Although the TCEAB has the power to subpoena witnesses, the possibility of this happening has not been seriously discussed publicly. Subpoena powers have been mentioned among council members in past discussions, but letters on behalf of TCEAB instead raised the potential for council to draw adverse inferences if the city does not participate in some way or other. another one.

Lavine indicated in his Dec. 3 letter to the TCEAB that he believes the next best step would be for council to submit its written questions to the city so it can assess the appropriateness of the interviews requested by council.

Ferrara responded to Lavine on Dec. 19, writing that it’s unclear why you and/or various other city officials and employees are unwilling to cooperate with this ethics investigation, especially since it appears that there was full cooperation with the investigation commissioned by the city.

Lack of cooperation from part of the city, Ferrara wrote, hampered the TCEAB investigation. Ferrara proposed that Lavine, himself, and potentially the TCEAB, meet and discuss Lavine’s concerns with the counsel investigation.

[ad_2]