Friendship Heights council adopts revised investment policy after ethics-language amendment

After extended committee discussion and a contested committee-to-council drafting process, the Friendship Heights Village Council adopted a revised village investment policy. Council debate focused on a single contested element: the ethics and conflict-of-interest language in the proposed policy.

Council member Schaeffer argued the version presented to the council differed from the committee-approved draft and expressed concern about process. Council member Sault proposed substituting the state model language for section 6 (ethics/conflict of interest), arguing the state text is familiar to auditors and limits de minimis disclosures that the village draft would require.

The council voted 5–2 to amend section 6 with the state-model language (roll call: Mayor Melanie Rose White and one other member opposed). After further amendments addressing internal-control reporting language, the amended investment policy was adopted by the council; the final adoption vote was recorded as 6–1, with Council member Schaeffer voting no on final passage.

Supporters said the revised policy narrows permitted investments to low‑risk options (U.S. government securities, federally insured deposits, and the Maryland local government investment pool) and adds internal-control expectations. Opponents warned that some proposed language went beyond an investment policy and that a separate comprehensive ethics policy would be preferable.

The village attorney, Ron Bolt, reviewed changes that were incorporated into the version presented to the council, and the village manager assisted in drafting language that legal counsel had approved. Council members asked the next council to consider a separate, broader ethics policy.