Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nepotism topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Harbor council coalesces around narrower nepotism rules for boards and commissions
Summary
Council discussed two ordinance options to limit nepotism in appointments to boards and commissions and signaled majority support for Option 2 (prohibiting council members from appointing or serving on the same board as close relatives), with staff directed to return draft language mirroring the city's employee-family definition.
The Oak Harbor City Council on Jan. 27 discussed a draft ordinance (Oak Harbor code section 2.65.0.14) that would limit appointments of relatives to boards, commissions and committees but did not vote.
City Attorney Hillary Evans introduced two options for the council to consider, saying staff had prepared a broad definition of "relative" so the council could cut language if desired. "I presented with you some options for ordinances that you could adopt into your municipal code that would regulate relationships and appointments with boards and commissions," Evans said.
Mayor Pro Tem summarized the choices: a strict ban that would disqualify relatives outright, or a narrower approach that would allow relatives to serve but require council members to avoid appointing or serving on the same advisory body as a family member. Multiple council members said Option 2 better fits Oak Harbor's size and volunteer pool.
Councilmember Marshall voiced support for the stricter ban. "I think that we could narrow the definition of relative," he said, adding that a clean prohibition could avoid even the appearance of conflict. Several other members and staff urged alignment with the city's employee policy definition of family to account for blended households.
Councilmember Peterson proposed a working compromise: move forward with Option 2 while limiting the family definition to spouse or domestic partner, child/stepchild and parent/stepparent to mirror the employee manual. "Let's mirror it and call it a day," Peterson said.
On a procedural point, staff said the item was placed on the workshop agenda for discussion and would be returned as an action item once the council chose an option and refined language. City Attorney Evans said she would include two versions of Option 2 in the next packet ' one with an explicit prohibition on a family member serving as chair and one without ' so the council can vote without extended rewording on the dais.
No ordinance was adopted at the workshop. The council directed staff to draft the proposed code change consistent with the narrower Option 2 language, aligned to the employee-family definition, and to return with materials for a vote at a subsequent meeting.
