Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Guidance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington County chair warns new ethics guidance limits discussion, complicates Ordinance 917 timeline
Summary
County leaders said new Oregon Government Ethics Commission guidance prevents public discussion of actions that create financial impacts without a class exception, forcing recusal and limiting how the board may proceed on the proposed vehicle registration fee (Ordinance 917).
Chair Harrington told colleagues the state-level ethics bill veto left the county to follow new guidance from the Oregon Government Ethics Commission that arrived at the end of June and changes how the board must handle measures that could financially affect commissioners or household relatives. "We got the guidance, not the beginning of June. We got it the last week of June," Harrington said, adding county counsel has been notified and will advise on next steps.
Counsel and commissioners discussed how the guidance requires either seeking a class exception from the ethics commission—an administrative request that counsel estimated takes about 60 days—or limiting public discussion and recusing from deliberation on items that create a financial impact. Harrington summarized the restriction bluntly: "You're not allowed to discuss it at all. You're not allowed to explain your vote at all. All we get to do is vote." Counsel explained a "minimum vote" exception may allow an action to move forward once the requisite number of affirmative or negative votes is recorded, but said the board cannot deliberate on the measure publicly without an exception. The exchange centered on a proposed local vehicle registration fee, Ordinance 917, which counsel and the chair said would likely trigger the new guidance.
