Ethics code to stay the same Bangor panel finds terms fine for now

BANGOR – After wrestling for two weeks with ambiguous language in the city’s code of ethics, members of the ethics panel decided Thursday that the code is fine the way it is – for now.

“Our own definition is not so bad,” Chairman Phil Hunter said. “It’s better to be more general than specific, otherwise we take on new problems and open the door to exceptions.”

Board members decided at a June 17 meeting to address definitions of “special interest” and “family member” in the city’s code, which hasn’t been amended since 1995.

Four of the seven board members at Thursday’s meeting discussed the terms at length but decided making changes would do more harm than good.

“We shouldn’t change because it’s what we’ve been asked to do,” Denise O’Connell said. “Maybe it’s enough.”

The “special interest” clause carried most of the discussion. As written, the code defines “special interest” as “interest having value peculiar to a certain individual or group, whether economic or otherwise.”

The “otherwise” seemed to bother members, but Vice Chairman Cliff Guthrie said it might be in the board’s best interest to continue fact-finding efforts regarding the code before making a decision.

O’Connell brought up a provision of the code in Mechanic Falls, which talks about “special advantage” rather than “special interest.”

Cindy Debeck, executor of the Irene L. Averill estate, has contended that a specific city councilor with ties to Bangor Area Citizens for Responsible Development had a conflict of interest regarding the rezoning of the Penjajawoc Marsh. She hasn’t identified the councilor in question.

“The term ‘special advantage’ appeals to me,” Debeck said. “It’s a bit more definitive than ‘otherwise.'”

“We need to look at the whole code rather than tinker with one definition,” Guthrie said. “We need more time to look closely if we’re going to pursue [changes].”

Rather than table a motion to change language in the code, the board Thursday voted unanimously to leave the code the way it is. Its next meeting is July 22.

“Why table [the motion] when you can always come back with another motion [at a later date],” Ken Huhn said.