Ethics panel rules against BC mayor

Jeffrey Libby

Friday, Dec. 8, 2000 | 10:41 a.m.

Boulder City Mayor Robert Ferraro violated state ethics codes when he failed to disclose personal retirement benefits connected with an $8,000 salary increase approved in June by the City Council, the state Ethics Commission ruled Thursday.

The raise, scheduled to become effective in July, would boost Ferraro's retirement benefits by $300 a month.

Thursday's ruling stemmed from a written compromise drafted in November between Nancy Lee Varnum, then-executive director of the Ethics Commission, and David Olsen, attorney for the city of Boulder City.

That so-called stipulation allowed Ferraro, a 24-year veteran of the council, to settle the ethics case brought against him without a public hearing and without a formal investigation by the Ethics Commission. His only penalty was that he would agree with the Ethics Commission that he committed a violation. No fine or any other penalty was imposed.

That arrangement left Boulder City Councilman William Smith dissatisfied.

"The Ethics Commission took the easy way out," said Smith, who filed the ethics charge against Ferraro in July.

In most cases, state law prohibits elected officials from voting themselves a salary increase for the current term of office. The Boulder City council ruled, however, that the local charter had no such prohibition.

Even so, Ferraro did not publicly disclose the $300 monthly increase in retirement benefits that would result from his pay raise. Those benefits are figured from the highest 36 months of pay, and during his campaign, Ferraro said that if elected, it would be his last term.

Council members were approved for $5,000 raises at the same time the mayor's raise was approved. It was the first pay raise in eight years and represented a 48 percent increase in annual pay for council members and the mayor.

But only Ferraro stands to benefit directly through his retirement package.

Peter Bernhard, chairman of the commission, agreed with Smith that his commission could have gone further in its investigation of the complaint against Ferraro.

"A lot of questions remain unanswered," Bernhard said.

The agreed-to stipulation does not answer questions as to the timing of the proposed salary increase in relationship to Ferraro's announced retirement, or whether "there was any substance to the argument" that Ferraro may have acted in order to allow the proposal to come up after elections, Bernhard said.

"At this point we haven't heard the evidence," Bernhard said. "It sets a bad precedent."