HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.hpc.002-2013 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CREATING A PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTS FOR RECUSAL
OF A MEMBER OR MEMBERS
RESOLUTION #2, SERIES OF 2013
Recitals
1. Section 8.4 of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen provides in part that
"Each board and commission shall operate in accordance with its own rules of procedure except
as otherwise directed by the council."
2. Section 26.304.060C.6. of the Aspen Municipal Code, "General Hearing
Procedures; Other Rules to Govern," allows the decision-making body to have "adopted rules of
procedure, so long as the same are not in conflict with this Title."
3. Section 26.220.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code provides, in part:
F. The chairperson of any meeting of the Commission may administer oaths, shall be in
charge of all proceedings before the Commission and shall take such action as shall be
necessary to preserve order and the integrity of all proceedings before the Commission.
4. Chapter 2.02 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes standards of conduct for
officials of the City of Aspen, including the members of volunteer boards. The purpose statement for
such standards of conduct is "to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the public and the
integrity of City government by defining and proscribing certain conflicts of interest that may arise
between the City and City Council members, employees or appointees to City boards, authorities and
commissions." It recognizes that"some actions are conflicts per se between public duty and private
interest while other actions may or may not pose such conflicts depending upon the totality of the
circumstances surrounding certain actions."
5. The Historic Preservation Commission regularly addresses potential conflicts of
interest and its members recuse themselves when a conflict is apparent.
6. Other City of Aspen volunteer commissions have had applicant representatives
request recusal of a member at a public hearing, on the basis of bias toward the applicant or applicant
representatives.
7. The Aspen Municipal Code addresses behavior of those who make quasi-judicial
decisions in a public hearing in Sec. 2.02.110. "Quasi-judicial proceedings," which states as follows:
City Council members, City officials and employees,r_oquired as part of their
duties to take direct official action that involves a quasi-judicial proceeding shall:
(a) Follow the voluntary disclosure procedures set forth at Section 2.02.050, if he
or she has a financial or personal interest in any quasi-judicial proceeding;
1
(b) Attempt as reasonably possible to remain impartial and make final decisions
only after a full and open hearing based on evidence presented at-a hearing;
(c) Avoid as reasonably possible communications outside the hearing or public
meeting process on pending matters and disclose all information regarding the
pending matter that he or she may have received from sources outside the public
decision-making process;
(d) Avoid as reasonably possible taking any public position or stance on a
pending matter until all of the evidence has been presented and he or she is
required to take a direct official action on the pending matter;
(e) Avoid as reasonably possible any conduct through words or conduct that
would lead a reasonably prudent person to believe that he or she has prejudged the
pending matter until such time as he or she is required to take a direct official
action on the matter;
(f) Endeavor to prevent personal feelings about an applicant or an application
from entering into the decision making process; and, if personal bias reaches a
level where he or she cannot make an impartial decision based on facts in the
record, follow the voluntary disclosure procedures set forth at Section 2.02.050;
and
(g) If in doubt, seek advice from the City Attorney's office on whether a particular
proceeding is a quasi-judicial proceeding.
9 The Historic Preservation Commission desires to establish a procedure to address
allegations against its members in a way that allows the applicant to raise the issue yet does not
require the use of public meeting or hearing time to discuss the issue.
10. Resolution of an issue of bias or impartiality or other conflicts of a member is not for the
Historic Preservation Commission to decide, but rather is up to the individual member who has the
alleged bias or other reason for recusal. However, it is the duty of the chair of the Commission to
preserve order and the integrity of any meeting. When a member with an alleged bias or other
alleged reason for recusal disagrees with an applicant's request for recusal,the Historic Preservation
Commission does not want any disruption of the order and integrity of its proceedings.
11. At their regular meeting of January 9, 2013, the Historic Preservation Commission
considered a procedural rule to address an applicant's allegation of bias or unfairness and request
for recusal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission hereby adopts the following policy:
An applicant requesting recusal of a Historic Preservation Commission member from a
public hearing on an application shall make such request in writing as soon as the
applicant is aware of its need for such a request, but no later than seven days after
notification to the applicant of the date of the application's public hearing. The written
request shall include sufficient detail and documentation to apprise the member whose
recusal is requested of the reason the applicant believes the member cannot fairly judge
the application. The written request shall be submitted to the City Attorney's office.
2
Upon receipt of the request, the City Attorney shall discuss the request with the member
of the Historic Preservation Commission whose recusal was requested in order to
determine whether the member's participation in the public hearing meets the criteria of
Aspen Municipal Code Section 2.02.110. The member shall recuse him or herself when
he or she believes that he or she could not meet all of those criteria. The applicant shall
be advised by the City Attorney in advance of the public hearing that the member will or
will not recuse himself or herself.
At the time of the meeting when conflicts of interest are addressed, the Chair will
announce that a request was received and that the criteria in code section 2.02.110 were
discussed by the member and the City Attorney, that the member will or will not recuse
himself or herself, and that the applicant was advised. There will be no other discussion
of the issue at the meeting by the applicant, its representatives, any member of the
Historic Preservation Commission, City staff or members of the public.
Should the issue be raised initially by a member of the public or otherwise at a public
hearing, the Chair shall take such action as is necessary to preserve the order and integrity
of the proceeding, including, but not limited to, declaring an immediate recess to allow
for discussion between the affected member and the City Attorney, or such other action
as circumstances require. The Chair may, but need not, request a motion to continue or
to recess, and a vote on any such action.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of January,
2013.
Ann Mullins, Chair
App�oved a� to Form:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kathy Stric and, Chief Deputy Clerk
3