Glen Ellyn board may be banning romance between department heads

Glen Ellyn board may be banning romance between department heads
Originally published Sunday, May 24, 2009

By Nadia Malik
Daily Herald Staff Writer

Sparked by a texting controversy involving two department heads, the Glen Ellyn village board may soon be voting on an ethics policy that forbids romantic relationships between department heads.
The policy, proposed by Village Manager Steve Jones, defines those relationships as ones "that can reasonably be determined to be of a romantic, sexual or dating nature."
Department heads, Jones said, "are subject to more stringent requirements, with their stature as role models, access to sensitive information," he said.
"If the relationship ended badly, you have the whole distraction issue," he added.
Jones last year recommended demotions for Police Chief Phil Norton and Staci Hulseberg, planning and development director, for "excessive workplace interaction."
The pair communicated via text message 9,637 times between January and August, communiqués that cost totaled more than $1,000. While the board discussed their fate last year, hundreds of residents and business owners showed their support for the employees.
The board ultimately decided against the demotions, but the issue didn't come without plenty of controversy and strong opinions.
And now, Trustees Tim Armstrong and Pete Ladesic say they aren't happy with the way the policy reads, with Armstrong calling it "vindictive."
"It's an attempt to remedy the situation that didn't go the way the village manager wanted it to go back in December," he said.
Jones contends that's not the case, but that the management team in Glen Ellyn is so small, some measure needs to be taken to protect employees.
Ladesic said he also didn't understand Jones' reasons for having more scrutiny of department heads.
"To have a relationship with a co-worker is not anything that doesn't happen every day," he said. "If it's something that disrupts the corporation, it should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. There was no lack of job performance (with Hulseberg and Norton)."
The final decision on an ethics policy, if it's agreed to be necessary, will come in the upcoming months by the village board, which includes new members elected last month.
Many on the former board had agreed with Jones, saying the management staff has to live up to higher standards.
"I believe (a relationship) has the potential to create an internal problem that shouldn't be there," Trustee Jim Comerford said.
Conflicts of interest
While the village board discusses ethics for its staff, there's also potential for new rules to apply to elected officials.
These will center around avoiding the appearance of conflicts of interest. Although already regulated by state law, a village ordinance would have language about gifts, hiring of relatives and transactions that involve officials.
The village may also institute an ethics officer to rule on conflicts. Those who violate the policy will be fined $1,000.
Peter Cooper, one of the new trustees, says he thinks some type of regulation is necessary.
"I think sometimes there is a concern that getting approvals from the board or the village can be an insider's game," he said. "It's essential that we get rid of that image."
Trustees are quick to point out that while there may be nothing unscrupulous going on with the board, there are sometimes perceptions in town that counter that notion.
"It's almost impossible to not have something that is conflicting," Comerford said.
The distinction, he said, is to make sure the village has a concrete plan for looking into conflicts.
"I think it's really important that we have an ethics policy that conveys confidence to the community," he said.
Two of the conflicts that most recently have come to light involve Trustee Armstrong: One is related to a Montessori School that was recently approved, and the other involving a new ambulance contract Glen Ellyn just signed.
Armstrong represented Ron and Elizabeth Repking, who wanted to move the Montessori school they own to a new location in town; Armstrong's brother-in-law also owns the ambulance company the village dropped for a new vendor.
In the former case, Armstrong recused himself from proceedings; in the latter, he disclosed his relationship but didn't recuse himself, because the village attorney said it wasn't legally required.
"Even though he's recusing himself, there's an appearance that he has an influence over the rest of us," Comerford said.
Armstrong himself brought up the two instances, pointing out that he acted in a way that was legal. He noted that putting too much scrutiny on elected officials might push residents away from pursuing public office.
"I think the level of purity they're trying to reach is unattainable," he said.
Some are advocating for an independent person or panel who can evaluate such concerns; Armstrong agreed with the idea of an ethics officer.
Cooper said that even when nobody acts unethically, there still may be an image in town that something untoward was going on.
"We have to create not only the fact of impartiality but an appearance of impartiality and strong ethics," he said.