Now
Fair
76.0°
High
87°
Low
64°
Full Forecast

Coupon

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Council votes down contract ban

Comments 27 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By DEENA WINTER / Lincoln Journal Star

Tuesday, Mar 11, 2008 - 12:32:56 am CDT

Arguing that good business people would be prevented from running for office, the four Republicans on the Lincoln City Council defeated a proposal Monday to let voters decide whether elected officials should be able to get city contracts.

The charter amendment would have been on the November ballot if it had passed muster with the council.

The 4-3 vote was split along party lines with Republicans Ken Svoboda, Jon Camp, John Spatz and Robin Eschliman voting against, and Democrats Doug Emery, Jonathan Cook and Dan Marvin in favor of putting the issue before the public.

Story Photo
Contributing the deciding vote Monday night at the Lincoln City Council meeting, Ken Svoboda voices why he voted "No" to a proposed charter amendment prohibiting elected officials from holding business contracts with the city. MICHAEL PAULSEN/LINCOLN JOURNAL STAR

The Republicans picked apart the proposed legislation, saying it could be interpreted broadly to dissuade all kinds of people from running for office. But they also rejected Democrats’ offers to “fix” the legislation with amendments.

The contract ban would have affected one existing contract Camp has with the city: He leases space to the Urban Development Department.

Svoboda’s family-owned landscaping company earned about $300,000, installing and maintaining landscaping on city medians during the decade leading up to 2007, but he dropped the last of his contracts that year to run for mayor.

The council voted on the same issue last week, but Svoboda was on vacation and the council ended up deadlocked 3-3.

Svoboda said Monday he had planned the vacation months ago not knowing he would miss the vote. Svoboda talked at length about the issue, clarifying that he no longer has any city contracts.

In addition, he said, he had a “gentleman’s agreement” with Mayor Chris Beutler that he wouldn’t accept any additional contracts while he’s on the council and Beutler is mayor.

Not long after Beutler defeated Svoboda to become mayor, he and Svoboda resolved a landscaping contract dispute dating back to 2004. Svoboda agreed to end the contract, pay nearly $41,000 in damages and forego more than $25,000 he would have been paid if the work had been done to the city’s satisfaction.

Svoboda said those who hinted at ethical lapses or corruption are “just plain wrong.” He said he checked with local and state authorities before running for the council to see if his company’s contracts were a problem. After he got on the council, he said, he checked with city departments to see if they had any problem with his company doing city work.

He refuted the suggestion that city employees “walked around on eggshells in dealing with” his company’s performance problems, saying city employees were professional and respectful.

He said if contracts need to be handled with more transparency, he welcomes such legislation.

“I don’t want to … try to shoot a mosquito with a Howitzer,” Svoboda said.

Svoboda also accused a member of the Charter Revision Committee, Vic Covalt, of having a personal vendetta against him. He claimed Covalt repeatedly threatened him with frivolous lawsuits when he ran for mayor and personally attacked him during last week’s debate.

“To me, that made it extremely personal,” Svoboda said. He said he holds his position on the council with the “highest respect” and expects those appointed to city committees to do the same.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Covalt, I don’t believe, is doing that,” he said, adding that he would oppose Covalt’s reappointment.

After the meeting, Covalt, a prominent Democrat, said Svoboda must have him confused with someone else, because he only called and e-mailed him once to complain about what he considered a misleading ad.

Covalt said he doesn’t have a problem with Svoboda, he’s just interested in “honesty and ethics in government.”

“If he wants to play correctly, then I guess I don’t have a problem with him,” he said.

He said the Charter Revision Committee is comprised of “really good people” who “shouldn’t be beat around” by the council for doing their jobs.

But Spatz echoed Svoboda’s concern, saying members of mayoral committees “should not allow a personal agenda to filter its way up to the City Council.” He said if the goal is to improve people’s perception of city government, the council could do that by “stepping up and being leaders.”

Cook said the ban wouldn’t prohibit anyone from running for office — they’d just have to choose between their contracts and public service. He noted that Omaha has lived with an even broader ban for more than 50 years.

“Omaha is touted often as a very business friendly city, a great place to do business,” Cook reminded his Republican colleagues.

Marvin said the ban seems to work in Omaha; he talked to councilmen who resigned from their positions in order to serve on the council.

Marvin offered an amendment specifying that elected officials could not have more than a 5 percent business interest in companies that do business with the city. But the Republicans voted against it.

Eschliman said she wasn’t going to “better something I think is fundamentally bad.” She said the next thing they know someone will propose that it’s a conflict of interest for a council member to live in an area that’s declared blighted.

She urged the business people to run for office to build bridges with the city to guard against those who “want to build walls” between them.

Emery said the council is mistaken if they think the issue is now dead, saying “the genie is out of the bottle” and a petition drive is probably coming next. Covalt said he didn’t know for sure but wouldn’t be surprised if there are people in the community who start gathering signatures to get the issue on the November ballot.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
Wm. Morris wrote on March 11, 2008 5:27 am:
" Ah, we should have known it would come to this. People don't get on the council simply to serve. The perks of having the inside track to business opportunities is the plum that makes a poor paying council job look attractive. Lets vote these people out come next election and consider electing some of our neighbors who are interested in the public good rather than their private business. "
AMG wrote on March 11, 2008 5:51 am:
" Politicians are the same wherever you go. The recent action by the City Council that allows elected officials hold city contracts reminds me of when I lived in Montana. You could always tell where the council members lived because their roads always seemed to be the first ones paved. "
Yes wrote on March 11, 2008 5:54 am:
" The 4 that voted against are right about this issue, the others are just playing political games. "
john q wrote on March 11, 2008 6:20 am:
" so the fox is still guarding the hen house "
Cb wrote on March 11, 2008 6:59 am:
" Svoboda and Camp have no business on Lincoln's City Council.

End of discussion.

"
huh wrote on March 11, 2008 7:21 am:
" Surprise, surprise! I NEVER expected Svboda to vote that that way. Right. "
russell wrote on March 11, 2008 8:07 am:
" It seems inefficient for the city to be renting office and parking space in the Haymarket when the top floor of the City-County building is empty. Why hasn't the tax reducers on the Council thought of this? What is the reason those Council members have not taken action? "
no surprise wrote on March 11, 2008 8:11 am:
" LIBA represents and works for its own interests, not the interests of the citizens of Lincoln and good government. Of course, in its distorted vision those interests are one and the same, and they've actually convinced themselves (and a disturbing number of Lincolnites) that there is no conflict of interest between their personal business interests and the best interest of the city and its citizens. However, as Omaha has proven, there is a conflict of interest, and government functions better without such conflicts. That Omaha has enjoyed a renaissance with an even broader ban tells us all we need to know about how a narrow business interest continues to dominate and control Lincoln government to the detriment of the best interests of the city and its citizens. "
Unreal wrote on March 11, 2008 8:17 am:
" This is why the rich get richer and the middleclass and poor live paycheck to paycheck.

I bet the 4 republicans dont have to make decisions like: do I fill the fridge or fill the prescription this month? "
Svoboda did the right thing wrote on March 11, 2008 8:36 am:
" Ken Svoboda did the right thing. The side that publicly tore down Svoboda over his poppy mallows then turned it around to make it seem as if he had done something unethical in getting the contract in the first place. Rubbish. No one blanches at Don Wesely's/Seng's/Beutler's campaign manager getting city contracts--no one. That person now draws a city paycheck. But you sure hear plenty of suggestion that Ken was unethical somehow because he is on the city council and failed to get the 700+ poppy mallows to all grow in the alloted time. If there is a problem with city council members getting city contracts, then the mayor needs to say so clearly (I can't find a record of him saying this) and then ask that language be drawn up by a committee that isn't so stridently partisan and constantly on the attack. The committee lashed out at certain council members despite NO evidence of improper behavior. One has to realize that these attacks were based not on some unethical behavior but rather is opposition to stances Svoboda/Camp, etc. have taken in the past. Beuter has done a good job as mayor but oh, he could have handled this better. And he needs to punt Covalt from any future city efforts. "
natefrog wrote on March 11, 2008 9:01 am:
" There's nothing like the sweet, sweet stench of corruption! "
Jeff wrote on March 11, 2008 9:02 am:
" I was disappointed that the stories covering this vote failed to point out that the City did not collect the liquidated damages that it was entitled to from Ray's Lawn Service for its contract violations. Maybe the city would have taken the same action if the company's owner wasn't one of only 7 city council members. However, we will never know for sure whether Svoboda benefited from his position by not having to pay more in damages. That is the question that erodes public confidence and the blindness of people such as Spatz and Eschliman on this issue is shocking and raises the question of whether the understand the way the world really works. "
Mrs. Johnson wrote on March 11, 2008 9:14 am:
" When you allow republicans to run things, this is what you get. Look at what they've done on the national level. Spatz's election to the council tipped things in the wrong direction. That needs fixed during the next election! "
shane wrote on March 11, 2008 10:09 am:
" I find it interesting that when Mr.Svoboda, Mr. Camp and Ms. Eschillman voted to approve this committee over a year ago that there was no outcry about the "strident partisan" makeup of the committee. If there was a problem why was it not brought up then? Only AFTER the committee brought forward an amendment that they, and their supporters, did not favor did party affiliation become an issue. If this is such "poor" legislation why do opponents feel the pubic is not educated enough to see that and vote against the amendment. While the timing might be poor this amendment is long overdue. "
Bill wrote on March 11, 2008 10:22 am:
" Baloney. A self serve council!!! I didn't vote these
people in the last election, but this is Lincoln, every
body is lead around like dogs on a chain!!! And no,
politicians aren't the same whereever you go, they are
west of the Mississippi, east, they are for the citizens.
They work hard and fight for the citizens. Not so west.
Its greed, greed, greed, and we're all for ourselves and
we'll dig your pockets dry!! Look around, you call
Lincoln a prosperous town or Nebraska. If it wasn't for
the farmers Nebraska would be dead!!!! I agree, Svoboda
Camp, Eschlin shouldn't be on the council. You reap
what you sow!! "
Darren wrote on March 11, 2008 10:30 am:
" shocked? Not in the least. Camp and Svoboda need to be booted off the council in the next election "
Money wrote on March 11, 2008 10:40 am:
" Business as usual here, no surprise. Jon Camp leases property to the city and is a huge proponet of haymaket development. I don't suppose he stands to financially gain from all of these plans and "visions" he votes on. Ken Svoboda maintained contracts with the city while on the council. On a national level V.P. Cheney has profited a lot from Haliburton's contracts. I can't imagine why LIBA was against this bill, LOL. Just ask Mrs. Eschilman and she will give you a handful of scripted answers. This kind of thing is not good for business, it is quite the opposite. There are plenty of other local business proprietors not in city government that can bid and do business with the city who are not on the council. I am not calling Camp and Svoboda shady. What I am saying is that removing their ability to maintain contracts makes government more transparent and takes away the image of impropriety. I am glad every day that we have council members like Mr. Marvin and Mr. Cook who are willing to maintain transparency. "
Dave wrote on March 11, 2008 10:42 am:
" Once again it's refreshing to see that our elected officials think they are smarter than the voters. Why could they possibly not want to allow the public to decide this issue by ballot???? I wonder.... "
Michael wrote on March 11, 2008 10:47 am:
" I don't remember my councilman asking me what I thought. I was under the assumption they represented me and my neighborhood. Maybe the people should vote. The city council is useless, ineffective and corrupt. Be gone with it! When its time for a vote or discuss issues, draw names from each district out of a hat to serve for a period of time. Make it like jury duty. "
BB wrote on March 11, 2008 11:47 am:
" It's time fpr a RECALL! "
Lisa wrote on March 11, 2008 3:03 pm:
" I can't believe some people are stupid enough to believe these people want to 'serve' our community for free, no perks.

Grow up! You sound like college students. "
Yah wrote on March 11, 2008 4:05 pm:
" I want to know why the city leases to Camp when the third floor of the City-County building is empty. Can someone please give us an answer? "
XL2 wrote on March 11, 2008 4:49 pm:
" This issue is a loser for Lincoln. Here we are back to yet another partisan vote! Didn't recent campaigns vow to heal the wounds of the past two (one-term) administrations? When are we going to get some leadership at city hall? When is someone going to focus on the importance of economic growth and jobs instead of politics? This was nothing more than politics on both sides. Move on. "
Disappointed -- and a new Democrat wrote on March 11, 2008 7:11 pm:
" When the local republicans are pro-corruption, it's time for me to be a Democrat, the party of ethics, it seems. "
Billy Bob wrote on March 11, 2008 7:43 pm:
" The Mayor stacked the deck with the impact fee review group. I hope this comes back to bite them all who voted against letting the people decide. One would think that out of a population of 230,000 we could find someone to run for public office without having Ties to the City coffers. "
JR wrote on March 11, 2008 9:16 pm:
" Just another example of who these four really, truly represent. And it sure isn't you and me. They are here to represent LIBA and the Chamber of Commerce. I have been saying for years LIBA and Colby Mach are anti Lincoln. Maybe now people will start to believe me and others who have seen what they stand for. We need to start boycotting all LIBA members. It is really quite easy to do, as they do not represent all that many businesses. But when you do decide to boycott, please make sure and let them know why you are not going to use them anymore. "
hollister wrote on March 12, 2008 6:57 am:
" Boss Hogg is alive and well, and seated on the Lincoln city council. Hang on to your wallets. "

Ads by Yahoo!