Gilbert ethics probes find no wrongdoing
Lawyers tasked with reviewing a spate of ethics complaints filed against Gilbert Town Council members this summer have finished their reports and found no wrongdoing.
The lawyers recommended no serious penalties, only verbal warnings, in some cases.
The Town Council will discuss four of six complaints and the report’s conclusions at the Sept. 19 council meeting. One complaint is still being investigated and another is not on the agenda for discussion. Complaints have plagued the seven-member elected group over the past several years. So much so, that the council in June approved updates to its ethics handbook and code of conduct to build a more transparent process with clear penalties.
But since all the complaints were filed prior to the new policies going into effect, the town followed its previous procedures. The town hired attorneys Sarah Barnes and Kenneth Fields from separate firms to review and investigate the claims brought forward.
Fields was hired on a $500 an hour rate, according to his contract. The town did not provide the total cost for his services but at minimum the town has paid him $2,300, according two invoices provided by the town. The contract provided by the town for Barnes did not detail her hourly rate.
Several complaints were submitted in July and August. Some by residents and others by past and sitting council members, including one by Mayor Bridgette Peterson against Councilmember Jim Torgeson.
The probes were done by conducting interviews and reviewing the materials submitted with the complaint. The final reports found that none of the council members or Mayor Peterson had violated the code of ethics.
A complaint filed by former council member Bill Spence is still being investigated
Here’s what the findings are of each finished report.
Maureen Hoppe complaint v. Torgeson and Buchli
A complaint filed by resident Maureen Hoppe against council members Jim Torgeson and Bobbi Buchli led to the domino effect of ethics complaints this summer. Hoppe’s complaint alleged that that Buchli and Torgeson spread misinformation about a council pay raises, harassed her and hurt her ability to perform her duties as a Republican precinct committeeman.
Hoppe also called out Buchli for blocking her on her Facebook profile that she said Buchli used to communicate as a council member.
In his report, Fields wrote his investigation uncovered no evidence that Buchli harassed Hoppe or that Buchli used her Facebook account for town purposes.
“This activity within this series of events by a first-term councilmember does not amount to a violation of any provision of the code of ethics,” he wrote.
He recommended dismissal of the complaint.
Regarding Torgerson’s comments on the pay raise, Fields wrote, “having a mistaken understanding of the law pertaining to salary increases for members of the Town Council and defending his mistaken belief on the subject is not an ethics violation.”
The investigation into Torgeson included a 78-second voicemail left on Hoppe’s phone in which he explained why he abstained from a vote on a rezoning request for an apartment development. In Hoppe’s complaint, she said she felt it was an act of intimidation.
Hoppe and Torgeson were already aquatinted because Hoppe had volunteered on Torgeson’s campaign for council.
In regards to the abstention, Fields also concluded, with the “information provided,” the act was not in violation of the code. “Decisions regarding perceived conflicts of interests and abstaining from voting under the Code have to be left to the discretion of the public official with presumption of good faith on the part of the official,” he wrote.
Fields wrote he found “no convincing evidence” that supported the alleged code of conduct violations. “I recommend Councilmember Torgeson be cautioned as to the expectations and special responsibilities of an elected public official,” he wrote.
Peterson v. Torgeson complaint
In the voice message, Torgeson alleged Peterson targeted him and said, “She’s that (expletive). She’s that bad a human being.”
Following the discovery of the voice message left by Torgeson to Hoppe, Peterson said in her complaint that she was obligated to report the voicemail and that it may have violated five areas of the town’s council code of ethics.
Fields wrote that the voice message could have been a violation of the code if it had been a public statement but “in this case” it was instead a “private conversation expressing an opinion” of a colleague’s character.
Fields found no ethics violations occurred but recommended that Torgeson “be reminded of his new responsibilities as an elected official to treat his colleagues with respect and courtesy.”
Bongiovanni v. Peterson complaint
Peterson’s complaint led to Councilmember Chuck Bongiovanni filing his own complaint against the mayor.
Bongiovanni’s complaint called out the timing of Peterson’s complaint and the disclosure it to a news media outlet before the “Town Clerk and other council members had knowledge of it” and that it violated “responsibilities of public service” section of the code.
According to the report, Bongiovanni also felt Peterson had no obligation to file the complaint but instead “placed her personal interests ahead of the interests of the public and the Town of Gilbert.”
Fields wrote that complaint didn’t go against the interests of public or town “even though it may also have been in the political interest of the Mayor.”
Bongiovanni’s complaint also questioned a meeting Peterson had with former council member Bill Spence, who also filed a separate ethics complaint. The July 25 meeting took place at the request of Spence to talk about his concerns with the updated code of conduct, Fields wrote.
The report didn’t outline why the meeting might have run afoul of any specific part of the town’s code of conduct.
Fields wrote that the meeting didn’t violate the code and recommended the complaint be dismissed. “This is normal and expected political activity of elected members of a town council interacting with a constituent,” he wrote.
Brandon Ryff and Ryan Handelsman complaint v. Peterson
Gilbert residents Brandon Ryff and Ryan Handelsman filed an ethics complaint in reference to an event that took place September 2022 when Peterson directed town security to kick them out of a council meeting.
During a particularly controversial council meeting, the two men were standing in the back of the room holding signs that said “Stop Lying.” The two are well-known critics of Peterson’s leadership and they allege the mayor targeted them, although others in the room had similar signs.
The complaint said that Peterson “used her position of power as mayor to retaliate.” The complaint also claimed Peterson leaked confidential information from an unidentified executive session.
Town Attorney Chris Payne recommends the council dismiss or take no action because the allegations of Peterson’s actions about the September 2022 council meeting have already been investigated. He noted that the claim about the leaked information is “vague” and fails to identify any particular executive session meeting or timeframe.
Payne wrote “reopening allegations that have already been investigated would be improper for a number of reasons.” Nearly 11 months has passed since the date of the alleged misconduct and revisiting the issue would be unfair and require additional expenditures, he reasoned.
If the council decided that either or both allegations should be investigated the town attorney’s office will refer the matter to an outside investigator, according to Payne’s recommendation.
Ryff has pending litigation regarding the September 2022 meeting which will be discussed during a closed door session with the town council on Sept. 19.
Terri Naddy complaint v. Koprowski
Terri Naddy’s complaints against Councilmember Yung Koprowski was reviewed by attorney Sarah Barns. Naddy’s complaint is not on the agenda for discussion at the Sept. 19 council meeting.
Koprowski works as a civil engineer and co-owns the firm Y2K Engineering. Naddy stated in the complaint Koprowski had conflicts of interest with the town. Naddy referenced a two projects Koprowski’s firm provided services to the town. One for the design of a traffic signal and another for fixing data connections.
“I feel it is a conflict of interest (ethics violation) for a company, owned by a sitting councilmember, to profit from the municipality they represent,” Naddy wrote in her complaint.
Barnes wrote in her final report that neither contract required a vote by the council, therefore not needing an abstention and that Koprowski “appears to have satisfied all state-required financial reporting obligations demonstrating her transparency while acting as a public official.”
Barns concluded that Koprowski did not commit any ethic violations nor the conflict-of-interests provisions in the town code of ethics.
Maritza Dominguez can be reached at maritza.dominguez@arizonarepublic.com or 480-271-0646.