Denver is “completely out of step” with other major jurisdictions in at least one key ethics code area, City Councilman Kevin Flynn told some of his colleagues in explaining some “tweaks” he is proposing to the city code.

At the Tuesday, Dec. 6, Finance and Governance Committee meeting, Flynn noted most jurisdictions have a dollar limit instead of a number limit for things like meals and event tickets a Council member, city employee or official can accept over the course of a year. Currently, Denver’s code has a limit of four such gifts and Flynn is proposing a change to a cumulative limit of $300 a year.

“Some of these places have outright bans on any gifts from anyone doing business with the city,” he noted.

Denver’s code bans accepting any gifts from someone the officer, official, or employee is in a position to take direct official action with, or if the city has an existing, ongoing, or pending contract, business, or regulatory relationship with the donor.

Flynn outlined a handful of proposed changes to the ethics code, after the committee last week agreed to send a bill to the full Council that changed some of the city’s financial disclosure requirements. Most notably, the committee agreed that gifts worth more than $50 a year would have to be reported.

Assistant City Attorney David Broadwell said the ethics code now defines any gift below $25 as a conflict, so will work to align and synchronize the two measures as they go through the approval process. A side-by-side comparison will also be produced so Council members can see how the changes in both bills align and compare.

“Actually, the current ethics code doesn’t even define a gift,” Broadwell said. “It only lists what’s in and what’s out” in terms of acceptance and reporting requirements.

Michael Henry, executive director of the city’s ethics board, said the last time the code was extensively changed in 2001, it took 18 months of work, meetings and discussion. Council members present all voiced support for trying to improve the code short of that step.

“The problem with influence is not with all the little gifts,” Councilman Paul Lopez said. “It’s with the election donations. If there is that type of influence, that’s where we need to set limits. You notice Los Angeles does not allow any corporate giving.”

Flynn said while his changes are not aimed at that part of the code, “perception is a concern.”

“I know $300 could easily be more than four meals or tickets in a year,” he added. “But these changes move us toward best practices. Right now, we could take thousands of dollars worth of tickets and not go over the limit of four” now in the code.

Councilwoman Robin Kniech pointed out the $300 limit would be among the highest in the country.

Broadwell told the committee no matter how the changes and the code itself is worded, “you’re always going to have some interpretation.”

“But basically, if something is given to you and it’s not to try to influence you, it should not be a concern,” he said. “We want to try to move in that direction.”

Another proposed change would move the appointment of ethics board members away from the Council, since it’s “fundamentally awkward to select the members of the board that will oversee” the Council, along with city employees, Flynn said.

Instead, Flynn proposed a three-member nominating commission seek applications and make recommendations for the five-member board as vacancies come up.

“I think it’s essential to bolster the public confidence in things like this at a time when we’re not always seen in a positive light,” Flynn said.

Flynn said the code must still ensure employee rights are not compromised when disciplinary steps are taken,  noting that the board had not taken a disciplinary action or even held a disciplinary hearing – which is done behind closed doors – in several years. He said the board has received fewer than 10 complaints this year.

Flynn will bring back further code revisions at the committee’s Dec. 20 meeting for consideration to send to the full City Council for action.