You couldn’t put a cork in some Denver City Council members when they hold forth on the issues of the day, which is as it should be – even if it tries the public’s patience at times. So, why does the council seem to fear its own staff’s ability to speak up, as well?

As reported by The Gazette, some council members are balking at Denver Auditor Tim O’Brien’s very reasonable insistence that interviews of council staff members in a pending audit of council operations be conducted without their bosses nosing in. O’Brien points out unrestricted interviews are required by Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards, which must be followed under the Denver Charter. He said the audit standards require interviews to be held under conditions in which people may speak freely.

Makes sense. Auditors couldn’t do their job if a staffer felt intimidated by the presence of a boss. Think of a council member or the member’s chief of staff disrupting an interview with, “what she meant to say was…” – just as the audit team was about to uncover something dicey or simply embarrassing. Talk about a chilling effect on whistleblowers.

Yet, the council objects and is holding up the audit. The council’s leadership claims it wants an observer present at the staff interviews to serve as a notetaker and – get this – to protect its staff from intimidation from the audit team.

Council President Pro Tem Jamie Torres seemed to think it was the return of the Spanish Inquisition.

“We won’t be bullied into decisions that have no legal basis,” Torres said. “Council’s interest in having a staffer be in the room for observation and note taking in no way undermines the auditor’s role, responsibility or authority.”

O’Brien’s take was more plausible.

“Council leadership won’t allow their own staff to have open and honest conversations with my audit team,” O’Brien said. “If City Council employees are required to be interviewed in the presence of senior staff, employees may be hesitant to speak openly about what is and is not working in council operations.”

Exactly.

Not all council members oppose O’Brien’s approach, and to their credit, some even have been calling for an audit.

But those like Torres and council President Stacie Gilmore are coming across as parents who are afraid their kids will let slip some awkward family secrets. Let’s not forget it was one of the current council members who had attempted to hire her own significant other onto her staff, and backed off only after public accusations of nepotism. Just what is it the council might be trying to hide this time?

And even if all they want is to “take notes” on what is said in the audit interviews – so that they can plan their spin ahead of time before their lapses in performance are made public – well, too bad. Council members can wait along with the rest of us for the audit report and findings. Keeping the interviews forthright and unhindered is a higher priority.

The council cannot claim to stand for transparency if its leaders are trying to limit what might come to light.

Denver Gazette editorial board