Durango City Council member Olivier Bosmans has argued that he did not violate the city’s code of ethics when he attended a Library Advisory Board meeting to speak as a private resident, not as a councilor. Fellow councilors, including two former councilors, disagreed and filed an ethics complaint against Bosmans for participating – he was not assigned to serve as a liaison to that board.

A councilor is a councilor at any public meeting pertaining to city business. A Council member risks exerting undue influence because, well, everyone at the meeting understands this person is a councilor.

Bosmans has also said he attended the meeting not to provide his opinion but to speak about how the joint sales tax gets broken up, where money comes from and how it is distributed across city departments. This meeting wasn’t the time or place. This wasn’t the contribution expected of him.

So much of behavior comes down to soft skills. To understand nuances, when and where – and with whom – personal opinions or details are appropriate to express. Tone, volume and magnitude play in, too. In the case of the Library Advisory Board meeting, the city’s code of ethics clearly spells out the rule.

Specifically, Section 2-205 Mandatory standards of ethical conduct, section (g), says: “City Officials shall not appear before the City Council or any Board or Commission on which or over which the City Official presides or has supervisory responsibilities, except in the City Official’s representation of the City.”

Of course, Bosmans is free to share his thoughts as a private citizen in suitable situations – with family members or with friends in his backyard at a barbecue. There’s a decorum in his position. He is part of a democratic group and process with decisions made by voting, following examinations and lengthy discussions. Councilors need that three- out of a five-person vote, so energy may be better spent finding resolutions inside chamber walls. Going outside undermines – and disrespects – the collective work of the Council.

It’s trying, working with people whom we have dubious history. Still, we expect each Council member to return to the table again and again, be civil and work toward the betterment of Durango.

Bosmans has taken his viewpoints to social media to the court of public opinion. In one January post on his “Olivier for City Council” Facebook page, Bosmans said councilors accused him of posting false and misleading information regarding the library. In another about a pipeline to connect Lake Nighthorse to the existing water system, he wrote “this is my personal post, not as a Councilor and not on behalf of Council.” But this page is all about Bosmans’ version of city business and includes his Council email address.

Social media is a gray area. Again, we expect dignified demeanor. It’s not a good look to broadcast why decisions Bosmans disagrees with are wrong, wrong, wrong. It contradicts another guiding principle for councilors to “speak with one voice” on decided subjects. No matter who dissents, every councilor is asked to abide by this.

Besides, all councilors’ voices are heard – they become public record while doing the work. We already know how Bosmans feels.

As tiresome as the infighting is, we certainly don’t want taxpayers to bankroll it. On June 16, city attorney Mark Morgan was quoted in The Durango Herald as saying since 2019, special counsels to the Board of Ethics have been paid $39,723.41 for complaints between councilors. About $26,000 was paid before Kim Baxter and Barbara Noseworthy left. Since two new councilors were seated on April 18, the city has spent about $14,000 on special counsel regarding ethics complaints.

Those expenses are ridiculous. Now, we’re feeling disrespected.

Being an elected public official means embracing some sacrifices, including not speaking as a private citizen at a city meeting. Still, it’s an honor to serve and represent community members. Humility is within this process.

We’re not expecting that Bosmans’ upcoming public hearing will provide fresh insight for ethics board members. Again, Section 2-205 (g) is straightforward. It’s also a guardrail for strong personalities.

Bosmans is a smart man. He’s signaled that the current Council is a better fit for him. That’s good news. We need the collective focus to be on the business of Durango and the common good for all of us.