Incumbent Ald. Arthur Newman (1st) released another legal opinion on council ethics Monday contending that his opponent, Kellogg Prof. Allan Drebin, would have a conflict of interest in discussions and votes on university-related issues if elected to the Evanston City Council.
In a press release, Newman cited a decision made about two weeks ago by the city’s legal counsel explaining that Ald. Joseph Kent (5th) is unable to vote on District 65 issues because he is a tenured teacher in the district.
“If Ald. Kent is prohibited from participating and voting on District 65 issues coming before the council, certainly Prof. Drebin is likewise disqualified from debating and voting on many significant issues relating to Northwestern,” Newman said.
Drebin pointed out that Newman and Kent have worked together for years and said the parallel drawn between the two cases may not be right.
Debate about Drebin’s ability to participate in council decisions related to NU has been placed at the center of the First Ward race. Both sides have offered legal opinions why Drebin can or cannot vote on matters related to his employer.
In January, Drebin issued an opinion saying the statute applied only to a candidate holding stock in NU, sitting on the university’s board of directors or serving as a university administrator.
Drebin also has stated that his tenure at NU allows him to speak against the university without fear of dismissal. But Newman has said NU still pays Drebin’s salary and maintains the power to strip him of his tenure.
In a responding legal opinion, Newman said Drebin suffered from a conflict of interest even if he benefited indirectly from the outcome of a vote. Monday’s opinion cited a 1994 decision by Evanston’s corporation counsel prohibiting “the appearance of impropriety” in decisions where there is a possible conflict of interest.
But the 1994 decision also states that “there would be no statutory violation under the state conflict of interest laws absent a pecuniary interest on the part of the appointee.” Drebin has argued his tenure prevents such interests.
The counsel summarized its decision on Kent by saying “the mere possibility of … pressures, subtle or not subtle, which an employer has at his disposal to impose on an employee, is enough to create a prohibited conflict of interest.”
But Drebin said Newman’s arguments take on a larger significance when it comes to town-gown relations.
“What he’s saying is that no one at (NU) could ever serve on city council,” said Drebin, referring not only to professors and administrators, but also students. “Everybody representing (NU) would be disenfranchised.”
Newman said Drebin would be unable to vote on land-use issues and will not be allowed on the council’s negotiating team with NU as a result.
“His candidacy is fatally flawed,” Newman said.
Drebin said that the last time a zoning problem came up that involved NU was in 1998.
