AURORA | An ethics ordinance was narrowly defeated by Aurora City Council members Monday, but the squabble is far from over.

The measure was thwarted by a tied voted, and a vote from Mayor Bob LeGare, who is allowed to voted on measures when the council is divided. Allison Hiltz, Johnny Watson, Crystal Murillo, Angela Lawson and Nicole Johnston also voted the ordinance down. 

Early on during debate on the ethics code, council members decided against postponing the city bill. Watson voted against both of those motions,  but ultimately he decided not to support the ordinance altogether. That triggered a tie-breaker from the mayor. He said it was his among the first since he was appointed to the seat this spring.

Watson’s change of heart is so far unclear. He didn’t speak on ordinance itself during discussion.

The ordinance, sponsored by council members Marsha Berzins and Charlie Richardson, braved harsh criticism for being rushed and, as Lawson called the measure, “flimsy.” 

Johnston said she’ll continue to work on a version of an ordinance, one that she’s been working since at least summer when she presented to the Federal, State and Intergovernmental Relations policy committee in August. 

“This gave me a second chance,” she told the Sentinel after the vote. 

Johnston told fellow council members during the meeting that if the ordinance was to pass it wouldn’t be doing much to tighten up ethical standards for city council members. Hiltz said she anticipated a “nightmare” scenario for the next couple of years if the ordinance passed.

Richardson disagreed, saying it brought the city from 2006 into 2018. The city currently adheres to a 2006 version of an ethics code that was in state law prior to the state adopting Amendment 41. It currently covers conflicts of interest with advisory, but it doesn’t have a mechanism for complaints to be made by constituents or offer a way for council members to seek ethical advice.

“It sets up a pathway for citizens to file a complaint and sets how that process works and what the end result will be,” Richardson said of the failed ordinance. “I just think it’s going to be extremely beneficial.”

Richardson was the Aurora city attorney when those rules were adopted by a previous council. 

The two versions of the ordinances differed on how to handle complaints. Johnston wanted a panel to hear complaints, whereas Richardson and Berzins included a single retired judge to handle ethical complaints and advisory opinions — though, Berzins previously told the Sentinel she was open to a panel of retired judges filling that role.

Both sides said they were open to compromise, and they did during discussion on some amendments Johnston drafted prior to the meeting. One applied the ordinance to council appointed boards and commissions as well as council appointees.

Johnston wanted that piece to go even further and cover executive staff, but others argued that was not the council’s purview.

The measure from Berzins and Richardson was presented to the city council’s Management and Finance Policy Committee during the “miscellaneous” portion of the meeting earlier this year. That raised concerns among some city council members at the October study session when the measure was first in front of a full council. 

Council member Crystal Murillo said Monday night she took issue with the ordinance because it was a redlined version of Johnston’s original ordinance.

Now Johnston said she plans to build on what she started with and plans to reach out to more stakeholders and tweak language before resubmitting her ethics ordinance to the FSIR council committee again. 

“I want to compromise, it doesn’t have to be just my version,” she said.

*This story was updated to reflect that a tied vote defeats a measure. The mayor may vote when that happens.