| Updated: 2/19/2009 3:41 pm |
Published: 2/18/2009 5:41 pm
|
Citizens call it their right, guaranteed by the first amendment. But one Tulsa city councilor calls it a 6-paragraph diatribe. The investigation into alleged improprieties by two city councilors is now over. But the public backlash has just begun. FOX 23’s Douglas Clark has the latest on a story that he broke last week.
Earlier this month, Tulsa citizen Chip Atkins made a complaint against city councilors Eric Gomez and Bill Martinson, alleging they may have profited from a real estate deal. Councilors have now dismissed the complaint, after finding no supporting evidence, clearing the names of the councilors in question. But citizens call the process flawed.
It was a hot-button issue for Midtown residents – land targeted for redevelopment by the St. John Credit Union, which wanted to put a bank in place of houses near 13th and Lewis.
But a complaint filed against City Councilors Eric Gomez and Bill Martinson charged them with accepting “compensation” from St. John, in exchange for their support of the project. The man who wrote the complaint, Chip Atkins, now alleges only Gomez may have received money. But he presented no evidence to support the claim.
“The allegation was raised by a citizen who now says, ‘I have no evidence to support the allegation and I didn’t make the allegation. It’s a bit over the top,” says Tulsa City Council Chairman John Eagleton.
With no ethical or criminal breach uncovered, the investigation is now closed.
But Atkins claims he never had to present evidence, citing a 2005 ethics ordinance that says the mere appearance of impropriety can constitute an ethical violation.
“There’s problems with the process here,” says Julie Hall, who runs the citizen watchdog group Who Owns Tulsa. She says the investigation was incomplete, and criticizes the process that allows councilors to investigate each other.
