Conflicts of interest addressed

By Dave Fidlin

Correspondent

Waterford Union High School board members have reviewed their ethics policy for potential conflicts of interest regarding an elected official serving on two school boards.

Dan Jensen was elected to serve on the WUHS board in April. At the same time, he is keeping his longtime seat on the Waterford Graded School Board.

WUHS Superintendent Keith Brandstetter discussed the issue at the board’s regular monthly meeting last week.

“Since Dan now serves on (both) boards, there are potentially some matters of discussion which may present a conflict of interest between the two boards,” Brandstetter said.

Brandstetter sought legal advice from attorneys representing WUHS and the Waterford Special Education Cooperative – the latter being a shared service between the two districts, which has been a source of controversy in recent months.

Mark Olson of Waukesha-based Buelow Vetter Buikema Olson & Vliet, LLC, is an attorney representing WUHS.

In a letter to the district, Olson said the Wisconsin Supreme Court has weighed in on cases involving elected officials serving on two boards that hold different levels of stature – an example being a person on a county and municipal board.

“There is no legal authority addressing whether the doctrine of incompatibility would bar an individual from serving on both a K-8 and a union high school board,” Olson wrote.

“However, it is our opinion that, although there will likely be some conflicts of interest that arise … those conflicts will likely not be so great or frequent as to invoke the doctrine of incompatibility.”

Michael J. Julka of Madison-based Boardman & Clark, LLP, represents the special education Co-op.

Providing an analysis narrowly within the scope of Waterford’s special education programming, Julka recommended Jensen abstain from voting on matters pertaining to the Co-op.

“Although abstention deprives the respective constituencies of the subject board member’s influence and vote with respect to these matters, it is a common and accepted way of addressing conflicts of interest and one that promotes confidence of the public in the actions of public boards,” Julka wrote.

Jensen briefly spoke to the issue at last week’s board meeting. He said the only topic he readily sees as a conflict of interest is issues pertaining to the cooperative.

Brandstetter stated a desire to be proactive about the issue during last week’s discussion.

“If there is anything, we will address it as soon as we can and be transparent about it,” Brandstetter said.