Print Version
Email this story
Comment
Switzer cleared of ethics rap
Panel dismisses ONRC's conflict of interest charges
By JENNIFER BATES
A state ethics panel has dismissed two complaints against Klamath County Commissioner Al Switzer that alleged he had a conflict of interest when he voted to use county funds to support legal efforts of local irrigators.
The Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission voted Tuesday to set aside the complaints filed last November by the Oregon Natural Resources Council.
Jay Ward and Wendell Wood, ONRC members who filed the complaints, claimed Switzer took action as a Klamath County commissioner that could have benefited him personally without declaring a conflict of interest.
Switzer joined the other two county commissioners in May 2002 to allocate $50,000 in county funds to support irrigators' efforts to appeal a federal court ruling that strengthened the Klamath Tribes' claim over water rights in the Basin.
Switzer owns about 40 acres of irrigated land in the Klamath Irrigation District.
Irrigators have appealed a decision by U.S. District Judge Owen Panner in February 2002 that affirmed tribal claims to water which were originally established by a 1984 court decision known as the Adair case. The earlier ruling established the right of Klamath tribal members to hunt, fish and gather on former reservation lands.
The second allegation against Switzer claimed he also failed to state a conflict of interest when he voted last July to have a consultant explore the possibility of transferring ownership of the Klamath Reclamation Project to a local entity.
Wood said Thursday he disagreed with the findings of the ethics panel, but respected its decision.
"Let me make it clear we are sympathetic to the tribes' situation," Wood said. "We believe their scope of water rights have been seriously limited."
He also said he and Ward acted independently of the tribes. He declined to comment on whether they might take any additional action on the issue.
Switzer said Thursday the complaint was frivolous.
"I felt it was political," he said.
He said taxpayers had asked him to take steps to help irrigators.
"You have to remember, the county people were in the heat of the water wars," Switzer said. "They wanted us to look at solutions."
Switzer also said his personal stake in the water issue is relatively small.
"I only own 40 acres. You cannot make a living off this land. Our family just enjoys living there," he said.
Switzer's costs to defend himself against the complaint totaled $3,000. He paid 75 percent, while the county paid 25 percent.
"If I would have lost, I would have had to pay for all of the courts expenses," said Switzer.
Reporter Jennifer Bates covers local and state government. She can be reached at 885-4415 or (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at jbates@heraldandnews.com.
By JENNIFER BATES
A state ethics panel has dismissed two complaints against Klamath County Commissioner Al Switzer that alleged he had a conflict of interest when he voted to use county funds to support legal efforts of local irrigators.
The Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission voted Tuesday to set aside the complaints filed last November by the Oregon Natural Resources Council.
Jay Ward and Wendell Wood, ONRC members who filed the complaints, claimed Switzer took action as a Klamath County commissioner that could have benefited him personally without declaring a conflict of interest.
Switzer joined the other two county commissioners in May 2002 to allocate $50,000 in county funds to support irrigators' efforts to appeal a federal court ruling that strengthened the Klamath Tribes' claim over water rights in the Basin.
Switzer owns about 40 acres of irrigated land in the Klamath Irrigation District.
Irrigators have appealed a decision by U.S. District Judge Owen Panner in February 2002 that affirmed tribal claims to water which were originally established by a 1984 court decision known as the Adair case. The earlier ruling established the right of Klamath tribal members to hunt, fish and gather on former reservation lands.
The second allegation against Switzer claimed he also failed to state a conflict of interest when he voted last July to have a consultant explore the possibility of transferring ownership of the Klamath Reclamation Project to a local entity.
Wood said Thursday he disagreed with the findings of the ethics panel, but respected its decision.
"Let me make it clear we are sympathetic to the tribes' situation," Wood said. "We believe their scope of water rights have been seriously limited."
He also said he and Ward acted independently of the tribes. He declined to comment on whether they might take any additional action on the issue.
Switzer said Thursday the complaint was frivolous.
"I felt it was political," he said.
He said taxpayers had asked him to take steps to help irrigators.
"You have to remember, the county people were in the heat of the water wars," Switzer said. "They wanted us to look at solutions."
Switzer also said his personal stake in the water issue is relatively small.
"I only own 40 acres. You cannot make a living off this land. Our family just enjoys living there," he said.
Switzer's costs to defend himself against the complaint totaled $3,000. He paid 75 percent, while the county paid 25 percent.
"If I would have lost, I would have had to pay for all of the courts expenses," said Switzer.
Reporter Jennifer Bates covers local and state government. She can be reached at 885-4415 or (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at jbates@heraldandnews.com.
 |
 |
|
| House burns | Hen-pecked out of business |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of HeraldAndNews.com. Comment Disclaimer: The editors of heraldandnews.com reserve the right to refuse publication of any comment posted for consideration. We may refuse for any reason, including use of profanity, disparaging comments, libelous comments, etc. Any reader who notices a comment they believe is particularly offensive, should notify us at webmaster@heraldandnews.com.
RSS