CORRECTION: The original form of this article misstated that Council Member Jennifer Jasper-Lucas had spoken within someone who offered a dissenting opinion in the ethics case mentioned in this article. Jasper-Lucas had, in fact, cited a dissenting legal opinion in the case. The relevant lines have been corrected. –LINK nky editorial, May 10, 2024
During Tuesday’s meeting, Erlanger City Council discussed what options it could pursue regarding a local family’s complaints about the hillside near 3315 Alice St.
Councilwoman Diana Niceley originally brought forth the issue of Duke Energy removing trees from the powerlines, which she deemed a safety matter in the council’s April 16 meeting. Since then, family members Steve and Jeff Niceley have spoken during public comment about the matter and their concern for their safety and that of others.
“What we’re asking for is nothing special, just a four-board fence installed at the top of that hill,” Jeff Nicely said. “The same type of fencing that the city has all around town, miles of it, that serves no purpose other than for appearance in most cases.”
Mayor Jessica Fette gave a detailed timeline dating back to late December of conversations between the city, Duke Energy and the properties involved.
She also added that if safety is the concern and not the beautification of the area, a four-board fence would not be a proper safety measure and would not protect someone in a vehicle or on a bike from driving off the road.
When he spoke with the Kentucky League of Cities, city attorney Jack Gatlin said the city would not be liable for any injuries caused by the trees being removed. He also added that if the council wanted to allocate resources in the next budget cycle, they could, but he didn’t see this as an obligation of the council. When addressing the matter, Gatlin deemed there were three options: do nothing, mutually agree with the Niceley family to hand over the land to them or do a beautification project.
Councilwoman Vicki Kyle said she favored beautifying the hillside and having the four-board horse fencing and vegetation as a decorative deterrent for children riding bikes through the area and others who may be in danger. However, the project will not be addressed until mid-June after the city’s new budget is approved. Another councilperson who favored adding the area to the beautification project list was councilwoman Jennifer Jasper-Lucas. She noted that it would be ideal for the area to be enhanced since the overpass nearby is on the list of beautification projects.
While Kyle and Jasper-Lucas focused on beautifying the area, councilwoman Rebecca Reckers questioned whether the area was a true safety concern.
“The whole argument for weeks and weeks and every article, and every news report is about safety,” she said. “So me as a councilwoman, as part of this governing body, I want assurance as to whether or not we have a safety issue.”
Reckers also mentioned having Duke Energy return to fix the mess they left behind on Alice Street. However, Fette said she did not think the company would be inclined to return for the matter since they requested a police escort during the process.
Councilman Tyson Hermes agreed with Reckers but added that a safety survey could open a “Pandora’s box” for the city if this is deemed a safety issue. He also said the hillside isn’t the safety issue it’s being made out to be and that other inclines and hillsides across the city could be considered more dangerous.
The only council members who didn’t comment on the matters were Don Skidmore, Renee Skidmore, and Tom Cahill, who were absent from Tuesday’s meeting.
After the public comment discussion, Hermes also presented a code of ethics presentation discussing how a council member representing their family instead of the city could be an ethics violation, even if they would “do it for any citizen.” During the presentation, he quoted Diana’s comments from the April 16 meeting stating that the issue involved her brother and father.
Hermes cited the ethics code section 43.019 (A), which read, “No officer, employee, board member of the city or any other city agency shall represent any person or business, other than the city, in connection with any cause, proceeding, application or other matter pending before the city or any city agency.” However, he did include in subsection C of the material that nothing prohibits any members listed above from representing themselves in a matter concerning his or her interests.
Diana refuted Hermes’ indirect claims that she violated the ethics code and said she had been transparent during the Alice Street discussion.
“I am not sure if this is an attack personally, politically, or both,” Diana Nicely said. “If I feel you are retaliating due to me speaking up regarding a safety issue in our city I am insulted because I spoke up [and] you are focusing on trying to target me instead of addressing the issue at hand that exists in our city.”
Jasper-Lucas also commented that she filed an ethics complaint in 2020 against Hermes. Although he wasn’t deemed guilty, Jasper Lucas cited a dissenting opinion in the case from the vice chairman of the regional ethics authority, which to her indicated that Hermes had “clearly violated the city’s ethics ordinance.” She added that it was reprehensible that Hermes used his presentation to attack another council member and that what Diana did was something she would do for any citizen.
Hermes finished the conversation by saying that while it doesn’t take an ethics violation to become the Northern KY Regional Ethics Authority’s chair, it makes you want to reevaluate the system. He also said that he is interested to see how the discussion of the matter will go since Diana is the head of the City Beautification Task Force where the hillside debate is heading.
The City Beautification Task Force meeting will be held on May 21 and is open to the public.