In a packed meeting Monday night, the Fort Thomas city council was set to vote on the budget for the next fiscal year and discuss the ongoing zoning ordinance project. Yet, a good portion of the discussion focused on a call last month by council member Adam Blau for Mayor Eric Haas to step down over his involvement in a part of the One Highland project.
Although the rest of the council disagreed with or were uncertain that an ethics violation had occurred, the discussion led to a decision to revisit the entire process of the One Highland development agreement in light of this issue and ongoing revisions to the city’s ethics ordinance.
In May, Blau presented his concerns that the mayor used his authority to influence the outcome of the development project involving the former BB&T Bank Building, a part of the overall One Highland development project.
Haas denied the accusation and said he had checked with the city attorney and others to ensure what he was doing was not an issue.
In an effort to help secure a restaurant on the property, the mayor agreed to enter into a personal agreement (called a “put” agreement) with the developer to purchase the bank property if a proposed development agreement with the city was not approved. The agreement was for the city to purchase the building if a suitable buyer could not be found by the deadline. The cost of the building was $825,000.
Before the city was to vote, the developer released Haas from the put agreement. A month later, council voted on the matter and, instead of purchasing the property, the city arranged for an interest-free forgivable loan to the restaurant.
Council members said they needed time to review and discuss the matter. If appropriate, they could send the matter to the ethics board for review.
Two former council members who were on council during the One Highland development came to Monday night’s meeting to comment on Blau’s accusations and to give their views on the events.
Roger Peterman addressed council to say he disagreed with some of the events described in the letter Blau sent to council members.
“I can tell you definitively. If you want a sworn statement, I’ll give you one. We never discussed, as far as Mayor Haas wanting to get anything out of any transaction. In fact, he had been released from that before we voted,” said Peterman.
Another former council member, Ken Bowman, agreed that he saw no wrongdoing on the part of the mayor. It was not unusual for Fort Thomas residents, including city officials, to use their own resources “for the betterment of the community,” he said.
Blau said he was not questioning the motives of the mayor but that his actions created an appearance of impropriety. His concern was with the mayor continuing to serve as a liaison between the city and the developer after he had a financial agreement with them. Part of the problem, he said, was a lack of clarity and transparency in how things were handled.
“I just don’t think that it is the only problem with the One Highland development agreement. I think, from soup to nuts, it needs to be reviewed in its entirety to make sure we don’t do this again,” Blau said.
Council members Ben Pendery, Lauren McIntosh and Eric Strange, who were not council during the One Highland discussions, said they were in favor of reviewing council’s actions regarding the One Highland project to avoid issues in the future.
“I agree with Adam and Ben that Mayor Haas did not do anything maliciously wrong,” said council member Andy Ellison. “I would say, listening to the room, that there’s a bunch of people that say, ‘hey, this needs to be looked at.’…It’s really important right now because we’re in the middle of finalizing a new zoning code. And the zoning code allows development. So what kind of development can happen from the city that citizens may or may not know about? It might be a good time to review the processes.”
City Administrator Matt Kremer said he is reviewing the city’s ethics ordinance. Before deciding to send the matter to the ethics board or having an outside review, council agreed with Kremer to see if changes could be made to the ordinance that would clarify the role and duties of all elected officials involved in development agreements.