This news article is confusing, because there seems to be some confusion about Litz’s conflict of interest. Or at least he is confused. The conflict of interest (that is being questioned) has to do with canons 3 and 6 of the code of ethics not article 7. Also, I don’t think Litz or any councilor for that matter has a conflict of interest when it comes to the sales tax increase, the question is whether they can vote on developer platting fees.
I will have more on this later today, an interesting twist to Developer Fee-Gate.
His explanation for why there’s no conflict is weak sauce. It sounds to me like he might be a little scared.
I’ll have more later today. I think he is confused. I think he has all the right in the world to vote on a sales taz increase, just not developer fees. Not sure where KELO got their info? They never called me.