Patricia Hicks, Irvin E. Griffin, and Dr. Jeff Siler, the three members that make up the Milledgeville Ethics Committee, listen to City Attorney Jimmy Jordan during a Monday afternoon meeting at city hall. 

MILLEDGEVILLE, Ga. — An ethics complaint filed against several members of The Development Authority of Milledgeville and Baldwin County by Gregory Barnes, a local businessman and civic leader, didn’t move forward as planned Monday.

The reason: Patricia Hicks, who serves as chairwoman of the Milledgeville City Ethics Committee recused herself from participating because of a conflict of interest.

“So, the first order of business today would be for the ethics board to decide how you would like to proceed,” Jordan said. “Obviously the ethics ordinance was a solution to this issue. And that’s unfortunate. It’s probably due in fact that this board, and I’ve talked with the city manager, that this board probably needs to be expanded, so that one conflict or someone being absent does not create this kind of situation.”

Jordan told ethics committee members that he believes they are the ones who have to decide as a quorum whether or not to move forward with hearing the ethics complaint as a board of two members.

The city attorney told Hicks she can still attend the meetings, but noted it would not be proper for her to actually participate in any decision or deliberations relative to the ethics matter.

During such discussion, several development authority board members sat and listened. They are all named in the ethics complaint. The local development authority is a joint economic development entity for both the city and county. City Council and the Baldwin County Board of Commissioners appoint its board members. It is funded through both city and county financial support.

Barnes’ ethics complaint, which cites issues dating all the way back to 2014, accuses members of the local development authority and its executive director of racially-motivated economic discrimination.

The city’s three-member ethics board reviews ethics complaints and makes rulings on how to proceed in each ethics matter. With one ethics board member stepping aside due to conflict of interest, Jordan said the only other alternatives would first be to have city council appoint a third ethics member specifically for the existing proceeding, and possibly follow a recent amendment to the ethics ordinance that allows for the appointment of an outside attorney to conduct the proceedings.

“If I was going to recommend a course of action to you, it would be for the board to continue forward with three members, but constituted a quorum as two members,” Jordan said. “If you don’t feel comfortable in doing that then we can return to City Council and ask them to appoint a substitute.

Matters going forward as far as this complaint is concerned, then we would have to have both members present in order to be able to conduct business.”

Hicks said she would prefer to have a third person appointed before going forward.

“I, myself, feel comfortable, but I don’t want to put the results, if necessary, in jeopardy,” Hicks said.

Jordan told Hicks that he “very much respected” her opinion.

“As an ethics board, I think that is the proper course,” Jordan said. “And it’s unfortunate, because you have been a good chairman for us in prior matters, but we’ll need to hear from the other two board members.”

Ethics board member Dr. Jeff Siler said he believes that a committee of two just seemed like it wasn’t enough to be defined as a committee. Siler, along with Irvin Griffin and Hicks, comprise the three-member ethics board.

“I would say we need a committee of three, since that’s the way it was set up,” Siler said.

Griffin agreed.

“I feel like we need the three,” Griffin said. “I can understand her (Hicks) situation, as far as I would put myself in the same boat that she’s in.”

Jordan said he would report the request back to City Council and to City Manager Barry Jarrett.

The city attorney said he was hopeful a new person could be appointed soon so the city ethics committee can get on with the task before them, and because the committee is up against a 60-day deadline to respond to the complaint.