Rochester council member's work with park group spurs ethics complaint

May 9—ROCHESTER — The city's Ethical Practices Board will determine whether a Rochester City Council member's involvement with a community group creates a conflict with city policy.

"(Council member) Palmer has left the door open to violations of ethics and conflicts of interest on multiple points due to his founding role and current leadership with Friends of Silver Lake since 2018," Rochester resident Benjamin Zastrow wrote in his complaint.

Zastrow, who is a member of the city's Heritage Preservation Commission, said Palmer has supported the Friends' group's efforts, which have included opposing potential changes to the Silver Lake Dam, but the council member's ethics disclosure form fails to include his role with the group.

Palmer acknowledged membership in the informal community group on the required city form form, as well as his council biography, but he said his role is being exaggerated in Zastrow's complaint, which the council member sent to the Post Bulletin.

"We have no leadership, and I haven't done anything with the dam with Silver Lake Friends," he said, noting he helped create the group before he was elected in 2018.

While Palmer cast the sole vote against approval of the dam modification concept in 2020 and recently voiced support for the Friends' efforts during an April 22, 2024, council meeting, he said he was not directly involved in the recent rally or lobbying efforts aimed at preserving the existing Silver Lake Dam.

The city's ethics disclosure forms ask city officials and volunteer board members to list leadership or decision-making roles with identified community groups. Palmer listed membership in the Silver Lake group without a specific role, while Zastrow listed his role as Lowertown Neighborhood Association president on his own form.

In the material sent with his complaint, Zastrow points to a 2022 Facebook post that identifies Palmer as one of five members of the Friends' leadership team. He also questions whether other members exist.

The Friends group was formed with an initial goal to help improve Silver Lake Park and push for updates in the city park. Volunteer work has included cleaning the path around the lake, cutting back shoreline vegetation and planting flower beds.

Zastrow pointed to the work of the group as being troublesome because it is unclear how work is authorized. He added the lack of a formal structure or official nonprofit creates confusion and uncertainty about Palmer's role.

"I am concerned that someone can lead an unregistered group engaged in lobbying that isn't reporting their finances over three candidacy cycles while also serving on our council," he wrote.

Palmer said he doesn't consider his community activity as a conflict, since it doesn't offer him personal benefit. While he serves the ward that includes the park, he is running for the City Council president seat and said he believes the complaint is politically motivated.

The Ethical Practices Board received the April 8 complaint, along with another undisclosed complaint, during its April 30 meeting but opted to delay review to allow time for written responses to both complaints.

Board Chairman Peter Amadio, who, along with member Lin Gentling, served his final day on the board during the April meeting, said the delay also provides two new board members to start the review process in May.

"If we started today, we'd be involved with starting it but not with finishing it," said Amadio, who was the board chairman. "So, this way we are just separated from it."

Rochester City Attorney Michael Spindler-Krage said the board's action during May 29 will involve a review of the complaints and written responses based on the city's ethic's code.

"Those are the initial materials that we use in your initial discussion, and we really call that your preliminary investigation," he said, noting that identities of the complaint subjects are generally kept confidential at that point.

After that discussion, the seven-member board could decide to dismiss the complaint or look into it further, potentially calling for an outside review or public hearing.