Working for a company that does business with the city is not automatically a conflict of interest for people who give advice to elected leaders, the Concord’s Board of Ethics determined Monday. As long as they walk a fine line to avoid influencing city projects that benefit them, residents with that level of insight should be encouraged to provide their expertise, some members said.

In a unanimous vote, the board found that Greg Bakos, the chair of the city’s Transportation Policy Advisory Committee, did not violate the ethics code when he discussed a city project that he is overseeing professionally.

The board determined there was no wrongdoing by Bakos because they found no evidence his employer could benefit from him having brought up the project at a meeting. Reaching that conclusion, the board worried that too stringent a standard for finding a conflict of interest would prevent important voices from contributing to committees.

“He’s likely knowledgeable about many of the projects that come before the city because of his background: That’s why he was there,” committee member Jim Rosenberg said of Bakos. “We want to encourage people in this role to step forward with force, vigor, energy, intellect and experienced background to share with all of us what they know.”

Last year, the City Council appropriated $200,000 for a study looking into the idea of adding an elevated park above the interstate — due for expansion in the next decade or so — as a deck or bridge. Bakos is the project manager for that study as an engineer for the firm VHB, one of three on-call consultants the city has for capital projects. He is also the chair of the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee, among the dozens of committees that give recommendations and insights to City Council. In a meeting earlier this year, as his committee was running through a list of projects relevant to its work, Bakos added the deck park to the list and provided a brief update on its progress.

The ethics code states that “no officer or elected official shall introduce, ask questions, speak on or vote on any motion, ordinance, resolution or issue in which he/she has a conflict of interest,” and it says a conflict of interest happens “when an officer or elected official takes an action or makes a decision that would affect his or her financial interest.”

Bakos reiterated in the hearing that he did not feel a conflict of interest was present because, by giving the update, he didn’t take any action that affected VHB’s role in the project. He felt, instead, that he had been helpful, offering information about a relevant project that no one else had.

The ethics board determined that the situation did raise the potential for a conflict of interest, but that Bakos had done nothing wrong.

Advisory committees don’t have a say over which contractors are selected by city staff, according to Deputy City Manager Matt Walsh. And while the committee could provide advice to the City Council in the future about whether to move forward with the potential park, Bakos said in the hearing he would recuse himself from such a proposal. Even if that happened and the city moved ahead with this park — something Walsh framed as highly unlikely — construction would probably be led by the state, not VHB.

At the same time, to avoid even potential conflicts in the future, the city solicitor said that her office had determined that, going forward, it would be best if staff, and not Bakos, gave updates on the study.

Allan Herschlag, a former city councilor who filed the complaint, said after the meeting that he understood why the board reached its findings: He recognized the importance of balancing local expertise on committees with preserving the independence of city government. He said he didn’t think Bakos, or any other committee member with similar ties to the city, had anything other than good intentions. But the ruling also concerned him.

“It’s opening the door for increasing the public’s perception that these bodies may not be looking out for their best interest — even if that’s not the case,” Herschlag said.

Bakos said during the hearing that in situations where any major vote or recommendation about the park was on the table, he’d step aside — but he also expressed some skepticism about not being able to participate in less consequential discussions.

“Kind of the difficult part is, I’m here’s a resource, and I feel like I should be free to add information,” he said. “But now I know that I need to be more careful.”

In a preliminary meeting, ethics board members raised questions about whether having someone whose employer had contracts with the city serve on any committee put that person in a tough position, making potential conflicts likely.

But, in addition to closing the complaint against Bakos, some board members underlined that they felt local professionals not only should be encouraged to serve but were in fact assets to city committees.

Rosenberg said he was concerned “that we might chill people’s generous application of their time, their intellect, their interests in participating and sharing what information they have in moments like these.”

In an interview, Bakos agreed with that caution.

“Had this turned out differently,” he said, “There’s three other consultants” — with city contracts — “on that committee. And they may be like, ‘Well, should we really be here?’ I would reconsider my role as well.”

Questions about whether an official’s professional connections make it hard for them to serve impartially have been raised before. The last time the ethics board fielded complaints more than a decade ago, they dismissed two against Jim Bouley, the city’s former longtime mayor. Bouley, a partner at the firm Dennehy and Bouley, lobbied at the State House on behalf of businesses that had contracts with the city. He now serves as a member of the city’s newly reformed Economic Development Advisory Committee.

Catherine McLaughlin can be reached at cm claughlin@cmonitor.com