EDITORIAL:Conflict or not, damage is done

As we said before on this topic of the Newport Center Park, the council spoke and we’re willing to admit that it’s time to move on.

Apparently, though, the council wasn’t done speaking, so they have our attention once again.

Last week, the Newport Beach City Council decided to reconsider its earlier vote to go forward with plans to create a passive park on a sliver of sage-scrub-covered land just north of the Newport Beach Central Library.

The undeveloped patch of greenery is bordered by MacArthur Boulevard, San Miguel Drive, Avocado Avenue and East Coast Highway.

And while plans have been made for the creation of the park, some have argued lately that the parcel would be a great spot for the new city hall that the city is hoping to build.

Proponents of the passive park don’t want any such thing, and they have lobbied City Hall to keep its promise and build the park.

Proponents of a new city hall have suggested that the real opposition from the park comes from the neighbors up the hill who don’t want anything built there that would hinder their ocean views.

Hence the reason the city cited for reconsidering its earlier vote.

One of the residents of that neighborhood up the hill is Debra Allen, a civic activist and city parks and recreation commissioner.

That’s the rub.

Allen, according to city officials, lives 375 feet away from the property in question. As such, her involvement in the park decision while sitting on the parks commission is a potential conflict of interest under state political practice rules, which require anyone living less than 500 feet away from things they have a stake in to abstain from making policy decisions.

Allen disagrees and in fact believes the city measurements to be wrong.

Even so, the damage is done. Those who have argued that the park was just a self-serving device cooked up by the aforementioned neighbors now have a bona fide poster child in Allen.

Allen, an attorney, should have known better. While we don’t quarrel with or question her intentions, she must know that perceptions can be everything.

Instead of deeply involving herself in something she had a personal stake in, Allen the commissioner should have recused herself from the discussion at the parks commission level.

Not doing so has caused the whole process to come under scrutiny.

Whether a park is still in the picture remains to be seen. But whatever the outcome of that debate, this incident should serve as a reminder to all who serve in government to eschew all potential conflicts, real or imagined.