State finds "substantial objective basis" Keizer City Councilor Kyle Juran violated ethics rules.
State finds "substantial objective basis" Keizer City Councilor Kyle Juran violated ethics rules.
Juran faces two complaints likely spawning from a city contract awarded to his construction business
Word has it he’s pissed. And some say he’d rather folks not talk about it.
But Keizer City Councilor Kyle Juran is facing a state ethics investigation after a complaint was lodged against him, seemingly related to a 6-figure city contract awarded to his private construction business.
And, so far, things aren’t going his way. Ethics Commissioners found “a substantial objective basis for believing that an offense or violation may have been committed and the person who is the subject of an inquiry may have committed the offense or violation.”
A more thorough investigation will take place over the next 6 months, concluding in August 2024 at the latest.
That’s probably pretty important for folks in Keizer to know, right? If there’s no issue, why would someone supposedly be so defensive at the mere existence of a complaint? Great questions! Thankfully, common sense provides the answers for us!
What we are less sure of is…why?
Why is Kyle Juran under investigation by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission? Let’s look at what we know, and then what we can reasonably infer.
The only public record that mentions Juran’s ethics quandary is the February 9, 2024 Oregon Government Ethics Commission Executive Session Agenda. The entry regarding Juran reads, in part:
Recommended Action: Move to investigate possible violations of ORS244.040(1) and ORS 244.040(4).
The Ethics Commission’s executive session agenda includes no additional detail.
Guess what those two Oregon statutes are about?
ORS244.040(1) is a statutory banger (emphasis added):
Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a public official may not use or attempt to use official position or office to obtain financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment for the public official, a relative or member of the household of the public official, or any business with which the public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official is associated, if the financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment would not otherwise be available but for the public official’s holding of the official position or office.
And ORS 244.040(4) is a fine chaser (emphasis added):
A public official may not attempt to further or further the personal gain of the public official through the use of confidential information gained in the course of or by reason of holding position as a public official or activities of the public official.
And while Juran is being investigated for possibly violating both sub-statutes, there’s no mention of why. The Ethics Commission agenda doesn’t deal in detail. And the statutes cited above cover a wide swath of behavior.
But you’d have to be legendarily dense (famously stupid?) if you couldn’t follow the breadcrumbs from this state ethics investigation back to a June 2023 City Council meeting in Keizer.
Previous reporting from SKP (“Keizer poised to award quarter-million dollar contract to sitting City Councilor.”) detailed the sketchy circumstances under which Juran’s conservative friends on the Keizer City Council handed him a quarter-million dollar contract for repair work on a public building. Juran’s construction business, Remodeling By Classic Homes, Inc., earned the project after being hand-selected by city staff when a bidding process was declared unsuccessful.
When the City Council was asked to approve the contract, Juran abstained, and seemingly the only Keizer City Council member with integrity - Robert Husseman - walked out on the vote, citing the gross and completely obvious conflict of interest. KeizerTimes reported on the June 2024 City Council meeting:
“I can’t in good conscience vote on this. This to me, is a breach of ethics, to ask the council to personally enrich a sitting member of the city council. I do not think this is acceptable behavior and I can’t endorse this.” At that Husseman gathered his belongings and walked out of the meeting.
Thanks to Husseman, we also know that Juran is…not happy he’s being investigated.
You might even say he’s salty. In a recent note to constituents, Husseman described an embarrassed colleague:
“(Juran) publicly expresses little (a default position for him) but privately he is furious. Kyle had previously told me he intended not to run for re-election for position No. 3, and he is up this November; he apparently has changed his mind, angered by the accusation against his integrity, and he is ready to defend his council position this fall.”
What happens next with the ethics investigation into Kyle Juran?
The Oregon Ethics Commission processes complaints against government officials like Juran in phases.
After the complaint against Juran was received, the Commission found in the “Preliminary Review” phase that there was “a substantial objective basis for believing that an offense or violation may have been committed and the person who is the subject of an inquiry may have committed the offense or violation.”
Statutorily, that’s the threshold for establishing “cause” to pursue an investigation.
That finding triggered the “Investigative Phase,” where Juran’s case currently sits. Oregon Ethics Commission members have 180 days from February 9, 2024, (sooo, by sometime in August 2024?) to issue their disposition - “during which time subpoenas for documents and oral testimony may be issued.”