Grayeyes and Maryboy may have broke open meeting law, says audit, which leaves out context.
| Updated: 10:11 p.m.
Two former San Juan County commissioners were faulted in a new Utah legislative audit that concluded the two tribal members’ reliance on an outside lawyer for advice may have run afoul of the state’s transparency rules and eroded the public’s trust in local government.
Not named in the audit are Willie Grayeyes and Kenneth Maryboy, Navajo tribal members who were elected to the county commission in 2018, but failed to win reelection in 2022. Before they were elected, both were outspoken champions for the designation of Bears Ears National Monument, a divisive issue for San Juan residents.
The previous commission fought the monument’s 2016 designation and later met privately with Trump administration officials to lobby for its rescission without any repercussions.
Shortly before last November’s election, a trove of emails surfaced detailing communications Grayeyes and Maryboy had with an outside lawyer, Steve Boos, who was providing them pro bono advice and had previously represented the Navajo Nation on various matters.
Boos’ arrangement with the new commissioners was hardly conventional, but necessary given the lack of trust between them and San Juan County government thanks to its history of discrimination against Native Americans, Boos told the Tribune in October.
As a candidate in 2018, Grayeyes had been the target of an inappropriate effort by the county clerk to eject him from the ballot, according to court records. Based in southwest Colorado, Boos was the lawyer who went to court to get Grayeyes’ name on the ballot.
The legislative audit released Wednesday, however, is silent on all of this context and provides little indication that the auditors spoke to Grayeyes, Maryboy or Boos, none of whom are named in the audit. It doesn’t even mention the commissioners’ tribal affiliation.
“The commissioners’ unconventional actions put them in a potentially compromising position,” the audit stated. “Based on our combined experience of auditing a wide variety of public entities, the actions by the two former San Juan County Commissioners are unique in their disregard for transparency to the residents of the county. While we could not document any definitive violations of law, we believe the issues we identified warrant additional measures by the county to prevent similar actions in the future, to restore public trust and to ensure transparency.”
Like most Utah counties, San Juan is governed by a three-member commission, so a commission quorum is formed any time two members get together, raising the need for a noticed meeting if county business is discussed.
The audit documented instances where the two commissioners met ahead of regularly scheduled Tuesday commission meetings to discuss issues that would come up and how they would vote on them. Auditors could not conclude the commissioners broke Utah’s open meetings laws, but they highlighted several red flags.
“We are concerned that by using private counsel instead of the county attorney’s services, county commissioners reduced the transparency of commission activities and increased the potential for undue influence in commission business,” auditors wrote.
The audit said Boos’s services, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, “may have been paid” by an unnamed “special interest group,” giving the appearance that the commission was subject to undue influence.
That unnamed group is the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, which never agreed to pay for any of Boos’s work for the commissioner, according to its executive director.
Subscribe To Open Lands Newsletter
Get the latest news by subscribing to our Open Lands newsletter. Enter your email below to receive more stories like these right to your inbox.
In 2021, one of the commissioners proposed a resolution for the county to hire Boos to represent the county over the objections of then-County Attorney Kendall Laws, according to the audit. The resolution ultimately failed.
“The commissioner’s attempt to hire his private counsel for county work may have been influenced by his having received pro bono legal work over an extended period,” the audit said. “Also, proper disclosures of this relationship would have provided greater transparency.”
In an unsigned response to the audit, the new San Juan County Commission blasted Maryboy and Grayeyes, again without naming them, for conducting county business in secret. Its statement goes beyond the audit’s conclusions to condemn their conduct.
“We believe, although appearing unconventional, these were not unconventional acts but were deliberate. Deliberate with the intent to hide from the public what they were doing, hiding actions and favors for special interest groups, and hiding common deliberations which should always take place in front of an open public setting when considering ordinances, resolutions, and language therein,” the formal response states.
The commissioners’ conduct cost the county “thousands of dollars,” undermined morale and led to the departure of experienced staff, according to the statement.
“Citizens should not have to bear the financial burden of elected leaders who choose not to follow State Statute and will not follow the law after being trained and advised,” the response said. “Citizens should not have to wait 4 years for elections to correct the violations and misdeeds of an elected official.”