BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (WIAT) — Only on CBS42, we are hearing more about claims of potential ethical wrongdoing by a former Birmingham area representative. Another person is coming forward Wednesday morning saying they’ve filed an ethics complaint against former Birmingham area Representative Oliver Robinson. He served in the state house for nearly two decades and resigned this November.
“Oliver is the one who needs to explain why people don’t buy his excuse of leaving early,” said James King. “Most people don’t buy that and they know he left under a cloud of suspicion after pushing possible illegal legislation through in order to possibly profit himself.”
King filed an ethics complaint that centers around one of the last pieces of legislation Robinson sponsored last year and whether or not it would have benefited any outside business dealings with the city of Birmingham.
The legislation was over changes to the Mayor-Council Act that would give Birmingham’s mayor way more authority, like having exclusive control over board appointments. This is where the ethics complaint comes in. Robinon had at least one contract with the Birmingham Airport Authority. The complainant says this may have crossed the line with trying to the give the mayor more authority and potential conflicts with this impacting future business.
“All we want is clarity in government and we can’t have good government with corruption,” King said. “So, our goal is and was to make it clear that there is no ethical violations in the procedure in order to give the mayor more power. That there was a quid pro quo. That there was no improper actions that were taken in lieu or money exchanged and that’s the only reason we filed this particular charge.”
CBS42 gave Robinson multiple attempts to share his side of the story on camera, but he’s declined. He says the claims in the ethics complaint are not factual and the Mayor-Council Act wouldn’t impact anything to do with his connection to the airport authority.
The ethics commission responded to CBS42’s request for comment. They claim they did not receive the complaint even though the complainant showed us the notarized copy submitted. The complainant says he will resubmit the complaint via mail.