You are here
A Miscellany
Friday, January 8th, 2010
Robert Wechsler
Baltimore Mayor Resigns
Baltimore's mayor resigned on Wednesday, fortunately after being convicted of the crime of embezzlement (albeit for $500 in gift cards) rather than the ethics violation (not yet tried) of failing to include gifts on her financial disclosure statement (see Baltimore Sun article).
Then, according to another Sun article, the mayor said that "the earlier conviction was not accurate and that jurors were confused." She did, however, admit to her failure to disclose certain gifts.
Virginia Commerce Secretary Opts for Private Pay
According to a Washington Post editorial yesterday, the new Virginia secretary of commerce and trade doesn't seem to understand public service. He has chosen to remain on several corporate boards, which pay him an aggregate of over $200,000 a year plus stock options, and has also chosen not to accept any pay for his state job ($150,000 a year). He says that he gives his corporate board earnings to charity. But why couldn't he give his state pay to charity?
Yes, he is saving the state money during a financial crisis, and this is good. But he is at the same time preserving conflicts of interest. As the editorial states, "As a member of those boards, he is legally obligated to seek to maximize profits for the companies. How does that square with government service?"
The secretary says he will recuse himself if an actual conflict arises. The editorial states that this is fine for state legislators, who are part-time citzen legislators, but not for a full-time state employee.
I would say that it depends on the position, and that being secretary of commerce is going to mean regulating the industries in which you are acting as a corporate director. This very well could mean multiple ongoing conflicts. Even resigning from the boards will mean that there will be a need for recusal in certain instances.
What's most wrong here is that the secretary focuses on the money. As in so many ethics situations, money is not the central issue. What's central here is the conflict between the two roles, the two sets of obligations, the secretary has.
Forest Hill (TX) Mayor and City Manager Go At It
According to an article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram yesterday, the city manager of Forest Hill (pop. 13,000) was fired by the council the day after filing an ethics complaint (with the council) against the city's weak mayor. The complaint accused the mayor of "pressuring city employees to give the mayor favorable treatment on code violations on properties he is associated with, [and] of trying to bypass state sealed-bid requirements." It also said that the mayor "retaliated against [the city manager] after he submitted findings from a 2006 investigation to the FBI," according to an earlier Star-Telegram article.
The complaint came after the council agenda was amended during the Thanksgiving holiday weekend to include an item about firing the city manager (not exactly playing fair). So the firing was not retaliation for the ethics complaint. In fact, without an ethics program in the city, it wasn't really an ethics complaint, but a request for an independent investigation. It's hard to know if the complaint was itself retaliation or if the city manager had been afraid to make the allegations before he knew he had nothing to lose.
The city seems to have had a series of problems with its top officials. According to the earlier article, in 2004 there was an unsuccessful attempt to recall a council member after the then city manager was fired. The city manager sued the city, saying he was illegally fired. That suit was settled for $350,000, or four times the city manager's salary. That settlement led to the recall by voters of two council members, in 2005.
In 2006, the council voted to remove the weak mayor from office, "claiming he had violated ethics provisions of the city charter. But six weeks later, the council rescinded that vote after [the mayor's] lawyers called it illegal and unconstitutional."
Now a council member is seeking to recall the mayor and another council member, due to the firing of the city manager. The mayor is quoted as saying, "City managers last between three and five years. Forest Hill is no different from other cities."
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Baltimore's mayor resigned on Wednesday, fortunately after being convicted of the crime of embezzlement (albeit for $500 in gift cards) rather than the ethics violation (not yet tried) of failing to include gifts on her financial disclosure statement (see Baltimore Sun article).
Then, according to another Sun article, the mayor said that "the earlier conviction was not accurate and that jurors were confused." She did, however, admit to her failure to disclose certain gifts.
Virginia Commerce Secretary Opts for Private Pay
According to a Washington Post editorial yesterday, the new Virginia secretary of commerce and trade doesn't seem to understand public service. He has chosen to remain on several corporate boards, which pay him an aggregate of over $200,000 a year plus stock options, and has also chosen not to accept any pay for his state job ($150,000 a year). He says that he gives his corporate board earnings to charity. But why couldn't he give his state pay to charity?
Yes, he is saving the state money during a financial crisis, and this is good. But he is at the same time preserving conflicts of interest. As the editorial states, "As a member of those boards, he is legally obligated to seek to maximize profits for the companies. How does that square with government service?"
The secretary says he will recuse himself if an actual conflict arises. The editorial states that this is fine for state legislators, who are part-time citzen legislators, but not for a full-time state employee.
I would say that it depends on the position, and that being secretary of commerce is going to mean regulating the industries in which you are acting as a corporate director. This very well could mean multiple ongoing conflicts. Even resigning from the boards will mean that there will be a need for recusal in certain instances.
What's most wrong here is that the secretary focuses on the money. As in so many ethics situations, money is not the central issue. What's central here is the conflict between the two roles, the two sets of obligations, the secretary has.
Forest Hill (TX) Mayor and City Manager Go At It
According to an article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram yesterday, the city manager of Forest Hill (pop. 13,000) was fired by the council the day after filing an ethics complaint (with the council) against the city's weak mayor. The complaint accused the mayor of "pressuring city employees to give the mayor favorable treatment on code violations on properties he is associated with, [and] of trying to bypass state sealed-bid requirements." It also said that the mayor "retaliated against [the city manager] after he submitted findings from a 2006 investigation to the FBI," according to an earlier Star-Telegram article.
The complaint came after the council agenda was amended during the Thanksgiving holiday weekend to include an item about firing the city manager (not exactly playing fair). So the firing was not retaliation for the ethics complaint. In fact, without an ethics program in the city, it wasn't really an ethics complaint, but a request for an independent investigation. It's hard to know if the complaint was itself retaliation or if the city manager had been afraid to make the allegations before he knew he had nothing to lose.
The city seems to have had a series of problems with its top officials. According to the earlier article, in 2004 there was an unsuccessful attempt to recall a council member after the then city manager was fired. The city manager sued the city, saying he was illegally fired. That suit was settled for $350,000, or four times the city manager's salary. That settlement led to the recall by voters of two council members, in 2005.
In 2006, the council voted to remove the weak mayor from office, "claiming he had violated ethics provisions of the city charter. But six weeks later, the council rescinded that vote after [the mayor's] lawyers called it illegal and unconstitutional."
Now a council member is seeking to recall the mayor and another council member, due to the firing of the city manager. The mayor is quoted as saying, "City managers last between three and five years. Forest Hill is no different from other cities."
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments