Updates: August 4 and 9, 2010 (see below)
I was just saying to someone the other day that the worst offenses in local government ethics do not involve money. The worst offenses in local government ethics involve intimidation, which causes people to lose their peace of mind, their reputations, and the feeling that they may participate in their local government, things no amount of money can buy. And yet it is the rare ethics complaint or arrest that primarily involves intimidation. Well, this just happened yesterday, in Palm Beach County.

When it comes to government ethics, too often lawyers are nowhere to be seen, unless they are the ones saying that unethical conduct is legal. Far too often, lawyers do not use their knowledge, their strong, independent personalities, and their professional obligations to stand up to, or at least question, those acting unethically.

A horrible example of this, a cautionary tale that every law student should read in the first year, occurred when all the lawyers in the system (and other professionals, as well) did nothing to stop thousands of juveniles from being tried without counsel and wrongfully sent to detention centers in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania (see my blog post on this situation).

The Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Conduct's final report on the criminal and unethical conduct of the Luzerne County juvenile court was published a month ago, and it is painful, but important reading.

What responsibility does a supervisor have for the unethical conduct of a subordinate? This issue arises in a matter in Winn Parish, Louisiana where, according to an article on myarklamiss.com, based on a channel 10 newscast (accessible on the same page as the article), a former chief deputy sheriff is being investigated by the state ethics board for apparently having used deputies to collect rent for properties he owned (the official charges can be found here).

In my previous blog post, the issue arose of voiding a planning and zoning commission's approval of a permit because one of the commission members had a conflict of interest. Connecticut law automatically invalidates the commission action, without any individual or body having to act. But this is unusual. In fact, most jurisdictions do not expressly provide for the avoidance of permits, contracts, or other transactions.

It's been almost two years since the New York Times broke the story on the abuses of New York City council earmarks slush fund, which totaled about $50 million a year. This week, the council member featured in the Times article was expelled from the state senate for a violent act committed against his female companion, according to an article in yesterday's Times. And according to a Times article today, another council member was indicted by a federal grand jury for much the same sort of conduct. Not the violence, but the misuse of council earmarks to help himself and his family, which included charges of money laundering, extortion, and fraud.

But unlike the violent council member, this one was enabled by hundreds of elected and appointed city officials.

Political activity by local government employees can be a sign of misuse of office. And when election problems arise, they generally involve local government employees, as has happened in Essex County (NJ; home of Newark), according to an article in Friday's Star-Ledger.

The principal problem with political activity involves patronage, the system whereby officials make it a requirement of being hired for a job that the employee work for the election of certain candidates. The classic case is Chicago, where even a federal order to institute serious obstacles to the patronage system were, for years, undermined by fraudulent conduct.