According to an article in the Metro West Daily News on Friday, the Ashland (MA) board of selectmen sent two reported allegations of possible acts of ethical misconduct to the state ethics commission. The request sought not enforcement, but clarification. I hope by "clarification" the board meant that it is seeking advice about continuing the behavior. Its other option was to file a complaint with respect to past behavior. But it did not seem to want to "accuse" its fellow selectman of anything.

Transparency, although not generally part of a local ethics code, is central to a local government's ethics environment. A lack of transparency is both a tell-tale sign that things are wrong, and an impediment to discussing ethics issues and enforcing ethics violations. Unfortunately, ethics codes do have confidential information provisions, making it appear to those who do not understand government ethics that it is more important to hide confidential information than to let the sunshine in.

The transparency problem in Clackamas County, Oregon, the home of Mt. Hood and Oregon City, is taking the form of actions against an official for allegedly sharing confidential information, making public records requests, and making allegations of questionable expenditures.

There are several problems with Houston's new ethics provisions, in addition to what I pointed out in my last blog post. Some of them are typical, some of them are unusual. The ethics reform ordinance is attached; see below; the old ethics ordinance can be found by clicking here and scrolling down on the left to Code of Ordinances Chapter 18).

Teachers and teachers' family members seem to be just the sort of people to run for school boards. They have either the expertise and/or the interest in education. But with them come conflicts of interest, and these can cast doubt on what they're doing there in the first place.

Teachers in the particular school district generally can't run for school board seats, but many teachers don't live in the districts where they teach. This prohibition often applies to their spouses as well, but not to their parents, siblings, and children.

But when it comes to teacher contracts, even the parents, siblings, and children have a conflict between the interests of the public and the interests of their immediate family members in getting a raise and holding on to their benefits.

A Resignation from an Ethics Board for a Possible Future Conflict
A member of the Philadelphia Board of Ethics resigned recently, according to an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer. The reason for his resignation was a possible conflict of interest due to his representation of the Philadelphia Housing Authority (PHA) in producing documents as part of a federal investigation. The possible conflict seems fairly remote: a PHA tenant leader and executive director of a PHA-supported nonprofit operates a PAC that has purportedly failed to report more than $100,000 since 2006. The ethics board has jurisdiction over campaign finance matters.

In Milwaukee County, according to an article in Sunday's Journal-Sentinel, a county supervisor is seeking to add to the county ethics code a confidential information provision that would not limit the prohibition to what is common in ethics codes: information divulged for someone's benefit.

As I've written before (1 2), this is not a government ethics issue, because there is no conflict between the public interest and the official or employee's personal interest. In fact, there are many situations where divulging confidential information is in the public interest, for example, in the course of blowing the whistle on improper conduct by other officials or employees.