An Exemplary Ethics Officer Report on a Specific Ethics Matter

An Ethics Matters newsletter from the Atlanta ethics officer is always a valuable occasion for those interested in local government ethics. The fall newsletter is no exception (to subscribe, e-mail [email protected]). This is the first of two blog posts about matters raised in the fall newsletter.

One newsletter article concerns a matter I wrote about in June. The matter involves a farewell dinner paid for by companies doing business with the department, with funds passed through the local chamber of commerce, which meant that no report was legally due on gifts made for the occasion.

After the local newspaper wrote about this matter, the mayor asked the ethics officer to report on it. The report, dated August 24, determines that donations from prohibited sources may be used for a retirement party, as long as they are offered to and accepted by the city, and are properly reported. Although the checks were payable to the chamber of commerce, the ethics officer found them to be "in the nature of gifts to the department," and found that "while the use of a private group to handle the funds may have been well intentioned, it resulted in less transparency and accountability" by circumventing disclosure rules.

The report moves on to the issue of employees targeting prohibited sources for donations. The Board of Ethics had already responded to this issue by providing guidelines for solicitations made by employees on behalf of the city:

• The official or employee must solicit in an official capacity
• The solicitation must be made for a city purpose, project, or program
• The fund-raising campaign should make a broad public appeal for support
• The solicitation should not target prohibited sources
• The gift must be given to the City of Atlanta or one of its agencies
• The gift must be publicly disclosed on an online gift report form
• The gift cannot be calculated to influence any vote, decision, or official action

These are clear, excellent guidelines, and the ethics officer determined that they were not followed in this matter.

What I love most about how Atlanta's ethics officer handles matters such as this is that she doesn't just stop when the particular matter has been dealt with. She goes on to consider problems that still exist. In this case, under the guidelines, soliciting prohibited sources is allowed as part of a broad public appeal. She writes:

This review has raised serious questions about whether the current advisory opinions that allow solicitations of prohibited sources as part of a broad public appeal operate in the best interest of the City and in keeping with the purpose of the Ethics Code. Accordingly, we plan to seek a formal advisory opinion from the Board of Ethics on the circumstances under which city employees can solicit donations from companies doing business with or seeking official action from their city departments.

Also worth noting is the report's conclusion, which takes a very practical, problem-solving approach to the matter:

However well intentioned, the planning committee’s decision to hold a hybrid event – part private and part public – created appearance problems. By asking for financial support from companies that do business at the airport, city employees placed themselves and the donors in an untenable position; what was intended to be a celebration honoring a public servant for his 12 years of service instead became a subject of controversy in which motives were questioned. In the future, the better practice would be to host a more modest affair funded entirely by the City and persons in attendance. If the business community wishes to honor a retiring official or employee, it may establish a private planning committee to organize and raise funds for the event.

Local government ethics programs across the country should look at this report, and its underlying advisory opinion, as an example to copy in approaching ethics matters. They should also recognize from this report how important it is to have an ethics officer. An ethics commission without professional staff that reports to it could not produce such important analyses of matters that come before it, and government officials would not be able to seek reviews of such matters in a timely, professional manner. City attorney involvement, even when it does not politicize a matter, is not enough. The same report by a city attorney would be less likely to look beyond the current law, nor provide such practical suggestions for the future.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---