Chicago Task Force Second Report I — The Good Recommendations

The second report of the Chicago Ethics Reform Task Force came out this week (see my posts on the first report and on the ordinances passed in response to it). The report contains several excellent recommendations and some original solutions to problems. But it also makes recommendations that stop short of optimal solutions, especially in the areas of independence, jurisdiction, transparency, systemic problems, and the role of the corporation counsel.

First for the good stuff. Here are the best recommendations in the second report:

1. Add clear settlement and waiver provisions. As the ethics task force recognizes, settlements should not only be permitted, but encouraged. Only the rare ethics complaint should require a hearing process.

2. Strip away confidentiality between the inspectors general (IGs) and the ethics board. After all, they're part of the same ethics program, with the same goals and the same relationship to officials and employees.

3. Let ethics board staff make decisions on complaints re disclosure forms and officials' failure to attend training classes.

4. Hold an annual public hearing on the ethics program. The task force emphasizes accountability, but I think it's more about education. The fact is that it's very hard to hold an independent ethics program accountable. As the task force recognizes, "the public cannot see all the good work the Board has done in preventing unethical behavior." Since an ethics program's principal purpose is prevention, and the lack of ethics complaints is not a good indicator that there is no ethical misconduct, it is very hard to judge an ethics program.

5. Place political activity restrictions on the executive IG. The one that I especially like is a pledge not to run for office for two years after employment. There is nothing worse than someone involved in an ethics program leaving to run for office or run a campaign. This sends the message that an ethics program is a way to get in the good graces of parties and politicians, who are necessary to run a successful campaign. This is not something that will gain the public's trust.

6. Change the reimbursement of legal expenses provision both to cover not only aldermen, but other officials and employees, and to limit reimbursement to "those rare instances where the statement of charges was submitted in bad faith."

7. Allow the legislative inspector general (LIG) to initiate investigations and accept anonymous complaints, as the executive inspector general (IG) already can. Sworn complaints alone will not allow for effective enforcement. However, I do not agree with the task force that is appropriate for IGs to be involved in initiating proceedings; they should be the investigation arm of the ethics program and nothing else, as I will argue in my next post on this report.

Below are links to my other blog posts on the second task force report:
The Roles of the Ethics Board and the IGs
Ethics Program Independence
Confidentiality and False Information
Some Bad Ideas and Missed Chances

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---