Safra Working Papers

Ferguson, MO — where Michael Brown was recently killed by a police officer, and the police department's first reaction was to protect the officer and keep the facts secret — is an unusual case of a local government where a scandal is likely to actually increase rather than decrease citizen participation in government.

Some situations clearly involve a conflict of interest, but are not dealt with in a local government ethics code. Two issues arise. One is the quality of the local government ethics code. The other is whether the code matters at all, if the conflict is clear.

Such a situation exists with respect to a council member in Bellevue, WA, a Seattle suburb, with the extra twist that the city's ethics code applies to employees, and the state ethics code applies to council members.

In March I wrote a blog post about a situation in La Crosse, Wisconsin where the mayor brought his father, who runs a refuse business, to meet with a county official about a county solid waste assessment. A council member sought advice from the city attorney rather than the city ethics board, and then the mayor said he would put the matter before the ethics board. His father's company has a refuse contract with the mayor's city.

One of the most damaging kinds of preferential treatment is one that is hard to pin on any one individual:  public works work done for some, but not for others, or done for some before being done for others. Whether or not this is done in any particular city or county, people talk about it, speculating that it is done, talking about things they've seen and heard. It's an important part of the perception that local government is run for those in government and those with political connections, and that the "important" areas of town (i.e., where the wealthy and powerful live) are favored.