Government Employees and the Class Exception to Conflicts of Interest

Yesterday, the California Supreme Court published its decision relating to the conflict of interest charges against five members of San Diego's pension board, which I discussed a couple months ago in a blog post.

Needless to say, the court completely disagreed with me. It felt that being part of a class of retirement system members protected them from conflict of interest charges. This would allow teachers on school boards to vote for their own pay packages, etc.

I don't think that the class exception to conflicts of interest should ever apply to classes of government employees. They should not be a protected class in this context as would, say, homeowners, business owners, and senior citizens.

I can see why this would be a hard conclusion for a court to reach. Therefore, it should be clearly stated in the ethics code.

Here's how I am doing it in the City Ethics Model Code. The conflict of interest provision has read as follows:

An official or employee may not use his or her official position or office, or take or fail to take any action, or influence others to take or fail to take any action, in a manner which he or she knows, or has reason to believe, may result in a personal or financial benefit, not shared with a substantial segment of the city's population, for any of the following persons or entities...

I will add the following language:  "No group of government employees may be considered 'a substantial segment' for the purposes of this provision."

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---