It's rare to find a newspaper article that truly appreciates the
work a city ethics officer does. So I'm including the entire article
below. It's from
the Jacksonville Times-Union, and Jacksonville's ethics officer happens
to be City Ethics President Carla Miller. Had it been anyone else, I
would have run the article right away.
The Missouri Ethics Commission has put up a
nice slideshow-with-audio presentation on the many changes made
to its ethics and campaign finance laws in Senate
Bill 844 (it used Adobe Presenter software, but there are likely
other alternatives). It's a good way to do reform-specific training.
It's official. According to an article in
yesterday's Salt Lake City Tribune, a comprehensive ethics
reform petition has been okayed for distribution, with the goal of
placing it on the November 2010 ballot. That requires 95,000 signatures
on a 21-page petition that is far from easy reading.
In your county, a major corruption investigation is being conducted by
the FBI. Already, nearly twenty county employees, city building
inspectors, and businessmen have pleaded guilty (see an earlier blog post on the
investigation). Others are holding out. What do you do?
It is common for councils to engage in backsliding shortly after
creating or improving a government ethics program. When there has been a
scandal, councils often go further than they would like to go in
establishing ethics rules and procedures.
A week ago, Transparency International published its fifteenth annual Corruption
Perceptions Index, which scores countries on the basis of a variety
of independent reports on and surveys about corruption, including those
from the World Bank and other development banks, and those surveying
journalists, business executives, and international organization staff.
In
October, I wrote a blog post about a report commissioned by
the Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority (WMATA), based on an investigation of an
ethics issue involving a Washington, D.C. council member and transit
authority board member. The focus of my post was on the conflicted
situation of a city council member on a regional board.
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.
This blog post is about Chicago, and things are more complicated in
Chicago than in other American municipalities. So please read slowly
and carefully.
The law on limiting campaign expenditures has been changing over the
past couple of years. But the law on limiting campaign contributions
has not.
The standard in many instances is more liberal than with campaign expenditures, in others it is the
same. And the application of the standard is highly contextual. A law in one jurisdiction, or at a particular time, might be constitutional, while in another jurisdiction, or at a different time, it is not.
It's only been six weeks since I wrote about a campaign finance suit in
San Diego, filed by the Republican
Party of San Diego County, a former City Council candidate, a
pro-business group, a union PAC, and a pollster. Yesterday the federal
district court handed down an
important split decision on the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary
injunction.
It is rare for the news media to look at government ethics any more
deeply than a particular scandal, usually one involving law-breaking,
money, sex, or a public argument between parties or within a party. The
vice-presidential nomination of Sarah Palin has led to the most
in-depth look at government ethics for a long time.
Settlements of ethics proceedings are usually a good thing for
everyone involved. They save officials
the cost of a proceeding and prevent officials from digging
themselves deeper and deeper into defenses, denials, and cover-ups,
which are usually more harmful to the public trust than any ethics violation. They save taxpayers the cost of a proceeding and
of possible appeals. They save the community the pain of going through
an extended fight over an ethics violation, which can hurt its reputation, escalate, and
have long-term ramifications.