Two Very Different Views of Local Government Ethics
Below are the opinions of two candidates running in a primary for a seat on the Effingham County, GA commission, which perfectly present two very different views of local government ethics, one pseudo-religious (people are good or bad), the other professional (people need guidance):
Question from Effingham Now reporter: Commissioners recently discussed a stronger ethics policy that would hold both commissioners and county officials to higher standards. Would you be in favor of such a policy?
Jones: Locally we have an ordinance, SEC. 50-2, listed as general behavior that addresses: "Any employees, appointed official, or elected official of the county." This ordinance addresses the issues of unethical and illegal behavior and references additional state laws as well. I believe unethical people will be unethical, and that we have more than enough policies and laws on the books to deal with these people, and that the commissioners' time could be better spent. I try to live by an even higher code of conduct to avoid the very appearance of evil.
King: Yes, I believe it is important for any organization to have a
strong ethics policy. Most organizations today, including local
governments, have adopted ethics policies. A properly designed ethics
policy for Effingham County will help protect the public, as well as
the public official, and will provide a high standard of
accountability. It will also provide for a culture of openness and
integrity within our local government. Conflicts of interest do occur,
and we need to have a policy in place to address those conflicts and
provide a guideline for our county commissioners and other county
officials.
I have included the
ethics
ordinance below, to show that it provides little in the way
of clear guidelines, training, advice, or independent enforcement.
Sec. 50-2. General behavior.
(a) Any employee, appointed official, or elected
official of the county shall avoid any action, whether or not
specifically prohibited by this chapter, that might result in or create
the appearance of:
(1) Using public office for private gain;
(2) Giving preferential treatment to any person;
(3) Impeding county government efficiency or economy;
(4) Losing complete independence or impartiality;
(5) Making a county government decision outside
official channels; or
(6) Affecting adversely the confidence of the public
in the integrity of county government.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any
employee of the county, on behalf of himself or any business entity, to
buy from or sell to his particular employing department or agency any
real or personal property.
(c) Except as provided in subsection (d) of this
section, it shall be unlawful for any employee, appointed officer, or
elective officer of the county, on behalf of himself or any business
entity, to buy from or sell to the county or any department or agency
thereof any real or personal property.
(d) Subsection (c) of this section shall not apply to:
(1) A sale of personal property made
pursuant to sealed competitive bidding, and which is the lowest bid
received, by an employee, appointive officer, or elective officer,
either for himself or herself or on behalf of any business entity; or
(2) A sale of real property in which a
disclosure has been made according to the disclosure requirements of
O.C.G.A. § 16-10-6(b)(3), and approved unanimously by the board of
commissioners.
(e) Any employee or appointed official of this county
who violates any provision of this section, after notice and
opportunity to be heard, may upon majority vote of the board of
commissioners have one of the following judgments rendered:
(1) Dismissal from county employment
or removal from appointed office.
(2) Demotion in rank or grade.
(3) Suspension for a period of time
without pay not exceeding 30 days.
(4) Ineligibility for appointment to
or employment in a position in county government for a period of time
or indefinitely.
(5) Written reprimand, which shall
remain in such person's county personnel file for a period of 24 months.