City Related

Last week, a resident from one of the towns next to mine (Wallingford, CT) called me for advice regarding his request for an advisory opinion. The request involved the appropriateness of council members affiliated with a church participating in a matter that involved funding for renovation of a wall along the church's parking lot. This is a difficult conflict situation, but some town officials made it much more complicated than it had to be.

Update: October 10, 2012 (see below)

So far, I have ignored this year's most famous local ethics proceeding, against San Francisco sheriff Ross Mirkarimi. The reason I ignored it is the reason I am writing about it now:  I think the proceeding should have been dismissed because the sheriff's misconduct involved neither a conflict of interest nor his official duties.

It was very refreshing to hear Ann Arbor council member Steven Kunselman, in an interview with Jeanine DeLay of A2Ethics, an Ann Arbor-based ethics organization, talking openly, honestly, and intelligently about some local government ethics situations.

When a mayor replaces an entire ethics commission, it usually means that he is taking over control of the city's ethics program, to protect himself and his allies. This doesn't appear to be the case in Chicago, where today Mayor Emmanuel replaced ethics board members whose terms had ended or were about to end, and whose other members had been asked to resign, according to an article in today's Chicago Sun-Times.

According to an article in the San Antonio Express-News this week, San Antonio's deputy city manager is concerned about whether he mishandled a conflict situation. It involved his participation on a bid review committee for a $300 million contract for an expansion to the city's convention center. While on the bid review committee, he interviewed for and accepted a job with a nonprofit whose focus is downtown development.

This is the first of a series of looks at the ethics programs of smaller cities, towns, and counties. These local governments have the resources to create an independent, comprehensive ethics program, but they rarely do. It is valuable to look at both the good ideas and the bad ideas in the programs they have chosen to create.

It took a law student doing a summer job, but there is finally confirmation of what I have been saying for a long time:  normal people do not understand the word "interest" as it is commonly used by lawyers in the government ethics context. It was for this reason that I rarely use the word "interest" in my book Local Government Ethics Programs.

Local government ethics can quickly become an ugly circus when officials don't really understand it.

According to Dan Lett's column in the Winnipeg Free Press yesterday, when a conflict of interest issue arises with respect to Winnipeg's mayor, his first response is to shrug his shoulders. If that works, that's the end of the matter.

Now that I am no longer administrator of the New Haven Democracy Fund, a public campaign financing program, I can once again write about ethics issues that arise in New Haven. An interesting issue arose when, according to an article in Monday's New Haven Register, a member of the city's ethics board took a part-time job with the city. The questions this raises are (1) does this create a conflict? and (2) how (and by whom) should the situation be dealt with?