Disclosure

Transparency in government should not be limited only to officials. Disclosure rules should also apply to everyone seeking special benefits from government, such as contracts, permits, or grants. For one thing, without transparency on both sides of every transaction, it is impossible for the public or officials to know if there are any conflicts that particular officials need to deal with.

Here are three instances of ethics reform that, I hope, would not happen if someone involved had read the chapter on ethics reform in my Local Government Ethics Program book.

Copying a Local Town's Code

Elisabeth Rosenthal wrote an excellent op-ed piece for the New York Times last Sunday. It was about disclosure, more specifically about the way disclosure sometimes neither leads to more transparency, nor prevents what it is intended to prevent. In the government ethics situation, that would mean preventing misconduct.

I make a great effort to be nonpartisan in choosing what and whom I write about. I am an unaffiliated voter who believes in nonpartisan local government. But yesterday, the Republican Party took a strong stand against government ethics and, in its most important statement in years, totally ignored it.

Here's a good followup to yesterday's blog post about a conflict of interest in Tucson.

"Ceremonial function" is one of those terms that is found in many local government ethics codes (but not the City Ethics Model Code). However, it is rarely defined except, occasionally, in advisory opinions. The term is generally used to exclude certain gifts from being either disclosed or considered gifts at all. The result is lots of free, undisclosed tickets to sporting events, especially for mayors, and then a minor scandal.

In my recent blog post on Maricopa County, I referred to the problem of harassment and intimidation by government officials against other government officials and employees. I have also referred in the past to the even more serious problem of harassment, intimidation, and ad hominem attacks by government officials against citizens.

When it comes to ethics fines, it's hard to satisfy anyone. Fines are usually too large or too small, depending on whom you ask. No one likes to be punished, and no one likes the guilty to get off easy. So what is an ethics commission to do?

This week there have been two newspaper articles featuring opposite ends of the fine spectrum.

Few Fines in California
An L.A. Times article featured this dreaded headline:

According to an article in the Jacksonville Times-Union this week, former Jacksonville council member and current lobbyist Ginny Myrick said, in response to lobbying reforms suggested by Jacksonville ethics officer, and City Ethics' president, Carla Miller, that (not exact words) "it is important for exact payments from clients to remain protected because the information is proprietary.

Pennsylvanians have, for some time, been entertained with a scandal called Bonusgate, which involves state legislative staff not only being used for campaigns, but getting bonuses, which makes a common practice appear even uglier. The ugliness has recently increased in intensity:  defense counsel for two of the legislators is accusing the attorney general (who instituted the criminal actions) of doing the very same thing, without the bonuses. And the attorney general, of a different political party than the great majority of the accused legislators, is running for governor.