Ethics Commissions & Administration

Update: December 30, 2009

The ethics commission for the largest American city, and the only one with a truly appropriate title — New York City's Conflicts of Interest Board — is appointed by the city's extremely strong mayor, with council approval.

If this old and highly respected EC were to be made independent of the administration it oversees, it would send an important message to the rest of the country's local governments.

The relationship between San Diego's council and ethics commission continues to prove unhealthy. It shows how wrong it is for elected officials to appoint and control the body that oversees their conduct.

According to an article in today's Union-Tribune, a long-term EC investigation has led to an accusation that a council member did not report campaign expenses until eight months after they were incurred. That should be the central story, but it's not.

Ethics reform is difficult without a scandal. If your local government doesn't have an ethics commission, it's hard to form one. If there's an ethics commission without teeth, it's hard to even get dentures. And in Denver, according to an article in the Denver Post, it's hard to even get information about what happens after a toothless ethics commission recommends disclipinary action.

There are many right and wrong ways to select an ethics commission. The rightest ways take the selection process out of the hands of anyone who could possibly come before the EC, because that places a conflict of interest at the very center of a process intended to guide and enforce the responsible handling of conflicts. The rightest ways also prevent anyone who could possibly come before the EC, or their colleagues, from sitting on the EC.

This week saw the opening of the trial of former New York state senate majority leader Joseph Bruno for honest services fraud. According to the assistant U.S. attorney presenting the case, as quoted in the Albany Times-Union, although a criminal trial, "this case is about conflicts of interest. It's about failure to disclose conflicts of interest, and it's about concealment of information that might have exposed conflicts of interest."

Update: November 16, 2009 (see below)

On Sunday, the Lexington Herald-Leader took an unflattering look at Kentucky's legislative ethics commission. As in New York State, a central problem appears to be the commission's lack of independence.

One of the more interesting battles in the civil war among Maricopa County elected officials is the Battle of the Civil Division. When the county attorney indicted County Supervisor Don Stapley in December 2008, the board of supervisors decided to take away the county attorney's civil division and create a separate county civil law department.

The Conflict of Representing and Prosecuting Officials

One of the most difficult things for a government official to do is to determine whether his or her conduct creates an appearance of impropriety. Partially blinded by ego, surrounding yes-people, and the government's ethical culture, an official often finds nothing wrong with conduct that many or even most outsiders -- that is, citizens -- find questionable or downright wrong. It is hard for them to put themselves in citizen shoes in order to see whether their conduct might appear improper.

The New Orleans Ethics Review Board, formed in 2006, certainly wins an A for independence. According to the city ethics code, six of its seven members are chosen by the mayor (with council approval) from nominees submitted by the heads of five local private universities (the seventh is the mayor's to select). Unfortunately, the result is that the majority of board members work at the universities.