You are here
The Need for an Independent Ethics Commission in San Bernardino County
Monday, April 6th, 2009
Robert Wechsler
Updates below
According to an article in yesterday's Press-Enterprise, San Bernardino County (CA) looks like it might soon have an ethics commission. After numerous scandals, two of five members of the county's board of supervisors are convinced of the need for an independent ethics panel with teeth.
But how independent?
One of the supervisors behind the proposal, whose former chief of staff was recently arrested (the allegations concerned his work for the assessor's office) told the newspaper that "he is considering giving the Board of Supervisors, the district attorney and the sheriff one appointee each. He would like one member named by an independent group yet to be determined."
Comments to the article rightly focus on this aspect of the proposal. The kindest version states, "the current Board of Supervisors and Sheriff should not appoint any of its members. They should instead designate totally independent people with known integrity to appoint the Commission. This is because I believe several members of the current Board of Supervisors should be the first people investigated by such a Commission."
The supervisor said that "past efforts have concentrated on ethics training and rules for county staff, but most of the ethical violations were committed by elected officials and political appointees." This is a common story: elected officials creating ethics rules for everyone but them and their appointees.
The proposal is for a commission with a small staff, including its own lawyer. This would be a big and very welcome jump. Let's hope the other three supervisors jump on board, and that the proposal isn't watered down.
Watered-down ethics proposals seem to be favored by San Bernardino County politicians, including the second supervisor in favor of an ethics commission. According to an article in the San Bernardino Sun, when the current scandal became public, he put forth a ballot measure concerning ethics training and a few new rules for elected officials' staff members. Center for Governmental Studies president Bob Stern told the paper, "I call this a feel-good measure because this doesn't do much. Obviously, they have had major problems in the county, and they need to do much better."
The idea of an ethics commission is hardly new to San Bernardino County. Here's an excerpt from a Los Angeles Times article circa 2003:
Update (August 2, 2009): According to an article in the San Bernardino Sun, there is another very strong argument favoring an independent ethics commission for San Bernardino: the elected city attorney now handles ethics complaints, and there appears to be serious friction between him and the mayor. This allows his pursuit of the mayor for a conflict, even when no formal complaint was filed, to look really ugly.
How ugly is it? Take this quote from a mayoral statement: "Sadly, City Attorney Penman fabricated a lie in his continuing attempt to attack me and to silence me..." This sort of personal animosity and conflict at the heart of the conflict of interest process has to stop. The clear solution is an independent ethics commission.
Update (December 3, 2009): According to an article in the Press-Enterprise, a newly elected county supervisor proposed an ethics commission in July, but for various stated reasons it won't be considered until January. One of the stated reasons for firing the county administrator was his opposition to forming an ethics commission. Here's the article's description of the proposal:
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
According to an article in yesterday's Press-Enterprise, San Bernardino County (CA) looks like it might soon have an ethics commission. After numerous scandals, two of five members of the county's board of supervisors are convinced of the need for an independent ethics panel with teeth.
But how independent?
One of the supervisors behind the proposal, whose former chief of staff was recently arrested (the allegations concerned his work for the assessor's office) told the newspaper that "he is considering giving the Board of Supervisors, the district attorney and the sheriff one appointee each. He would like one member named by an independent group yet to be determined."
Comments to the article rightly focus on this aspect of the proposal. The kindest version states, "the current Board of Supervisors and Sheriff should not appoint any of its members. They should instead designate totally independent people with known integrity to appoint the Commission. This is because I believe several members of the current Board of Supervisors should be the first people investigated by such a Commission."
The supervisor said that "past efforts have concentrated on ethics training and rules for county staff, but most of the ethical violations were committed by elected officials and political appointees." This is a common story: elected officials creating ethics rules for everyone but them and their appointees.
The proposal is for a commission with a small staff, including its own lawyer. This would be a big and very welcome jump. Let's hope the other three supervisors jump on board, and that the proposal isn't watered down.
Watered-down ethics proposals seem to be favored by San Bernardino County politicians, including the second supervisor in favor of an ethics commission. According to an article in the San Bernardino Sun, when the current scandal became public, he put forth a ballot measure concerning ethics training and a few new rules for elected officials' staff members. Center for Governmental Studies president Bob Stern told the paper, "I call this a feel-good measure because this doesn't do much. Obviously, they have had major problems in the county, and they need to do much better."
The idea of an ethics commission is hardly new to San Bernardino County. Here's an excerpt from a Los Angeles Times article circa 2003:
Nearly a dozen San Bernardino County
officials and leaders in area
cities have been convicted over the past decade ... of accepting bribes
in a series of corruption scandals that
shocked Inland Empire residents and embarrassed local leaders.
To rebuild the public trust, San Bernardino County officials have adopted several reform measures, launched internal audits, installed a whistle-blowing hotline, hired an ethics officer and created a special public integrity unit for the district attorney's office.
But
repairing the damage has proved daunting. While officials insist that
San Bernardino County government is now free of graft and corruption,
county employees, activists and others say serious reform measures with
tough penalties must be adopted to send a signal that the old ways of
doing business in the county are over.
... the ethics officer hired last year has no authority to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or impose penalties on violators.
Judging by the comments, county residents, who strongly supported the ballot measure, are on to the supervisors' ways. An ethics commission beholden to elected officials won't cut it with them. Elected officials should give up control of the ethics program and create a truly independent ethics program that applies to all government officials. The time is ripe. No, overripe.Update (August 2, 2009): According to an article in the San Bernardino Sun, there is another very strong argument favoring an independent ethics commission for San Bernardino: the elected city attorney now handles ethics complaints, and there appears to be serious friction between him and the mayor. This allows his pursuit of the mayor for a conflict, even when no formal complaint was filed, to look really ugly.
How ugly is it? Take this quote from a mayoral statement: "Sadly, City Attorney Penman fabricated a lie in his continuing attempt to attack me and to silence me..." This sort of personal animosity and conflict at the heart of the conflict of interest process has to stop. The clear solution is an independent ethics commission.
Update (December 3, 2009): According to an article in the Press-Enterprise, a newly elected county supervisor proposed an ethics commission in July, but for various stated reasons it won't be considered until January. One of the stated reasons for firing the county administrator was his opposition to forming an ethics commission. Here's the article's description of the proposal:
- Derry has suggested creating an independent panel of five members empowered to review the conduct of elected county officials and their staff. Commissioners with backgrounds in law, business and education who meet certain qualifications would be chosen by lottery. The agency would have a staff of three and a budget of $500,000.
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
