The EC Appointment Process: Watchdog or Lapdog?

Update below
The only thing worse than stacking ethics commissions with politically active, and apparently loyal, members is refusing to renew the term of a member who has been a vocal advocate of government ethics, in other words, a thorn in the side of officials who do not follow the local government's ethics codes. Clever officials know that one or two members of any board can have a strong effect on what the board does.

I recently wrote about this latter situation when it arose in San Diego. It turns out that the mayor's refusal to re-appoint the EC's vocal chair was followed by a council member's nomination of a former paid campaign staffer to the position, according to an article in yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune. The council member is currently under investigation by the EC.

This one-two punch to the EC seems to have been too much. Two council members have proposed a new, non-political way to appoint EC members:  by letting officials as well as the public make recommendations, and then have a panel of three retired judges select from those recommended. In addition to the current rules for EC members, the council members propose to exclude anyone who has been paid staff to a council member in the last five years. The council member who nominated her former staffer supports this proposal.

The mayor is open to consideration of the proposal, although not in support of it. However, he wants the council to vote on the proposed appointment and re-appointments now, and then deal with the proposal afterward. Two council members take the same position, but it is a questionable one. One of the council members, who was fined by the EC, is quoted as saying, "Seven appointed volunteers serve on this commission. Given its value and scope of responsibility, it would be inadvisable to leave three of the seven seats empty."

This would be an excellent argument if it were true. But as it turns out, two of these three members are being re-appointed, so whether a vote is taken or not has no effect on their membership. The third member would serve until replaced, so his seat too would not be empty. If a council member has to misrepresent the truth to make his argument, his argument is probably lacking in validity.

This is the time to consider a new process for selecting EC members. The mayor and at least some council members do not appear to be able to responsibly handle their roles in the appointment process. As one of the council members sponsoring the new approach (who was also fined by the EC) said, "If you want a watchdog, it makes no sense to have that watchdog hired by the individual or the entity the watchdog is supposed to be watching - that makes them a lapdog."

Update (July 29, 2009): According to an article in today's San Diego Union-Tribune, neither the council's vote on delaying appointment of EC members, nor its vote on the appointment of EC members received the necessary 2/3 majority to pass, so nothing was done. However, it looks like the suggestion to have three retired judges select EC nominees will be considered by a council committee.

City Ethics Model Code Provision on EC Selection

Below are more blog posts on EC member selection:
Selection by Community Organizations
Party Involvement
EC Members as Political Footballs
Leaving EC Seats Open
Investigating Officials Who Select EC Members

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---