A situation in the city of Alameda, CA once again points out that government officials dealing with the possibly unethical conduct of other government officials is
not a good thing.
When it comes to government ethics, too often lawyers are nowhere to be
seen, unless they are the ones saying that unethical conduct is legal.
Far too often, lawyers do not use their knowledge, their strong, independent
personalities, and their professional
obligations to stand up to, or at least question, those acting
unethically.
"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.
On Independence Day weekend, it's worth remembering that independence
does not come cheap, and that there are some things that are more
important than independence.
Honesty, although central to ethics, is not central to government
ethics. The reason for this is that honesty, or falsity, is so complex,
it is almost impossible to define or enforce. And first amendment
freedom of speech places so many limitations on government regulation
of expression short of libel (the intentional attempt to falsely
destroy another's reputation). Life is full of mistakes
and misreadings, half-truths and kernels of truth, and these do not
constitute falsity. Honesty comes in more shades of gray than a
black-and-white movie.
The great majority of what is written about legislative redistricting
focuses on state and federal redistricting. But many cities, even some
towns, have districts too, and resetting district boundaries is an
important political process designed to prevent public participation and to undermine public trust.