Most local government ethics codes do not explicitly deal with settlement agreements, but most state ethics codes do. I left settlement agreements out of my first draft of the City Ethics Model Code, but I have just added a provision, Section 213(5) [1]. The language is based on that of several state ethics codes and rules, especially those of Ohio and Georgia.

Click here to read the rest of this blog entry. [2]

Settlements are especially important because ethics commissions tend to have limited resources. In most cases, there is no need for lengthy investigations and hearings. And since the principal goal of ethics enforcement (as opposed to the criminal process) is to provide guidance, a public settlement agreement that includes a reasonable penalty is more important than an expensive proceeding that may or may not produce a more severe penalty.

In fact, some states (and at least one city) make settlement the default or preferred approach. Arkansas’ code requires a written Offer of Settlement when probable cause is found. Texas’s code requires that, upon a determination that there is credible evidence, the commission “resolve and settle the complaint or motion, to the extent possible.” Los Angeles delays public announcement of a finding of probable cause so that a settlement can be reached. Oregon’s Administrative Rules “encourages the settlement of a case,” and Ohio’s extensive settlement rules shows a propensity for settlement.

But most state codes and rules do little more than mention the possibility of settlement, providing little guidance.

Of course, settlements may be reached in cities and towns that lack explicit language about them. But, as with everything, language that provides clear guidance is valuable.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research, City Ethics

203-230-2548