Model Code

There is a lot of talk about courtesy in politics, but most discourtesy involves lack of respect and uncontrolled emotions on the part of officials in their relations with each other. It becomes an ethical problem when citizens are attacked in order to intimidate them and others from being involved in local politics. The conflicting interest here is central to democracy: participation in government. False personal attacks are a favorite means of decreasing participation and citizen oversight. I've been on the receiving end myself, and it is ugly.

Complicity with and knowledge of violations are two minefields it is worth crossing. They involve not only dotting the i's, but they also go right to a central element of responsibility: are you responsible for what others do, especially when you are involved or you let it happen. So much of what happens in any organization involves knowingly letting others -- especially subordinates -- do the dirty work. Note that this provision includes outsiders, such as people doing business with the city.

Consultants are an in-between group. They're not officials or employees, nor are they people who do business with the city. They advise or sometimes act for the city, and have access to confidential information as well as special relations with city staff. Please share your thoughts about and experiences with the inclusion of consultants in an ethics program.

100(17).

Endorsing products and services is a minor conflict, but this is the sort of conflict that, if not specified, would not be considered a conflict under general language. Please share your thoughts about its inclusion and experiences with this problem.

100(16). Endorsements

No official or employee* in his or her official capacity may publicly endorse products or services.

Accepting fees and honorariums is a minor conflict, but one that occurs a great deal. Please share your thoughts and experiences.

100(15). Fees and Honorariums

No official or employee* may accept a fee or honorarium for an article, for an appearance or speech, or for participation at an event, in his or her official capacity. However, he or she may receive payment or reimbursement for necessary expenses related to any such activity.

This provision deals with the potential coercion, or appearance of coercion, that accompanies outside dealings between officials and subordinates. Please share your experiences with this problem and ways to deal with it in ethics codes.

100(14).

Nepotism seems to be more a matter of taste than other conflict provisions. Everyone knows that it looks bad to hire members of one's own family, but many people feel that government is like business, and in business people do this all the time. What is family for? What are your thoughts on including nepotism in a municipal ethics code, and what are your experiences with such provisions and with the conflict itself?

100(13).

One conflict of interest is so basic it is sometimes left out of ethics codes: using city property or money for one's own use. Please share your thoughts about this conflict and your experiences with attempts to control it.

100(12).

The revolving door involves movement from city government into business, specifically into businesses that do business with the city or represent people before its boards and agencies.

Patronage involves a conflict between one's obligation to the public to hire the most competent person for each job, and one's political obligation to reward those who help oneself or one's colleagues get elected. Most ethics codes ignore this conflict. Please share your thoughts on its inclusion, as well as your experiences with patronage and attempts to control it.

100(10).