The Effect of NYC's Conflicts of Interest Board on the Ethics Programs in New York State's Larger Cities

New York City's Conflicts of Interest Board is one of the premier ethics commissions in the U.S. One would assume that its rules and procedures would provide an example, as well as guidance, for the rest of the state. So I would like to look at ethics programs in the other largest (although not large) cities in the state, in order by population.

Buffalo
Buffalo has a disclosure-based ethics code. An annual financial disclosure statement is required, and a separate disclosure statement is required whenever an official or his or her immediate family's interest might be affected by the official's decision. Council members may choose to abstain, but the decision is theirs alone: "the member’s decision not to abstain shall not be deemed unethical."

Buffalo's ethics code (pp. 11ff) has other basic provisions, including a ban on gifts from interested parties, which has some sizeable exceptions, including $100 (per gift) "hospitality" and travel for city purpose. There is a good abuse of office provision and a requirement to report anyone who improperly attempts to influence one's work.

Buffalo's Board of Ethics has an odd selection process. Of seven members, one is the city clerk and another the corporation counsel (who also acts as the board's counsel). They are ex officio members, but have full voting rights. This is downright bizarre. The good part is that the other five members are nominated by a committee consisting of the following:  the mayor, the comptroller, the president of the Common Council, the chief judge of the Buffalo City Court, and the dean of the Law School of the State University at Buffalo. The mayor selects from their list of nominees, but the mayor can also reject the committee's nominees altogether, although this would be hard to do. The council has the right of refusal, as well.

The board gives advisory opinions, may act on its own initiative, and may fine officials up to $10,000 as well as recommend disciplinary action. But the board has no presence on the city's website. Not a good sign of an active ethics program.

The board has no staff or resources. This can cause problems. According to an article in the Buffalo News last June, the board chair "expressed concerns ... about whether his all-volunteer panel has the resources to effectively conduct such a probe. 'Not having staff or resources, we can’t just snap our fingers and attend to this matter.' [The chair] said he wants to meet with Council President David A. Franczyk to discuss what investigatory roles would best be handled by the Board of Ethics, the Council or other entities."

In 2007, Buffalo's mayor announced a Public Integrity and Accountability Plan, including an inspector general and fraud hotline, but with the city and economy's problems, it doesn't seem to have happened.

Rochester
Rochester's ethics code (click at bottom of page) has more provisions than Buffalo's, but it has a toothless board of ethics that can only give advisory opinions. Citizens have no role in the ethics program.

Like Buffalo, the code requires annual financial disclosure. The Rochester gift provision permits gifts up to $25 each from interested parties. Like Buffalo, Rochester's toothless board of ethics has no presence on the city website, and I could find no mention of it on the Web. The board's seven members include one city council member and one high-level executive official selected by the mayor. The other five members are selected by the council.

Unlike Buffalo, Rochester does have an Office of Public Integrity, which oversees the ethics program, including ethics training, but is focused on fraud and waste, with a compliance and IG approach. The director/IG is appointed by the mayor and appears to have authority only over the executive branch.

Yonkers
Let's hear it for Yonkers, which actually has an Ethics Board page, albeit as part of the corporation counsel's site (the corporation counsel's office is the board's staff, not a good idea; but there is a special recusal provision for the corporation counsel, something I'd never seen). Not only is there a link to the city's code of ethics, but there is even a link to all nine 2006 advisory opinions. Have there been no advisory opinions since then, or is the board a bit behind in putting them online?

The Yonkers ethics code has by far the best provisions of any of these cities. It is a very clear, complete recusal provision. There is an extensive political activity section, and an unusual provision about business relationships among officials and employees:

No City elected official shall enter into any business relationship with any City officer or employee, and no City officer or employee shall enter into any business relationship with that individual’s subordinate, if such business relationship would be an outside employer or business as to any one of them.

There is also an unusual inducement provision:

No person shall induce any other person to violate, attempt to induce any other person to violate, or aid any other person in violating, any provision of the Code of Ethics.

Both of these provisions go beyond the New York City code, which only limits business relationships with subordinates, and has a very limited inducement provision.

However, Yonker officials and employees can accept gifts aggregating $200 from any person during a 12-month period. At least it's an aggregate, unlike the per gift limits in Buffalo and Rochester.

The seven members of the ethics board are appointed by an appointing committee, which consists of the mayor, the presiding judge of the Yonkers City Court, and the council president. Only one of the members can be a city employee.

The board has teeth. It can fine up to $10,000 (there are even minimum fine amounts), it can recommend suspension or dismissal, and it can ask a court to approve permanent disbarment from doing business with the city. It can also initiate investigations.

How did Yonkers get a better ethics program? It was drafted by a charter revision commission and approved by referendum in 2005, and it apparently had the mayor's support. See a 2005 New York Times article for the story behind the new ethics code.

Yonkers also has an inspector general, who focuses on fraud, waste, and fiscal accountability. The IG appears to have nothing directly to do with the ethics board. However, the IG can forward findings to the ethics board, and the ethics board can ask the IG to investigate a matter. According to the Politics on the Hudson blog, in October a community organization said it would file a complaint against the IG with the ethics board.

Ethics board meetings are unofficially available in video online at YonkersTV.

Syracuse
The Dachshund Club of Greater Syracuse has an ethics code, but it doesn't appear that Syracuse does. Nor does Syracuse have much of a website; you can't even do a search of it. And no mention of an ethics code or board in the local newspaper.

Albany
Albany appears to have nothing but a financial disclosure requirement (Ch. 54) An ethics code was proposed in May 2009 (pp. 2ff), but it does not appear to be law. For more info, see an earlier blog post.

Conclusion
The existence of such a great ethics code and so much expertise in the state's largest city apparently has had little to no effect on the state's other cities. Only Yonkers has an ethics program to be proud of, but it does not appear to have depended much on next-door NYC's example. On paper, Buffalo has a mediocre program with mediocre enforcement capabilities, but it's not clear how active it is.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---