The Duties of Ethics Board Members: The Bad Example of Detroit

Do ethics board members have a duty to follow more than the letter of their ethics code?

This issue has arisen with respect to the Detroit Board of Ethics. The Board’s chair, attorney Reginald Turner, joined the membership (that is, fundraising) committee of a defense fund for Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. A complaint has been filed against the mayor with the Board of Ethics. Therefore, the Board chair is helping to raise funds to defend against a case that may come before the Board. He says he will recuse himself, and the code of ethics does not explicitly make participation in a defense fund a conflict of interest.

Click here to read the rest of this blog entry.

But there is a serious appearance of impropriety, and the ethics code does say that it “shall be liberally construed so as to avoid even the appearance of impropriety by its public servants so that the public interest is protected.” It is questionable whether, given criminal allegations against the mayor, the Board chair should be involved even if there were no complaint filed with the Board of Ethics.

There are three reasons why, I believe, an ethics board member should follow the spirit rather than the letter of an ethics code.

First of all, ethics board members should set an example for all government officials.

Second, it is central to the effectiveness of an ethics board that it preserves the fact and appearance of independence, especially from a municipal executive. This is even more true when the mayor appoints a majority of the members of the ethics board (in this case, three of seven solely, and a fourth— Mr. Turner — jointly with the council).

The third reason why an ethics board member must be very careful about conflicts of interest is that any complaint filed against a member would put the entire board in a conflict of interest situation and create a serious ethics crisis.

There is a fourth reason here why Mr. Turner should not have become involved with the defense fund, even as a contributor. Helping a party to an action filed with the Board of Ethics is tantamount to participating in the proceeding not as a member of the Board (where he would recuse himself), but as a representative of one of its parties, which is arguably worse. Think how it appears to Board members when their chair, an author of the ethics code itself, takes side in a matter before the Board. How can it not affect the Board’s decision, or be seen to affect the decision?

The Detroit Board of Ethics also has other attorney-members who have relations with the mayor. They should not have been appointed, but once appointed, they should be even more careful to distance themselves from the mayor. Yes, the mayor deserves a defense, but this defense should not be aided in any way by any member of the Board of Ethics.

Mr. Turner knows better. He helped write the ethics code. And yet he talks as if the letter of the law is all that matters. Or at least, it is all that should apply to him. This is poor leadership, and it seriously undermines the reputation and effectiveness of the Board of Ethics.

I wrote to and called the Board of Ethics' executive director to see what the Board is doing about this situation, but I have received no response.

I believe that Mr. Turner should resign immediately from the Board of Ethics and tell other city officials that appearances of impropriety are not acceptable, especially on the Board of Ethics.

For more on this situation, read the following articles from the Detroit News: 1 and 2.

Updates: Ethics board dismissed two complaints against the Mayor, citing pending criminal investigations (Mr. Turner did not vote). Mr. Turner resigned from the mayor's legal defense fund. On July 7, the Council is scheduled to begin forfeiture proceedings to remove the mayor from office.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics