You are here
A County Ethics Commission Resigns En Masse
Monday, January 12th, 2009
Robert Wechsler
When the entire ethics commission of a major county resigns,
something is seriously wrong. This is what recently happened in Jackson
County, MO, home of Kansas City and Independence.
According to an article in Tuesday's Kansas City Star, most of the resignations occurred because the county legislature exempted itself (and other elected officials) from a new ethics code just before passing it. According to an article in Thursday's Independence Examiner, three members resigned in protest, one member resigned for other reasons, and the fifth resigned because she didn't want to be the only member left.
Some members of the county EC said that they would be useless, because complaints have only been filed in the past against elected officials. This does not, however, mean that future complaints (or requests for an advisory opinion) would not involve appointees and employees.
Was this a case of legislators insisting on legislative immunity? No. In fact, supporters of the exemption argued that it would be best if the Missouri Ethics Commission dealt with them (the Missouri EC already did have jurisdiction over county legislators, but they can enforce only the state ethics code, not the new county ethics code).
Possible Conflicts and Other Problems
One legislator argued that there is a conflict of interest because the county legislature determines the budget of the ethics commission, and that's why it was better to have the state in charge. This is certainly a good argument in favor of state jurisdiction over local government ethics, but clearly the county was not satisfied with state laws or the state's enforcement of these laws, or it would not have felt it necessary to pass a new ethics code of its own.
It's interesting how rarely budget control over an ethics commission is considered a conflict of interest. One reason is that legislators love to control budgets of bodies that have some control over them. Another reason is that if you call it a conflict, you would be required to deal with the conflict responsibly. As it turns out, it is easy to remedy such a conflict: the ordinance can be written so that legislators cannot tinker with the budget.
Another possible but common conflict of interest involves selection of ethics commission members by the legislative body. But there is no such conflict in Jackson County. The county charter (Article XII, Section 5.1) requires that EC members be selected by a commission consisting of the executive director of the Mid-America Regional Council, the dean of the Henry W. Bloc School of Business and Public Administration at the University of Missouri - Kansas City, and the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Greater Kansas City. This is just the sort of selection process recommended by the City Ethics Model Code to prevent such a conflict from occurring.
One Jackson County legislator argues that if the county EC were to have jurisdiction over legislators, legislators could face double jeopardy. That is, they could be brought before both the state and county ECs. It appears that there are no formal impediments to simultaneous or successive ethics proceedings in these two bodies, at least at the state level (I haven't been able to get a hold of the county ethics code yet). This is definitely a topic for a future blog entry.
One conflict the county legislature ignored was that its decision conflicts with a charter provision that explicitly gives the county EC jurisdiction over elected officials.
Which Ethics Program Is More Strict?
The chair of the task force that drafted the county ethics code insists that the state laws are weaker. This University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor also told the Kansas City Star that the county legislature's exemption of elected officials "has an appearance of impropriety that absolutely stinks." The task force was appointed not by the legislature, but by the county executive.
At least one county legislator thinks that state laws are much more strict, that he and his colleagues are being hard on themselves. I can't see why, since they have always been subject to the state ethics laws, and would be subject to them no matter what they did.
The state EC is treated more roughly in an editorial from Thursday's Kansas City Star: "Is this the same state commission that’s considered to be a mostly toothless watchdog? The one many elected officials throughout Missouri consider incompetent? The public entity that conducts its most important sessions in private? Yes, this sounds exactly like the kind of panel that the County Legislature would like watching over its shoulders. But taxpayers would be better off with the services of local, knowledgeable citizens who usually hold their meetings in public."
Already, the county is moving on. The selection committee hopes to come up with new EC members in the next few weeks. The county has a new ethics code, even if, once it gets a new ethics commision, those most likely to indulge in unethical conduct will not appear before it, and citizens will start out believing that local government ethics is unfair.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
According to an article in Tuesday's Kansas City Star, most of the resignations occurred because the county legislature exempted itself (and other elected officials) from a new ethics code just before passing it. According to an article in Thursday's Independence Examiner, three members resigned in protest, one member resigned for other reasons, and the fifth resigned because she didn't want to be the only member left.
Some members of the county EC said that they would be useless, because complaints have only been filed in the past against elected officials. This does not, however, mean that future complaints (or requests for an advisory opinion) would not involve appointees and employees.
Was this a case of legislators insisting on legislative immunity? No. In fact, supporters of the exemption argued that it would be best if the Missouri Ethics Commission dealt with them (the Missouri EC already did have jurisdiction over county legislators, but they can enforce only the state ethics code, not the new county ethics code).
Possible Conflicts and Other Problems
One legislator argued that there is a conflict of interest because the county legislature determines the budget of the ethics commission, and that's why it was better to have the state in charge. This is certainly a good argument in favor of state jurisdiction over local government ethics, but clearly the county was not satisfied with state laws or the state's enforcement of these laws, or it would not have felt it necessary to pass a new ethics code of its own.
It's interesting how rarely budget control over an ethics commission is considered a conflict of interest. One reason is that legislators love to control budgets of bodies that have some control over them. Another reason is that if you call it a conflict, you would be required to deal with the conflict responsibly. As it turns out, it is easy to remedy such a conflict: the ordinance can be written so that legislators cannot tinker with the budget.
Another possible but common conflict of interest involves selection of ethics commission members by the legislative body. But there is no such conflict in Jackson County. The county charter (Article XII, Section 5.1) requires that EC members be selected by a commission consisting of the executive director of the Mid-America Regional Council, the dean of the Henry W. Bloc School of Business and Public Administration at the University of Missouri - Kansas City, and the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Greater Kansas City. This is just the sort of selection process recommended by the City Ethics Model Code to prevent such a conflict from occurring.
One Jackson County legislator argues that if the county EC were to have jurisdiction over legislators, legislators could face double jeopardy. That is, they could be brought before both the state and county ECs. It appears that there are no formal impediments to simultaneous or successive ethics proceedings in these two bodies, at least at the state level (I haven't been able to get a hold of the county ethics code yet). This is definitely a topic for a future blog entry.
One conflict the county legislature ignored was that its decision conflicts with a charter provision that explicitly gives the county EC jurisdiction over elected officials.
Which Ethics Program Is More Strict?
The chair of the task force that drafted the county ethics code insists that the state laws are weaker. This University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor also told the Kansas City Star that the county legislature's exemption of elected officials "has an appearance of impropriety that absolutely stinks." The task force was appointed not by the legislature, but by the county executive.
At least one county legislator thinks that state laws are much more strict, that he and his colleagues are being hard on themselves. I can't see why, since they have always been subject to the state ethics laws, and would be subject to them no matter what they did.
The state EC is treated more roughly in an editorial from Thursday's Kansas City Star: "Is this the same state commission that’s considered to be a mostly toothless watchdog? The one many elected officials throughout Missouri consider incompetent? The public entity that conducts its most important sessions in private? Yes, this sounds exactly like the kind of panel that the County Legislature would like watching over its shoulders. But taxpayers would be better off with the services of local, knowledgeable citizens who usually hold their meetings in public."
Already, the county is moving on. The selection committee hopes to come up with new EC members in the next few weeks. The county has a new ethics code, even if, once it gets a new ethics commision, those most likely to indulge in unethical conduct will not appear before it, and citizens will start out believing that local government ethics is unfair.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
