A Big-City EC That Won't Meet or Stay Out of Politics
The Kansas City, MO ethics commission situation is a mess. Last month,
I wrote about the problem that arose regarding EC members who made
campaign contributions to candidates over whom they had jurisdiction,
leading to two resignations. Soon after, the council prohibited EC
members from making contributions, and two more members resigned, leaving
only three members. But that's only the icing on the cake.<br>
<br>
Normally, this would create a serious quorum problem for the EC. How
could it possibly do business? But according to <a href="http://www.pitch.com/2010-08-12/news/kansas-city-ethics-commission/" target="”_blank”">an
article
in <i>The Pitch</i></a>, over the last two years plus, the EC has met only in February 2008 and
November 2009. A meeting is scheduled for August 25, but the chair says
that it is unlikely to take place.<br>
<br>
Ironically, in December 2009 the Kansas City <i>Star</i> said that 2010 would
be a busy year for the EC. Way back in early 2008 a council member had
asked the EC to investigate how the city had selected a company to
provide copiers and other document services. In February 2008, the EC
voted to investigate, but soon after, the chair resigned and the new
chair didn't hold a meeting until November 2009. At that meeting, the
investigation was not even on the agenda.<br>
<br>
In late 2008, the council requested that the EC investigate the mayor's
handling of an open-records request, as well as the role that the
mayor's former communications director played in a political campaign.
At its November 2009 meeting, the EC approved an investigation, and the
auditor drafted a 600-page report. But the EC hasn't called any witnesses to
testify, because it hasn't met.<br>
<br>
Why hasn't it met? One reason is that the chair is a federal
prosecutor, and doesn't appear to have much free time. But worse, she
has a completely passive attitude toward the EC's role: "Nothing comes
to me directly, or to the commission members. It goes through the city.
I don't know about anything until they let me know." Doesn't sound like a prosecutor to me.<br>
<br>
According to the article, the council empowered the EC to make
investigations based on the auditor's reports, without any complaint
having to be filed. The EC does not have a passive role at all,
especially in this matter. The fact that its chair was appointed by the
mayor makes the EC look like his foot-dragging tool. It doesn't get much worse.<br>
<br>
Now that four members have chosen to resign rather than keep out of
local politics for the period left on their terms, there is nothing
anyone can do but the mayor.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/22/2101653/kc-council-bars-ethics-com…; target="”_blank”">an
article
in the Kansas City <i>Star</i></a>, on July 22 the mayor announced "he
will ask an independent panel of a few community leaders to meet soon
and recommend new members for the commission." This is an excellent
idea, although I haven't been able to find anything about who those
community leaders may be and whether they owe anything to the mayor, as
many community leaders do.<br>
<br>
The mayor or city manager should also do something about the EC's
presence on <a href="http://www.kcmo.org/CKCMO/index.htm" target="”_blank”">the Kansas
City website</a>, which is zilch (that's why there are no links to the EC in this blog post; nor could I find the auditor's report). And Kansas City is a big enough city
to have a full-time ethics officer or EC executive director so that no
chair can drop the ball and so that members have guidance in such
things as political involvement.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---