Conflicts of Interest Go Beyond Financial Benefits to Officials
Many local government ethics codes define a
conflict of interest as existing only when an official stands to receive a
financial benefit from his or her action or inaction. But real and perceived
conflicts exist even when there is no financial benefit to an official.
Important examples include benefits to relatives and business
associates, where the official only benefits indirectly, while others
benefit directly.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.indystar.com/article/20090911/LOCAL0101/90911041/1015/LOCAL0…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Indianapolis Star</a> yesterday, the mayor, city
attorney, and communications director of Carmel (IN) all sat on the
board of the town's Performing Arts Foundation, which gets lots of
money from the city. A council member filed an ethics complaint, and
the city's ethics board dismissed the complaint because the officials
themselves received no financial benefit.<br>
<br>
The most interesting and valuable part of the article is what the
council member said:<br>
<br>
<ul>Accetturo said he knew the ethics
ordinance's limitations before he
filed his complaint, but he thought it was important to express his
concerns anyway. "You just cannot separate yourself when
you're sitting on both sides of the fence in regards to transactions,"
Accetturo said.<br></ul>
<br>
Accetturo lost his case, but proved a point. For now, two of the three
officials are still on the foundation board. But perhaps the council
will consider re-defining a conflict of interest.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>