Disappointing Report from Ethics Task Force in Phoenix
Phoenix has followed Chicago in taking a task force approach to
ethics reform. As in Chicago, the mayor selected the task force. The
Ethics Task Force, which according to <a>an
article in the Arizona <i>Republic</i></a>, consists of "prominent
attorneys and judges," filed a report with the council on March 6. I have
been unable to locate a copy of the report, but I did find a 5-page
executive summary of the supposedly 20-page report (attached; see
below). <br>
<br>
Phoenix is one of the largest American cities without a government
ethics program. It has limited ethics guidelines (see <a href="http://icma.org/Documents/Document/Document/4871" target="”_blank”">the city's ethics handbook</a>); no ethics
training, as far as I could tell; ethics advice from either the city
attorney's office or from a committee consisting of the city
attorney, the city auditor, and the city manager; disclosure only of
conflicts in certain situations; and no enforcement process. In
other words, there is a great deal of improvement that can be done.<br>
<br>
But the three goals set by the mayor relate only to "ethics
standards" (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/phoenix-mayor-forms-ethics-task-force…; target="”_blank”">my
blog post on the setting up of the task force</a>). And according
to the executive summary, the task force took its job far less seriously than
Chicago's. For one thing, it does not appear to have looked at what
the Chicago task force was doing. Or at what any of the better task
forces have done. It spoke to one ethics expert, while Chicago's
task force talked to a slew of them. It does not appear to have
wasted any time looking at the many resources on the City Ethics
site. Instead, it somehow gleaned "best practices" by looking at the
ethics codes of a few other cities.<br>
<br>
One problem is the task force's choice of how to split up into
committees. It decided to have one committee for elected officials
and board members, and another committee for employees and
volunteers. Considering that most ethics codes provide the same
rules for all four groups, this does not appear to have been the
best choice. Better would have been a committee on rules and
disclosure, and a committee on administration and enforcement.<br>
<br>
The reforms it recommends are, for the most part, good ones. When
you have so little, it's hard not to find improvements that can be
made. And the task force did go beyond "ethics standards" to
recommend both ethics training and an "independent" ethics
commission that, sadly, would only be able to make recommendations
to the council and enforce the ethics code only against elected
officials and board members.<br>
<br>
Nothing is said about ethics advice, disclosure (except of gifts),
EC staff, the EC budget, EC initiation of investigations,
whistleblower protection, or an ethics hotline.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.azcentral.com/insiders/phxbeat/2013/03/25/phoenix-ethics-tas…; target="”_blank”">An
Arizona <i>Republic</i> column dated March 25</a> carries the headline, "Phoenix ethics task force
members fear city will shelve plan." <a>The
<i>Republic</i> article</a> quotes a couple of council members expressing
the usual suspect concerns, such as “Ethics is kind of a personal
perception for me and most people, I truly believe," and a concern
that the ethics commission not be an “overused tool” for tarnishing
city leaders.<br>
<br>
The task force is hoping the recommendations will be an election
issue. As of now, it is not clear whether or not it will make it out of committee.
I could find nothing about the task force report in the last
month. That does not bode well.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---