Ethics Waivers by a Legislative Body

I am a proponent of ethics waivers. But only if they are provided by an independent ethics commission. When they are provided by high-level officials or their appointees, they appear to be self-serving. Why self-serving? Because they create precedents that will enable those who make the precedents to themselves get ethics waivers.

Westchester County, NY has an ethics waiver process that allows the county legislative body to provide waivers. According to an article in the Journal News, today an outgoing county legislator was given a waiver, by a 9 to 1 vote, to be the lobbyist for the Westchester Medical Center, which does business with the county and has county-appointed individuals on its board of trustees. County legislators are required by law to wait a year before taking such a position.

According to the article, such waivers are "commonplace." This makes a mockery of the law and of the waiver process. Such waivers should only be given if there is a very compelling reason. The fact that the legislator would be good for the job (which in fact did not exist until he was hired) is not a compelling reason. The question is not whether the individual would be good for the job, but whether allowing a legislator to go through the revolving door is good for the community.

At least the waiver process does require a public hearing. This is a good thing. But Westchester County should either hand its waiver process over to its ethics board (which does not appear to be active; this too should be changed) or get rid of the waiver process.

Just this month, the county's charter revision commission filed a report calling for "a comprehensive review and revision" of the code of ethics, based on NYC Conflicts of Interest Board director Mark Davies' recommendations (attached; see below), which include a recommendation to hand the waiver process over to the ethics board.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---