Gifts from National and State Associations

Anonymous

Thu, 11/05/2009 - 03:40

Complaints/ Investigations/Hearings

Many of the most difficult situations in government ethics involve
relationships that are not direct. For example, situations where the
company that provides a benefit does not do business with the local
government, but is owned by someone who owns another company that does
do business with or have an interest in legislation before the local
government (click <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/two-case-studies" target="_blank">here </a>for
a recent example). Technically, the company giving the benefit is not
an "interested person" or whatever such a relationship is called in the
relevant ethics code. 
 
An interesting indirect relationship arose in a case in Rhode Island
which was decided this week, according to <a href="http://www.projo.com/news/content/Lynch_Ethics_Commission_11-04-09_0SGB…; target="_blank">an
article in the Providence Journal</a>. A complaint was filed with the
state ethics commission (which has jurisdiction over both state and local officials)
against the state's attorney general for a plane ticket he was given to
go to a conference by the National Cable and Telecommunications
Association (NCTA).

The commission dismissed the complaint, because the NCTA does not have official business in
the state and does not lobby in the state, even though the AG's office
does apparently regulate at least one NCTA member company and even
though the AG is expected to run for governor next year. Here is the RI
definition of "interested person" (Regulation 6-14-5009(c) of the <a href="http://www.ethics.ri.gov/code/" target="_blank">Code of Ethics</a>):

<ul>a person or a representative of a
person or business that has a direct
financial interest in a decision that the person subject to the Code of
Ethics is authorized to make, or to participate in the making of, as
part of his or her official duties. 
</ul>
 
In general, it is best to add "or indirect" after "direct" in ethics
codes. The <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/full-text-model-ethics-code#TOC35" target="_blank">City
Ethics Model Code language</a> is:

<ul>[a person or entity that] has
received or sought a financial benefit,
directly or through a relationship with another person or entity, from
the city within the previous three years, or intends to seek a
financial benefit in the future. 
</ul>
 
The AG said of the complaint, filed by the Republican Party chair, “This frivolous
tactic never had even the thinnest veneer of merit." 
 
The commission's vice-chair had a more constructive view of the
situation. “Is this a
loophole? I don’t know. It raises questions about the rules governing
national trade
associations that we should look at.” 
 
Every national association and, for the purpose of local government ethics, state association should be included as an "interested
person," because such associations represent members who are
interested persons, who do business with state and local governments
nationwide. There's no reason why an association would give a
benefit to an official if it had not even an indirect interest. If it was simply being
charitable, it could have given the money to the government itself (but
even that would raises questions). At least it would not put the
official in a position where he would have to decide whether to follow
the letter or the spirit of the law. 
 
In my opinion, an AG should always follow the spirit of the law when it
applies to him. As the top law enforcement official, he or she should always err on the side of caution, and set an example for everyone else. But from
the way this AG responded, it does not appear that setting an example is a high priority for him. 
 
Robert Wechsler 
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics 
 
---

Search

Gifts from National and State Associations

Tags

Share This Page