You are here
A Miscellany
Friday, April 8th, 2011
Robert Wechsler
Model Ethics Code Promotion As Community Service
I promise you that I did not write the City Ethics Model Code in order to shorten my prison sentence. According to an article in yesterday's Connecticut Post, that is effectively what a Shelton, CT developer offered to do to shorten his sentence for lying in court about gifts he made to Shelton officials, including the mayor.
The judge gave him 6 months in prison out of the possible 27 months. The judge did not, however, make a community service requirement that the developer pay for a model ethics code and "stump around the state to publicize it," as the developer apparently requested.
EC Members and Politics
How bad is it for ethics commission members to be involved in politics? Here's a good example of what can happen.
A member of the Chula Vista, CA ethics commission ran for a seat on the Otay Water District Board and lost. The victor and the water district board president filed a complaint with the ethics board against the ethics commission member. The ethics commission dismissed the complaint.
According to an article in last week's San Diego Union-Tribune, it appears that the complaint was for saying derogatory things about the water board members during the campaign. This is clearly not an ethics issue, and the complaint appears to have been properly dismissed. But few people understand this. What they see is an ethics commission protecting one of its own. This shouldn't happen.
It allows someone like the water board president to say, "This is just typical South Bay politics at its worst. This notion that if you’re on the ethics board then you are squeaky clean is propaganda.” It shouldn't be propaganda. It should be true.
Of course, the matter has escalated. The water board members allegedly used a water district attorney at an EC hearing without proper authorization, and the EC member filed an open meetings complaint against them.
Good Law, Lousy Budget
Ethics reform is a wonderful thing, but some kinds of ethics reform don't mean much without the addition of personnel to make it work. This is a problem in Philadelphia, according to an article in the Philadelphia Daily News this week.
The reform involved the creation of a lobbyist registry. The ethics board feels it needs to add three staff members (two IT people and a supervisor/help desk person) to create and maintain the registry (only about $130,000 a year), but the mayor's budget fails to provide the necessary additional funds.
It's not a good time to be seeking budget increases, but it's not really an increase when a substantial new program is added. Budget limiting is a favorite way for elected officials to prevent ethics commissions from actually performing their required tasks. Not increasing a budget to reflect the addition of a new program sends the message that an administration is not really serious about ethics reform.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
I promise you that I did not write the City Ethics Model Code in order to shorten my prison sentence. According to an article in yesterday's Connecticut Post, that is effectively what a Shelton, CT developer offered to do to shorten his sentence for lying in court about gifts he made to Shelton officials, including the mayor.
The judge gave him 6 months in prison out of the possible 27 months. The judge did not, however, make a community service requirement that the developer pay for a model ethics code and "stump around the state to publicize it," as the developer apparently requested.
EC Members and Politics
How bad is it for ethics commission members to be involved in politics? Here's a good example of what can happen.
A member of the Chula Vista, CA ethics commission ran for a seat on the Otay Water District Board and lost. The victor and the water district board president filed a complaint with the ethics board against the ethics commission member. The ethics commission dismissed the complaint.
According to an article in last week's San Diego Union-Tribune, it appears that the complaint was for saying derogatory things about the water board members during the campaign. This is clearly not an ethics issue, and the complaint appears to have been properly dismissed. But few people understand this. What they see is an ethics commission protecting one of its own. This shouldn't happen.
It allows someone like the water board president to say, "This is just typical South Bay politics at its worst. This notion that if you’re on the ethics board then you are squeaky clean is propaganda.” It shouldn't be propaganda. It should be true.
Of course, the matter has escalated. The water board members allegedly used a water district attorney at an EC hearing without proper authorization, and the EC member filed an open meetings complaint against them.
Good Law, Lousy Budget
Ethics reform is a wonderful thing, but some kinds of ethics reform don't mean much without the addition of personnel to make it work. This is a problem in Philadelphia, according to an article in the Philadelphia Daily News this week.
The reform involved the creation of a lobbyist registry. The ethics board feels it needs to add three staff members (two IT people and a supervisor/help desk person) to create and maintain the registry (only about $130,000 a year), but the mayor's budget fails to provide the necessary additional funds.
It's not a good time to be seeking budget increases, but it's not really an increase when a substantial new program is added. Budget limiting is a favorite way for elected officials to prevent ethics commissions from actually performing their required tasks. Not increasing a budget to reflect the addition of a new program sends the message that an administration is not really serious about ethics reform.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
