A Miscellany
<b>Who Should Oversee Nepotism Rules?</b><br>
According to <a href="http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Stamford-Reps-revamp-anti-…; target="”_blank”">an article in the Stamford (CT) <i>Advocate</i> last week</a>, Stamford's Board
of Representatives voted to amend an anti-nepotism bill to instead
require the city's human resources director to draft a nepotism
policy. The sponsor of the amendment was quoted as saying, "A
one-size-fits-all approach is not really amenable in situations that
can be so different based on individual circumstances and different
traditions. In matters of extreme human sensitivity like this I
think we should be governed by policies that can be flexible, nimble
and readily amended to meet unforeseen circumstances or
unintended consequences."<br>
<br>
Such flexibility is usually provided by a waiver process, under the
ethics commission's authority (Stamford has an active EC). It is
hard to imagine a human resources director as having the authority
to stand up to the uniformed departments, which are usually where
most nepotism occurs.<br>
<br>
One consequence of the amendment seems to be that elected officials
and board members will be excluded from the nepotism policy. But it
would, supposedly, include board of education employees. Couldn't they have found a way to include both?<br>
<br>
<b>One Council Member Can Help Improve an Ethics Program</b><br>
When a city council won't give the city's ethics commission enough
teeth or enough funding to adequately staff it, what can be done?
Usually, the ethics commission keeps making its case for more
authority and a larger budget until a scandal opens up council
members' ears.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://oaklandnorth.net/2013/10/02/ethics/" target="”_blank”">an
article on the Oakland North website</a>, a project of UC
Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism, one council member has
established an Ethics and Good Government work group to come up with
proposals for improving the city government's ethics program. The
group held a forum earlier this month to invite residents’ feedback.<br>
<br>
<b>Limits on the Participation of Union Affiliated School Board Members</b><br>
Three years ago I wrote <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/conflicts-teachers-school-boards" target="”_blank”">a
blog post</a> about a New Jersey School Ethics Commission (SEC)
advisory opinion concerning the limits on school board member
participation when the member is affiliated with a union that represents
the district's employees. The advisory opinion allowed such board
members to participate in the matter only after a memorandum of
agreement had been reached between the school board and the union.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.northjersey.com/news/227556801_2_trustees_dispute_ethics_opi…; target="”_blank”">an
article yesterday in the <i>Record</i></a>, a new SEC advisory opinion
advised the school board to limit two of its union-affiliated
members to "non-union personnel issues" and it banned their
involvement in teacher contracts, labor relations issues,
grievances, salary guides and development. The SEC said that
participation would "create in the public a perception that these
members and the board at large might be compromised and their
judgment or objectivity impaired. Moreover, the new members’
employment positions may severely diminish the board’s ability to
conduct much of its business." <br>
<br>
By this, I presume the SEC meant that the presence of union representatives or
members would make it harder for colleagues to be open about their
views, and there could be problems involving confidential
information.<br>
<br>
The school board members have pointed out that their union
affiliation was known to voters. This is a tough question. If voters
choose a school board that consists primarily of union
representatives and members, should this be permitted despite the
conflicts of interest involved? If voters choose a zoning board that
consists primarily of realtors and developers, should this be
permitted? Voters are certainly allowed to vote pro-union or
pro-development, but should they be allowed to effectively override
conflicts of interest laws that they probably don't know exist or do
not understand?<br>
<br>
Sadly, <a href="http://www.nj.gov/education/legal/ethics/advisory/chrono.htm" target="”_blank”">the
SEC has not posted any advisory opinion since last December</a>.
Do its members realize that transparency is a government ethics
issue, and that guidance is its principal goal?<br>
<br>
<b>Another Name for an EC</b><br>
According to <a href="http://www.novinite.com/articles/154483/Bulgarian+MPs+Axe+Chair+of+Conf…; target="”_blank”">the
Sofia News Agency's novinite.com website</a>, Bulgaria's ethics
commission is called (in English translation) the Commission on
Prevention and Ascertainment of Conflict of Interest.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---