An Odd Ethics Commission in Oakland
<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/cronyism-and-ethics" target="”_blank”">I
recently noted</a> Oakland, CA's odd nepotism ordinance. Well, its <a href="http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/public_ethics/webpage.html#4" target="”_blank”">Public
Ethics Commission</a> is also odd, and worthy of a look. I was alerted
to some of its oddities by a recent <a href="http://www.abetteroakland.com/does-oakland-need-a-public-ethics-commiss…; target="”_blank”">A
Better Oakland blog post</a> entitled "Does Oakland Need a Public
Ethics Commission?" An odd question from someone who does not have an
ax to grind against campaign finance laws.<br>
<br>
Many ethics commissions handle campaign finance and lobbying matters as
well as conflict of interest or ethics matters, but Oakland's handles
almost exclusively the former, despite its name. It does have
jurisdiction over the city's conflict of interest code (Ch. 3-16 of the
<a href="http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=16308&stateId=5&stateNa…; target="”_blank”">Code
of Ordinances</a>), but this "code" is nothing but an incorporation by
reference of <a href="http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/enabling/Section%2018730%20%28title%202%29.pdf&q…; target="”_blank”">a
state law</a> that requires financial disclosure and has only two
provisions, a basic conflict of interest provision and a provision on
loans to officials. Neither the city code nor the EC website provides a link to this
state law.<br>
<br>
Nor does the EC website provide a link to something it refers to as the
Code of Conduct for City Officials, a code that does not appear in the
variety of searches I attempted. There is, however, a link to a <a href="http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/public_ethics/code.html" target="”_blank”">City
Council Code of Ethics</a>, but this is an aspirational code, not
intended for enforcement. Here's one of the twelve provisions:<br>
<ul>
Listen courteously and attentively to all public discussions at Council
meetings and avoid interrupting other speakers, including other Council
members, except as may be permitted by established Rules of Order.<br>
</ul>
Cellphone abuse alone could keep the EC's docket full if this provision
were enforced.<br>
<br>
There is also that odd nepotism ordinance I've already written about.<br>
<br>
Another odd thing about Oakland's EC is the appointment process. Three
of its seven members are appointed by the mayor with council approval,
and the other four members are selected by the EC members. But the
executive director is appointed by the city administrator. This gets
everyone involved, and therefore can create all sorts of appearances of
impropriety.<br>
<br>
For example, according to an <a href="http://www.abetteroakland.com/max-allstadt-an-open-letter-to-the-oaklan…; target="”_blank”">open
letter to the EC</a> that appeared on the A Better Oakland blog last
year, there was speculation that the city administrator was pushing the
executive director to aggressively pursue an ethics complaint against
a council member who had strongly opposed the administrator's
appointment. Whether true or not, this doesn't make the ethics process
look good. An EC executive director should be selected by and should
report to the EC itself, and no one else should be involved.<br>
<br>
The blog post about the need for an EC says that most complaints go
nowhere. "Either nobody did anything wrong, or maybe they did, but the
Commission doesn’t have any power to do anything about it, or they did
do something kind of iffy but it wasn’t that big a deal and it’s too
late to fix it now." The feeling is that it is not providing sufficient
ethics oversight, and is overly careful to not ruffle feathers.<br>
<br>
The open letter points out an odd way for the EC to get out of making a
decision. The lobbyist ordinance defines a lobbyist as “a salaried employee,
officer, or director of any corporation, organization, or association.”
What nouns "salaried" modifies became an issue before the EC, and the
chair asked two English teachers, both of whom said the word could not modify
just "employee," but all three of the nouns.<br>
<br>
Yes, there is a grammatical matter here, but who would ask an English teacher to interpret it, when it is lawyers who interpret laws? To a lawyer it's clear
that corporate directors are not normally salaried individuals, and
that the word "salaried" is meant to distinguish salaried from hourly
employees.<br>
<br>
Instead, the EC referred the matter to the staff and to the council for
clarification. That displays a sad unwillingness to deal with matters
before it.<br>
<br>
It is true that government ethics includes campaign finance,
transparency, and lobbyist laws and enforcement, but the public does
not realize this. An ethics commission appears to deal with government
ethics, which involves conflicts of interest. The name of an EC does
matter. If it is misnamed, it is confusing to the public and it does
not get as much use or have as important a presence and, therefore,
effect on the city's ethics environment. Something called an EC should
have a true ethics code to administer, or it will be seen as unwilling
to deal with ethics problems.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---