Dealing Responsibly with an Ethics Violation

Here's a what-not-to-do scenario of a sort that is too rarely
included in ethics training. And yet it's one that could save a lot
of officials, as well as ethics programs, a great deal of trouble,
and help maintain public trust in local government.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/09/03/3604034/miamis-carollo-challenges…; target="”_blank”">an
article in Tuesday's Miami <i>Herald</a>, a Miami
commissioner, who was pulled over for a traffic violation, called
the police chief, who called the police officer's commander, who
called the officer. The commissioner was let off with a warning,
which is what the officer says he would have done anyway. In other
words, it was an unnecessary interference with the justice system by
a high-level city official. This kind of minor abuse of office
happens all the time.<br>
<br>

In this instance, an ethics complaint was filed against the
commissioner, and the ethics advocate found probable cause that the
commissioner abused his office for his own benefit. The commissioner
could have admitted this and settled for a reprimand or small fine.
But the commissioner said that he felt the "right thing" to do was
fight. One wonders why, if he feels the right thing to do is fight,
he didn't let the officer give him a ticket and fight that. It would
have saved both the commissioner and the county a lot of time and
money.<br>
<br>
The ethics commission was forced to hold a hearing in this minor
matter. The commissioner was represented by a "prominent" attorney.
When the police officer was asked whether his decision was affected
by the call from his commander, he answered, “It had to. To say no
would be disingenuous.”<br>
<br>
According to the article, at the hearing the commissioner's attorney proposed a conspiracy "in
which police targeted [the commissioner] because they held him
responsible for benefit cuts." I suppose this means that someone in
the police department disclosed what had occurred in order to
retaliate. Or is he saying the police department made the whole
thing up? We don't know, because the hearing isn't over. But if
there was a conspiracy, the police put on a great show:  in his
testimony, the police chief even badmouthed the ethics complainant,
and the complainant badmouthed the police chief right back.<br>
<br>
Assuming no conspiracy, what occurred here was a second act of
irresponsible, unprofessional behavior. After abusing his office for
his personal benefit, the commissioner failed to deal responsibly
with the ethics complaint, which would have meant stipulating to the
facts and entering into a settlement. One can only hope he doesn't
ask for attorney fees.<br>
<br>
Officials need to recognize that, although prevention — getting
officials to deal responsibly with conflict situations and not to
abuse their office — is the principal goal of a government ethics
program, a secondary goal, after an official fails to do this, is to
get officials to deal responsibly with the ethics violation (one's own and
others'). This means reporting ethical misconduct to the ethics
commission (which the police chief, commander, and officer failed to
do); and, for the respondent, agreeing on facts and fair sanctions
so that the fewest possible government resources are expended.<br>
<br>
The
result of a responsible handling of an ethics matter is that the
case serves as a positive learning experience for other officials. In this
way, dealing responsibly with an ethics violation also satisfies the
goal of prevention.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---