A Miscellany
<b>Some Problems with Mayoral Executive Orders in Philadelphia</b><br>
On January 25, Philadelphia Mayor Nutter signed three ethics-related
executive orders, which I would love to link you to, but cannot.
How effective, except as a way to get the council moving on ethics reform, are executive orders that can't be found online? These orders deal with nepotism, family-oriented conflicts, outside
employment, and gifts.<br>
<br>
Their limitations don't stop at inaccessibility. First, although they apply to
85% of the city's employees, the orders do not apply to the City Council, the
Sheriff's Office, the City Commissioner's Office, the Registrar of
Wills, the City Controller, or the District Attorney's Office,
according to <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20110125_Nutter_expands_ethi…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Philadelphia <i>Inquirer</i></a>.<br>
<br>
Nor, according to <a href="http://www.phila.gov/ethicsboard/pdfs/Advisory_Alert_Exec_Orders_22311…; target="”_blank”">an
advisory alert</a> posted on the city's ethics board page, does the
ethics board have jurisdiction to interpret or enforce the executive
orders.<br>
<br>
In addition, according the advisory alert, the executive orders cover
subject matters in the city's ethics code, which means that it's harder
now to comply to the law than it used to be, and the mayor's Chief
Integrity Officer becomes, for the time being, the arbiter regarding
the executive orders.<br>
<br>
The advisory alert ends with the upsetting warning: "A ruling,
waiver or exception granted with respect to an executive order would
not apply or resolve issues under the Public Integrity Laws," that is,
under the ethics code.<br>
<br>
The council is the only body that can apply these executive orders, as
law, to all city officials and employees, and work out inconsistencies with the ethics code. I could find nothing showing that, in the last two months, the council has done anything with
respect to ethics reform.<br>
<br>
<b>Being Extra Responsible</b><br>
According to <a href="http://www.verdenews.com/main.asp?SectionID=36&SubsectionID=73&ArticleI…; target="”_blank”">an
editorial in the Verde <i>Independent</i></a>, a fire board member in Camp
Verde, who was elected in November, resigned because he is a consultant
to a company that might do business with the fire department in the
future. The editorial praises him for dealing responsibly with his
possible conflict.<br>
<br>
Resignation appears to be going too far considering that the conflict
is so indefinite and is limited, in the sense that the board member could
withdraw from participation if the contract came before his board.<br>
<br>
However, it
is important to look at the situation from the client's point of view. Your consultant gets
elected to the fire board, and you realize that you might want
to do business with the fire department. If you win a bid or, even
worse, get a no-bid contract, even if the consultant withdraws, it
will look like you were making use of your consultant's position on the board. The stink that might happen would be bad for you, and bad for the fire board. The relationship with the fire board member might even prevent your bidding for or getting a contract. Concern for the client, from the client's point of view, makes the consultant's
resignation look more reasonable.<br>
<br>
<b>A Large School System Turns Its Ethics Over to the City's Ethics Program</b><br>
According to <a href="http://www.kplu.org/post/city-panel-could-soon-oversee-ethics-seattle-p…; target="”_blank”">an
article on the KPLU website</a>, the Seattle school system, after state
auditors found nearly $2 million in misspent funds by school
district employees and, worse, an “atmosphere of fear and intimidation”
that prevented anyone from blowing the whistle on the perpetrators, has
decided that it wants to turn its ethics program over to the city's
Ethics and Elections Commission. Although the EC will
oversee ethics training and investigation, it would have no enforcement
powers, because the school system ethics policy, which would remain in place, does not provide for civil penalties (and it's not clear the school system has the legal authority to do this), only discipline, which must be handled internally. For more on this relationship, see <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014517731_schoolethics…; target="”_blank”">this article in the Seattle <i>Times</i></a>.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---