I've
written recently about the propriety of the new chair of D.C.'s ethics
commission practicing in matters that involve the city government.
In that case, there was an appearance, based on the chair's own
website, that he was seeking benefits for his clients from the council and certain
city agencies. He said he would not do this while sitting on the
ethics commission.
It is common for councils to engage in backsliding shortly after
creating or improving a government ethics program. When there has been a
scandal, councils often go further than they would like to go in
establishing ethics rules and procedures.
According to an
article in yesterday's Washington Post, new allegations have
been made of a "shadow campaign" by which the District of Columbia's
largest contractor (in contract dollars) supported the current mayor's 2010 campaign to
the tune of about 650,000 unreported dollars.
I've written about the issue of ethics
commission jurisdiction over independent agencies and
authorities, which arose in recent years in such places as
Jacksonville, Louisville, and Palm Beach and Broward counties in
Florida. The issue has arisen again in Broward County, in a
different and interesting context.
There is a great deal to be learned from the selection process for
the new District of Columbia Board of Ethics and Government
Accountability, which is effectively complete. Three weeks ago, I
wrote a
blog post about the nomination of Robert Spagnoletti to be
chair of the new ethics board. I questioned this nomination of a
former D.C.
Providing incentives to attract companies or get them to expand
their operations in a city or county has always been a controversial
issue. Incentives are seen as necessary to attract, keep, or expand
jobs locally, but they can also be an unnecessary way to get local
governments into bidding wars (or what is presented to them as a
bidding war) with other local governments, to the benefit of
companies who are going to build or expand no matter what local
governments offer.
New Orleans must have the largest number of civic organizations that
focus on government ethics, and the greatest amount of activity among them. There is the Metropolitan
Crime Commission, a watchdog group that has filed ethics
complaints (see my two blog posts that mention them: 1 2
).
Possibly the most important single thing in government ethics is the
recognition that just because something isn't required, it doesn't
mean you can't do it, and that just because something is not
expressly prohibited, it doesn't mean you can do it. This is an
expanded version of what I've often talked about: that, unlike most laws, ethics
laws are minimum requirements.