City Related

Last December, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/ethics-reform-task-force-report-relea…; target="”_blank”">I
listed </a>the major recommendations of Philadelphia's Task Force on
Ethics and Campaign Finance

<br>
New York City's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has an ongoing problem
confusing his job as mayor, his ownership of a big media company, and
his philanthropic activities. One of the symptoms of this problem is
the unusual revolving door he provides for some of his closest advisers.<br>
<br>

<b>Governors Aren't Always Governors</b><br>
The involvement of New York governor David Paterson in his aide's
domestic abuse matter gets right to the heart of government ethics.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/nyregion/03paterson.html&quot; target="”_blank”">an
article in today's New York <i>Times</i></a>, Paterson told a state employee

<b>Update</b>: March 4, 2010<br>
I am placing this update up front because my consideration of the Committee of Seventy's criticism of the Philadelphia ethics board assumed the truth of the Committee's portrayal of the city's retirement law. Sadly, it turns out that it misrepresented the law, saying that the ethics board was unethically employing a loophole, when the ethics board's rehiring of its general counsel is expressly legal according to the retirement law.<br>
<br>

<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/cronyism-and-ethics&quot; 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&quot; target="”_blank”">Public
Ethics Commission</a> is also odd, and worthy of a look. I was alerted

New York City has had more problems with council earmarks than
Washington, D.C. (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/new-robert-s-bennett-report-dc-counci…; target="”_blank”">recent
blog post on D.C.</a>), and now the city's ombudsman has come up with a
different approach, an approach from outside the council, in fact, from
someone with no actual jurisdiction over the council. His plan shows that ethics

There's a lot of ethics news from San Diego today. First, the judge in <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/important-local-campaign-finance-deci…; target="”_blank”">the
San Diego campaign finance case</a> has <a href="http://electionlawblog.org/archives/clarification%20order.pdf&quot; target="”_blank”">clarified

<b>"Really they are just trying to exercise their First Amendment rights."</b><br>
John LaRue, counsel to individuals and entities contending that San
Diego's campaign finance laws restrict their free speech rights under
the First Amendment (see my <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/important-local-campaign-finance-deci…; target="”_blank”">recent
blog post</a> on the case)<br>

Especially in small towns, bankers often have business relationships
with many people and, therefore, do not make the best board and
commission members on account of the many conflicts they have or, more
frequently, the appearance of impropriety.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20101280355&quot; target="”_blank”">an

Special Counsel <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_S._Bennett&quot; target="”_blank”">Robert S. Bennett</a>'s
<a href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/files/2010/02/bennett…; target="”_blank”">report</a>
on the District of Columbia council's earmark grants and personal services