Not Much to Get Excited About in Baltimore's Ethics Reforms
<b>Update:</b> The bills discussed below passed the council on March 22.<br>
<br>
Just down the road from Philadelphia, Baltimore too is considering
ethics reforms, but it's in response to a scandal involving its past
mayor rather than in response to the work of a task force.<br>
<br>
There are two bills before the Baltimore council, both of them
introduced while the new mayor was council president. <a href="http://legistar.baltimorecitycouncil.com/attachments/5472.pdf" target="”_blank”">One</a>
makes changes to the city's ethics board composition and ethics
training, <a href="http://legistar.baltimorecitycouncil.com/attachments/5471.pdf" target="”_blank”">the
other</a> to the city's ethics code. Neither is much to get excited about.<br>
<br>
<b>The Ethics Board Bill</b><br>
The biggest changes in the ethics board's composition would be that
instead of the mayor nominating four members (with the fifth a member
of the city solicitor's office), the mayor would appoint three
members, with the council president and the city comptroller each
getting one choice. This hardly takes the ethics board out of the
control, or appearance of control, by the mayor and other elected
officials.<br>
<br>
A council member proposed that the mayor only be able to
nominate two ethics board members, and he has been strongly opposed by the council. It's almost as if none of them
bothered to look at the alternatives or at the arguments against ethics
board appointment by any official; a quick search of this blog alone
would have done the trick.<br>
<br>
For some reason, the bill would require that two of the mayor's
three appointments be lawyers. One wonders what is the basis for this decision. But at least city officials and employees
will be barred from the ethics board. Right now, there are two
officials and one city employee on the ethics board!<br>
<br>
Another positive move is to end the practice of ethics board terms being tied to the
mayor's term, so that each new mayor can appoint a new ethics board of
his or her own. Nothing says "I control the ethics board" better than
this sort of practice.<br>
<br>
The mayor can still remove ethics board members (and even refuse the
nominations of the council president and comptroller), but now it has
to be for cause. And the mayor can no longer select the chair; the
board would actually be allowed to do this itself.<br>
<br>
Finally, the ethics board must now submit an annual report. A good
thing. As a whole, the ethics board bill raises Baltimore from a
ridiculous setup to a relatively normal setup. One-and-a-half cheers.<br>
<br>
<b>The Ethics Code Bill</b><br>
One of the biggest problems that came out in the ethics scandal
that led to the mayor's resignation was the fact that a developer whose
projects required approval by the city was not considered someone doing
business with the city. The new bill makes changes to this definition,
but not so that such a developer would be included. Only those with
sales, purchases, leases, or contracts with the city would be considered to
be doing business with the city. A missed opportunity.<br>
<br>
The best thing in this bill is that subcontractors would be considered to be doing
business with the city, and that gifts could not be accepted from owners,
directors et al of companies doing business with the city.<br>
<br>
These are relatively minor changes, considering that a big scandal
provides the opportunity to take a fresh look at a city's ethics
program and to get provisions passed that would otherwise be hard to
get through a council.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-md.ci.ethi…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Baltimore <i>Sun</i></a>, the ethics board approves of these
changes. No ethics board should accept such minor changes that only
bring the city into normalcy with respect to a handful of provisions.<br>
<br>
There doesn't seem to be any good government organization pushing for
more major changes, nor do there appear to be editorials calling for a
better ethics program. More specifically, I don't see anyone calling
for taking ethics enforcement out of the hands of prosecutors and
letting it be handled, as with most local governments, as a civil matter
by an ethics commission.<br>
<br>
Baltimore will continue to have a relatively weak ethics program
dominated by its elected officials, who seem perfectly content arguing
over whether the mayor should get two or three ethics board
appointments. Not a good sign for an ethics renaissance in Baltimore.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---