Vendor Codes of Conduct Sound Better Than They Are
Local government vendor or supplier codes of conduct are not commonly found
in the U.S. In a limited search, I couldn't find one. But corporations commonly have them, as do some Canadian cities and some states
and state agencies. And they sound like a good idea.<br>
<br>
The reason I raise this idea is that Cuyahoga County's new county
executive says he will have one drafted (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/new-cuyahoga-county-executive-puts-ne… most recent blog post</a>). What can we expect from such a
code of conduct?<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/policies/ethical/appendix_en.html">Ottaw…
supplier code of conduct</a> has good provisions, but nothing regarding
government ethics. <a href="http://www.state.wv.us/admin/purchase/vrc/VendorCodeofConduct.pdf">West
Virginia's vendor code of conduct</a> consists mostly of ethics
provisions. However, as good as they are, they do not provide very
clear guidance. Here are the four core provisions:<ul>
<p>4. Refuse to cause or influence, or attempt to cause or influence,
agency procurement officers in their official capacity to impair the
objectivity or independence of judgment of a purchasing transaction;</p>
<p>5. Avoid any appearance of unethical or compromising practices in
relationship, actions and communications;</p>
<p>6. Identifies and eliminates participation of any individual in
procurement situations where a conflict of interest may be involved;</p>
<p>7. Understands that agency purchasers of the state shall at no time or
under any circumstances, accept directly or indirectly, gifts, favor,
service, gratuities or other items of value from your organization;</p></ul>
The <a href="http://www.nyserda.org/pdfs/Governance/NYSERDAs%20Code%20of%20Conduct%2…
York State Energy Research and Development Authority
code of conduct</a> for contractors, consultants, and vendors is more
extensive and detailed. It includes a lobbying provision, an
independence of bid provision, relatives of employees and
post-employment provisions, and duty to report provision (complete with
a hotline number). But they are only guidelines, with language such as
"encourages" and "strongly discourages." There appears to be no
training, formal advice process, disclosure, or enforcement. One
sentence stands out from the whole; it is a reference to a state
law: "Violations of these limits on gifts may be grounds for
immediate contract termination and referral for civil action or
criminal prosecution."<br>
<br>
Better than separate, unenforceable codes of conduct is the
application of ethics provisions to vendors and others doing or seeking business
with a local government. It is important to give the local (or state) ethics
commission jurisdiction over these individuals and companies. Any ethics-related rules for vendors and others doing
business should be included in the ethics code either directly or in an
appendix, so that all rules can be found in one place (state rules
should also be included in an appendix, for this reason).<br>
<br>
All applicable provisions should also be included in all RFPs, requests
for permits, and the like, and all vendors and others doing or seeking
business should be required to disclose all possible conflicts. They
should also be encouraged to seek advice before the bid, grant, or
permit process begins.<br>
<br>
Putting all of this in the form of a vendor (and grantee, permittee,
etc.) code of conduct, and including it will all RFPs, etc. is fine. But trying to do an end-run around this
formal, enforceable process with a merely aspirational code of conduct
is not acceptable. Vendors and others doing or seeking business should
be brought fully into a local government ethics program. Not only does
it protect the public and their officials, it also protects vendors and
others from being pulled into a pay-to-play situation. When an official
demands a gift, to himself or any individual or entity close to him,
someone seeking a contract, grant, or permit should be able to point to
a law and say that if he does so, he will lose his contract, grant, and
permit, so there is no advantage to him, or anyone else, in making the payment.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---