A Miscellany
<span>Open Records Requests and
Ethics Proceedings</span><br>
In an unusual twist on the confidentiality of ethics proceedings,
counsel for the Colorado Springs mayor's former client, the person who gave rise to the mayor's apparent conflict of interest, has made an open records
request for all documents related to the ethics proceeding against the
mayor, according to <a href="http://www.gazette.com/articles/attorney-58992-ethics-landco.html" target="”_blank”">an
article in the Colorado Springs <i>Gazette</i></a>.
</span>Counsel for the complainant noted, “Is there any irony in the
attorney for Marshall asking the city to
turn the cards up when it seems that Mr. Marshall, in all his dealings,
has preferred confidentiality commitments?" In fact, the complaint was
filed to bring transparency to a secret deal (see my <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/747" target="”_blank”">blog post</a> on this).<br>
<br>
I would think that if a proceeding is confidential, documents produced
in the proceeding would also be confidential. But it is not city law
that makes the proceeding confidential; it was the ethics commission's
decision (see my <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/754" target="”_blank”">blog post</a>
on this). Can an ethics commission, without support in the ethics law,
override an open records law? I would guess not.<br>
<br>
<span></span><span>Shades of Ambiguity?</span><br>
According to <a href="http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/07/defense-in-dallas-city…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Dallas <i>Morning
News</i></a>,</span> a council member obtained an opinion from an assistant
city attorney about the propriety of asking developers for money for a
city development initiative. The assistant city attorney said that this
could be done, so long as the funds were given directly to the city and
coordinated through the city manager's office.<br>
<br>
The council member has been accused of accepting bribes from
developers, and is using this opinion as a defense, especially since in
some cases he worked with the city manager's office. But if any of the
funds went into the council member's pocket, the opinion hardly seems
to protect him.<br>
<br>
In addition, the council member showed the jury an ethics video that
was viewed by council members. Counsel for the defense noted how
complicated ethics was and how many "shades of ambiguity." "So someone
needs a lawyer to navigate?" the defense attorney asked the assistant
city attorney, who said, "Yes."<br>
<br>
I don't see who needs a lawyer to tell him not to take money from
developers with projects before their board. If a council member can't
read the ethics code to this extent, he probably can't make
determinations about any law.<br>
<br>
<span>Political Conflicts</span><br>
According to <a href="http://www.wreg.com/wreg-herenton-greed,0,1830044.story" target="”_blank”">an
article on wreg.com</a>, the Memphis council officially accepted the
mayor's resignation as of July 30. One council member, as well as the
mayor who isn't quite sure he's leaving now, said that the council
couldn't do this, because its members have conflicts of interest. The
council member said, "With at least three members of the council
thinking of running for
Mayor...and one of them ...will be Mayor pro
tem, they shouldn't have voted. You can't vote on
anything, because you're going to move from one position
to another position. And that's going to be some new revenue for you."<br>
<br>
This view would mean that any council member up for chair of the
council (sometimes for mayor, if the council elects the mayor) would
not be able to vote, because it would mean more money for him. Every
conflict does not require recusal, and political conflicts such as
these are nearly always excluded, even if there is a raise in pay due
to obtaining a new political position. It is assumed in government
ethics that one does not run for mayor or council chair for the money, and that when it
comes to politics, no elected official can be expected to be impartial, whether or not he
or she is running.<br>
<br>
<span>Pension Board Disclosure
Requirement</span><br>
Los Angeles candidates have to disclose their campaign contributions,
but they don't have to report which boards or departments they do
business with. Therefore, according to <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/l-a-pension-board-approve…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Los Angeles <i>Times</i></a>,</span>
the Fire and Police Pensions board approved a policy
demanding quarterly statements that spell out the political donations
made by companies that do business with the board as well as by their
paid representatives, their
employees, and their employees’ family members.<br>
<br>
The board will also require the disclosure of all “placement agents” --
individuals and firms that
promote a specific investment proposal -- as well as other
intermediaries. This is a response to the kickbacks to placement agents
in New York State and elsewhere.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---