Exempting Special Developer Board Members from City Ethics Code in Dallas
According to <a href="http://www.dallascityhall.com/committee_briefings/briefings0110/ECO_Mun…; target="”_blank”">a
January 15 memorandum</a>, a week from today the Dallas city council
will be considering an amendment to the city's <a href="http://www.dallascityhall.com/pdf/Ethics/CodeOfEthics.pdf" target="”_blank”">ethics
code</a>, which would exclude municipal management district (MMD) board
members from the ethics code (it has already been approved by the council's economic development committee).<br>
<br>
MMDs are developer-controlled political subdivisions that can raise
taxes and collect fees from real property owners in their districts.
They were created in 2009 to develop three particular areas of the
city. Although three city employees sit on each board, the boards are
controlled by developers.<br>
<br>
If these developers want to personally sit on their boards, they will
by definition have serious conflicts of interest. In many cases, a
majority of each board would have to recuse themselves, and the boards
could not function.<br>
<br>
But that problem is very simple to deal with. Just add a Rule of
Necessity provision to the ethics code. Here is the one from the City
Ethics Model Code:<br>
<ul>
§100(3)(5) <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/full-text-model-ethics-code#0.1_TOC34…; target="”_blank”">Rule
of Necessity</a>: If recusal would leave a board with less than a
quorum capable of acting, members must disclose their conflicts on the
public record, but they may then vote.<br>
</ul>
But allowing developers to vote on their own projects does not solve
all the MMD's ethics problems. There are also rules about contracts
between board members and the city, and the developers have such
contracts.<br>
<br>
Since MMDs are intended to help developers help themselves, ethics
rules relating to the furthering of their direct personal interests
should not be applied to them. But what about ethics rules relating to
the furthering of other people's interests? Should they be allowed to
hire family members as staff, to disclose confidential information to
friends, to accept gifts meant to influence them? Should they be
allowed to use public property for their and others' personal use, to
require staff members to involve themselves in political activity? Should they be exempted from disclosure requirements?<br>
<br>
A blanket exemption from the ethics code is at best lazy. MMD board
members should be excluded only from those provisions that would be
absurd in relation to them. Council staff should carefully go through
the ethics code with someone who truly understands local government
ethics and make a list of such provisions. And they should consider
adding a rule of necessity that would apply not only to MMDs, but to
any city board.<br>
<br>
As one council member is quoted in <a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-e…; target="”_blank”">today's
Dallas <i>Morning News</i></a>, "I think it sends
a somewhat bad message that we're approving the appointments of people
to a board and then we just totally said you don't have to – in any
way, shape or form – abide by the city's ethics codes."<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---