Failure to disclose or to recuse oneself, even when it is not legally
required, can lead to some big headaches, as can be seen in Portland,
OR, where a city commissioner voted on a grant to a non-profit
organization where his girlfriend works. Also interesting in this case
is the commissioner's use of personal ethics rather than professional,
government ethics in making his judgment calls.<br>
<br>

According to <a href="http://www.morningjournal.com/articles/2010/05/03/news/doc4bdf1580b069e…; target="”_blank”">an
article in yesterday's <i>Morning Journal</i>,</a> the Law Director of Lorain,
OH (a city of 70,000), advising a council member, said, “If his
employer had a direct financial interest, he would have a conflict. But
it does not.”<br>
<br>

Many government lawyers feel that the rules of professional conduct are
sufficient to keep them ethical. Because of this, they sometimes seek
to be excluded from an ethics commission's jurisdiction (see a <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/lawyer-exceptions-and-preferential-tr…; target="”_blank”">recent
blog post</a>) and more often argue that the attorney discipline system

San Francisco's <a href="http://www.sfethics.org/ethics/2011/01/san-francisco-campaign-and-gover…; target="”_blank”">Conflict
of Interest code</a> has an unusual provision about voting on one's own
conduct or position. You would think this provision goes without
saying, but I can assure you it does not.<br>
<ul>
§3.210. Voting on Own Character or Conduct.<br>

New York State's new comptroller (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/excellent-description-unethical-envir…; target="”_blank”">an
earlier blog post</a> about the prior comptroller's ethical problems)
has recently produced a report based on an audit of 31 New York local

A no-bid or improperly bid contract cannot help but create an appearance of
impropriety. And yet not only do elected officials keep defending them,
but they also refuse to acknowledge the appearance of impropriety that
surrounds every one of them, especially when elected officials and
their family members are involved. Here are two current examples, one
in Dallas, the other in Richmond, KY, a city of 33,000 about 90 miles
from Churchill Downs.<br>
<br>

Again and again, local government officials say that there is no need
for an improved ethics program in their town because no one is filing
complaints. If there were ethical problems, they argue, there would be
lots of complaints. But complaints are not an indication of the need
for a better government ethics program. The reason is that no one files
a complaint when they do not expect a fair hearing of the complaint
(most basic programs do not have a body that is considered independent
and neutral).<br>
<br>

According to <a href="http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100413/OPINION/100419839?tc=ar&q…; target="”_blank”">an
editorial
in the <i>Press Democrat</i>,</a> the city council in Santa Rosa
(CA), a city of about 150,000 north of San Francisco, has postponed
consideration of an ordinance requiring city lobbyists to register,
supposedly due to complaints from nonprofits who do not want to pay the

<br><h6>(illustration from illegalsigns.ca, Toronto)</h6><br>
<br>
I haven't mentioned billboard companies in my blog. It's about time.
Billboard companies can be a serious source of apparent impropriety
and corruption in local government. And this is an important time for
them, because things are changing in the billboard world. It's no
longer mostly about old-fashioned billboards along highways. It's
digital supergraphics on buildings and all sorts of 21st-century

<br>
A city creates the position of inspector general in order to root out,
and hopefully prevent, corruption. The inspector general decides to
investigate a situation. A city attorney is involved. The
attorney-client privilege is invoked. The investigation is blocked. And
the word goes out:  if you want to hide your corrupt conduct,
involve a city attorney. It's that simple.<br>
<br>