The mayor of a city of 46,000 people announces that the city would
change its policy requiring annexation to obtain water and sewer
service, and then negotiates an agreement with a developer to provide
him with utilities. In the middle of the negotiations, the developer
gives the mayor's campaign a $10,000 contribution. An ethics

This is the second in a series of blog posts inspired by reading Susan
Neiman’s book <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Clarity-Grown-Up-Idealists-Revised/dp/06911…; target="”_blank”">Moral
Clarity:
A
Guide for Grown-Up Idealists</a></i> (Princeton, 2008).<br>
<br>
A controversial aspect of government ethics involves intentions or

Ethics charges are often not the end, but rather the beginning of a
process to improve government ethics. Take a recent instance in Los
Angeles.<br>
<br>

I recently read Susan Neiman’s book <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Clarity-Grown-Up-Idealists-Revised/dp/06911…; target="”_blank”">Moral
Clarity:
A
Guide for Grown-Up Idealists</a></i> (Princeton, 2008) and found a lot
there
of value to government ethics, even though government ethics doesn’t
generally involve the

<br>
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? In English: Who will guard the guardians? This
is a question many people ask about ethics commissions. But the
question I would like to raise is, Is this the right question to ask?<br>
<br>

One of the biggest differences between unethical conduct and criminal
conduct by government officials is the matter of proving intent. For
example, a bribe is nothing more than a gift to a government official
where it has been proven that the official intentionally took a gift in return for certain conduct. In government ethics, taking a gift beyond a certain value is all that needs to be proven to show misconduct. The official's conduct, beyond accepting the gift, is
irrelevant, as is the official's intent.<br>
<br>

Georgia seems intent on providing an entire course on the ethical
obligations of government attorneys. This time it's the obligations of
the state's top government attorney, the attorney general. There's also
an issue concerning special government attorneys.<br>
<br>

Here's another blog post about a Georgian who wants out of EC jurisdiction.<br>
<br>
Some ethics commissions, especially state ethics commissions, have no
jurisdiction over officials once they leave office. Especially when ECs
require confidentiality regarding complaints until probable cause is
found, this lack of jurisdiction allows officials to resign before
their unethical conduct becomes public. And it allows officials to
evade enforcement.<br>
<br>

Government lawyers enjoy exceptions to transparency laws. Should they
also be excepted from government ethics laws? Atlanta senior assistant
city attorney Robert N. Godfrey thinks so, according to <a href="http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/board-puts-attorneys…
article in yesterday's Atlanta <i>Journal-Constitution</i></a>.<br>
<br>

After all the problems San Diego pension boards have had with conflicts
of interest (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/local-government-employees-local-gove…; target="”_blank”">my
blog pos</a>t from November 2009), one would think they would be
extra-sensitive to further conflicts. But, alas, not in this case.<br>
<br>