Her Honor
Judy Nadler, senior fellow in government ethics at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, looks at ethical dilemmas, scandals, and best practices in government.
-
 No Need To Delay Ethics Discussion
Wednesday, Apr. 16, 2008
at 2:08 PM
The road a city takes in updating ethics codes can be long and winding, and without a deadline and direction, it's possible to run out of gas before reaching the destination: a strong, practical, and sustainable ethics program.
Council members in El Paso, Texas recognized that this week when their rules legislative review committee agreed to give the city's ethics commission authority to draft potential updates to the rules that apply to the the council and city employees .
At a meeting in January the commission looked at a few revisions, including a requirement that all city-related business done using city e-mail accounts, applying ethics rules to all non civil-service city employees elected city officials, and appointed board and commission members.
Rep. Eddie Holguin, chair of the review commission said "The update of the ethics code was started over a year ago and it lost steam. We're just getting it started again."
The chair of the city's ethics commission wants the update completed before the end of the year. "I feel the clock is ticking," said Gerald Mangrum, "We have another election coming in May and that means someone new could come in and cause further delay."
The strategy is a good one. While it is important to have input from newly elected council members, there will be time for that when the updated language come back. Delaying the research and recommendations may cause an unnecessary sputter and stall.
-
Would You Run For Office?
Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2008
at 3:59 PM
Would you consider running for public office? In a recent poll conducted of adult residents of Alabama by the USA Polling Group the answer was a resounding "no." Commissioned by the Mobile Press-Register, the survey took the pulse of Alabamians and their impressions of the ethics and integrity of local, state, and federal elected officials.
A stunning 86% said they would never consider running. Two percent didn't know or had no answer, so that leaves just 12% of the respondents willing to throw their hats into the ring for an upcoming election.
Not surprisingly, when asked to rate the honesty and ethical standards of people involved in politics today, 73% said "average or low" and only 1% put politicians "very high" on that scale.
Local officials fared better than their counterparts: 46% of the respondents said the locally elected representatives had higher standards of honesty and ethics, ranking national politicians at 11% and state officials only slightly higher at 13%.
These were not people who are disengaged from politics -- 94% indicated they had voted in the past, 85% talk politics with friends, family, or coworkers, and more than half have contacted a public official. Even more significant, 40% said they had made a campaign contribution.
We need people of integrity in government. Although it is distressing to know that there is such an aversion to running for office, I take comfort in knowing that a whopping 74% support requiring politicians to participate in training sessions on honesty and ethics as a condition for holding office. Being aware of ethical issues and having a framework for making better decisions is an important step in turning those naysayers into believers, and maybe even into candidates.
-
Ethics and Blogging
Thursday, Apr. 10, 2008
at 3:58 PM
Blogs have become the new citizen journalism -- an easy and inexpensive way to express what's on your mind. But because they are often anonymous, blogs can pose special challenges to public officials trying making sure information about city employees and services is accurate.
In a story in the April 2008 issue of Western City magazine, the benefits of blogging are compared with the harm. On the plus side, the public has an opportunity to weigh in on issues that are important. However, blogs are sometimes used to spread malicious rumors and can contain personal attacks.
The right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment makes it difficult to prevent caustic attacks, but there are still ethical considerations. "Even if posting misleading and false information is not illegal, it is important to acknowledge that it is unethical -- the medium in which false and misleading words are published or expressed doesn't matter. Deliberately disseminating inaccurate information is inconsistent with the ethical values of fairness and trustworthiness."
If there were to be a code of ethics for bloggers, it should include accuracy, civility, honesty, fairness, and transparency, among other virtues. You can read more, including how elected officials and city managers are using blogs to reach out to the community, by reading Taking the Bite Out of Blogs: Ethics in Cyberspace.
-
Cooperation Key to Media Relations
Monday, Apr. 7, 2008
at 11:14 AM
Reporters and elected officials are often engaged in a "love/hate" relationship. Sometimes that translates into "I love to hate reporters," which was the implied message in a memo written by the director of communications for Newark Mayor Cory Booker. The internal email, leaked to a reporter from The Star Ledger newspaper, seeks to help senior members of the Booker administration "in understanding the relationship between the government and the press."
Mayor Booker has received strong and positive press coverage, and the memo begins innocently enough with a review of Reporting 101. "Reporters, by the nature of their trade, are trained to hone in on tension, flaws, and deficits and present such aspects to readers and viewers so that the public might better understand and define those who have been granted the public trust." It is true that the duty of the reporter is to help the public understand how government works, although I would argue that some reporters actually look for stories where a public official is caught doing the right thing.
After the introduction the tone changes, warning "...the motivation and objectives of reporters are entirely in conflict with that of public officials and administrators. At the heart of the relationship with the press and government officials is warfare."
"Officials want to tell one story. Reporters are interested and driven by an entirely different set of values and interests."
An adversarial relationship between the press and and elected officials only serves to further the divide between the people and their government. Without a full, transparent, honest, and cooperative exchange with city hall or the state house, reporters and editors cannot do their jobs, and the public will be left to speculate, or worse-- to simply stop caring.
-
Scheduling An Ethics Checkup
Monday, Mar. 31, 2008
at 1:43 PM
John F. Kennedy once said "The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining." The same is true with ethics: the best time to engage in examining ethics issues is when there is no crisis at hand.
Public officials across the nation are being challenged daily to balance budgets, provide excellent services, set responsible policy, and represent constituents in a demanding, 24-hour-a-day environment. Responding to emails alone can take up enormous time. That's probably the reason most cities don't think about an ethics program until they are in dire need of one.
You don't need a toothache to visit the dentist. We make appointments for regular checkups to prevent problems. It's good to get your fluoride treatment, new toothbrush, and the perennial reminder to floss daily. Without regular attention, you may end up needing a root canal.
As cities gear up for the busy months ahead, crafting budgets, finishing capital improvement projects, and scheduling summer recreation programs, it would be good to make time for an "ethics checkup" as well. Information on model programs and basic information about government ethics are on the Web. You're only a click away.
-
Councilman Caught Doing The Right Thing
Thursday, Mar. 20, 2008
at 11:25 AM
Given the way our elected officials have appeared in the headlines recently, it's great to read a story entitled " Councilman follows protocol in land purchase talks." Pueblo, Colorado City Councilman Randy Thurston recused himself in recent discussions over the purchase of private property for a new fire station.
Thurston's wife is a broker for a firm representing one of the potential sellers, and city policy requires council members who have a potential conflict of interest to disclose that and excuse themselves from the meeting before any action is taken.
Although no action has been taken, and the negotiations are still being conducted in closed-door sessions, it is commendable that Thurston removed himself from all meetings. "I can guarantee there is no conflict," he said. "The other six City Council members are making that decision and I have total confidence they will make a decision that is best for the city."
Through his actions, the people of Pueblo can share that confidence.
-
Profiles in Courage
Wednesday, Mar. 19, 2008
at 1:52 PM
To show courage in life is difficult. To show courage in political life can seem impossible. That's why the members of President John F. Kennedy 's family established the "Profile in Courage Award" in 1989. Presented annually by the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, the award honors President Kennedy and "seeks to make Americans aware of the conscientious and courageous acts of their public servants, and to encourage elected officials to choose principles over partisanship -- to do what is right, rather than what is expedient."
Two secretaries of state - Debra Bowen of California and Jennifer Brunner of Ohio - are the 2008 winners. Bowen was the subject of much criticism when she severely restricted the use of electronic voting machines just six months before the February 5 primary. Her decision was based on reports from computer scientists at the University of California, which concluded the systems could be hacked.
Facing the fury of local elections officials in some important and highly populated counties, Bowen said the honor "vindicated the work of many who had preceded her in questioning the reliability of electronic voting machines."
Ohio's secretary of state likewise tackled electronic voting systems, requiring counties to provide paper ballots to voters who requested them. She also has ordered paper ballots for the upcoming November general election.
In describing the award, the Library Foundation notes President Kennedy "believed that each person can make a difference, and that everyone should try. In particular, he wanted to restore a belief in politics as a noble profession and and a calling to public service."
When it comes to public officials we are often quick to criticize and slow to praise. As we congratulate the winners let's recognize those individuals in local government who commit everyday acts of courage and ethical decision making.
-
Putting Out A Fiscal Fire
Thursday, Mar. 13, 2008
at 2:12 PM
We look to our firefighters to protect our communities, and they are well compensated for the high-risk and difficult job they perform. But fire prevention and fire suppression are not the only ways in which we should expect firefighters to protect the public, as the city of Vallejo, California is learning.
The city, facing bankruptcy, has closed two firehouses, reduced salaries for public safety workers, and services ranging from senior centers to libraries are facing draconian cuts. In light of the crisis, it is particularly disappointing to read that the union is continuing to take advantage of " city-funded business leave," a benefit granted under a 2003 contract.
The benefit allows the union to charge the city 600 hours a year for union activities approved by the union president. These include an annual Seafood Extravaganza and a 10-K run. Alcohol and meals are charged to the city. The cost to the taxpayers is more than $24,000 annually, and although the Solano Grand Jury issued a critical report, the union has responded not by ending the practice but by cutting back to 500 hours and limiting activities to firefighter and union conventions.
Union president Kurt Henke deflects the criticism by saying "They (investigators) want to make it look like we did something wrong. We did nothing wrong."
It doesn't matter that the activities have often been fundraisers for community groups. It does matter that in a time of crisis, in this case a fiscal crisis, we depend on the firefighters to protect the community. Just because they can charge the city for the time doesn't mean they should.
-
Public Benefit or Private Burden?
Wednesday, Mar. 12, 2008
at 4:52 PM
Full disclosure of personal finances is one of those "burdens" people in public life have come to accept. In order to allow the transparency required for good government, elected and appointed officials at all levels of government are required to file comprehensive annual reports detailing all sources of income (including spouse), debts and loans, partnerships and investment ownership, gifts, real estate bought or sold, leases, and the like.
Mayor Pat Porter and several members of the city council in Kenai, Alaska are objecting to the Public Official Financial Disclosure Law signed by the governor last July. The law, part of a 2007 Comprehensive Ethics Act, was passed unanimously by the legislature. Included in the 12-page disclosure packet is the rationale. "Good, open, fair and honest government calls for these disclosures. The law mandates them. The public supports them."
Unfortunately the law also allows municipalities to "opt out" and about half of the state's 200 communities have voted to be exempt from the state disclosure requirements. Kenai is hoping a vote of the people will allow it to join the ranks of those cities choosing not to allow the public this important information.
The objection seems to be about the public nature of the information, that it will be available for "anyone and everyone" to see via the internet. That is true, and that is one of the most beneficial aspects of these filings. They are intended to allow members of the public to check for possible conflicts of interest, and for the media to more accurately report on government.
"Hopefully," said Porter, "the people will realize how intrusive this is into our private lives."
If it comes to a vote, hopefully the people will decide in favor of the public good over any concerns about private hardship.
-
Private Lives Versus Public Interest
Tuesday, Mar. 11, 2008
at 3:32 PM
This week's news about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer once again brings to the forefront an ethical dilemma faced by reporters and public officials alike: how much of an individual's personal life does the public have a right to know?
The Poynter Institute, a resource center for journalists, offers some insights into how the media decides when a public official's private life becomes a news story. In a column on the Institute website, senior scholar Roy Peter Clark describes the way in which transcripts of federal wiretaps spun quickly into a national news story and personal scandal.
Acknowledging that the public has a right to know the facts surrounding this story, Clark lists 12 key questions journalists can ask themselves as they decide how to cover this, or a similar story. In addition to the "basics" such as "What is the journalistic purpose of running such a story?" the column asks "How will the public benefit?" and "What if the misbehavior had happened three years ago? Is there such a thing as a journalistic statute of limitations?"
Every public official knows that he or she is bound to be in the spotlight, regardless of attempts to retain a private life. Decisions I made when I was the mayor of Santa Clara, from the make and model of my car to where I purchased my groceries, were fair game, along with my policy decisions. My actions, right or wrong, were bound to be linked more to my public office than my personal life.
Elected officials and others in the public sector know that their duty is to put the public's interest above their own. As an introduction to the subject on our Web site says, "Everyone will draw the line between personal and public in a slightly different place but generally, if a private matter affects the performance of the officeholder's duties, most people would agree that it is no longer private."
-
Creative Accounting Adds Up To Distrust
Tuesday, Mar. 4, 2008
at 3:15 PM
The way goods and services are paid for at City Hall is supposed to be public. Transparency in public spending is important for two reasons: to ensure that the work or goods have actually been secured, and to guarantee the public knows the true cost.
Councilman Wayne Pullen is considering filing a complaint with the Florida Ethics Commission to protest bills paid by the city of Fort Walton Beach which were divided into separate invoices, eliminating the need for council approval. As with most cities, Fort Walton Beach has a "threshold" for expenditures over $20,000, which means anything in excess of that amount must be approved by the city council.
The total cost for new piping and sidewalks at a local condominium near City Hall was $27,178.25, requiring council action. But the bill was split into three separate invoices, one coming in just under the threshold at $19,998.
Whether by coincidence or design, this type of creative accounting obscures the complete cost to the public and gives the appearance of hiding the true figures. Full disclosure is a reasonable expectation of Councilman Pullman and of the public he represents.
-
The Ethics of Endorsements
Monday, Mar. 3, 2008
at 3:24 PM
As a political candidate I have always had mixed feelings about endorsements. For a newcomer, they can give instant credibility and open up sources for campaign contributions. As an incumbent, endorsements can confirm success in office and attract voters. It is important to note, however, that there are ethical considerations in soliciting and accepting endorsements.
Many special-interest organizations, including labor unions, conduct interviews with candidates after reviewing a paper questionnaire. Generally the questions apply to the specific issues of the group, and for some a "yes" or "no" on a particular question -- such as smart growth or mixed-use development -- can seal or kill an endorsement. Some groups actually have "litmus test" questions on which there can be no wavering.
The need for campaign funds may tempt a candidate to commit to a particular resolution to an open issue in order to receive the nod and the money. But ethics and good government require officeholders to maintain an open mind and make policy decisions after getting the facts, considering the options, and taking into account public input.
-
Minding the Taxpayer's Money
Friday, Feb. 29, 2008
at 10:23 AM
When the California prison system was failing to meet the health needs of inmates, federal Judge Thelton Henderson appointed Bob Sillen, a former Santa Clara County public health executive, to be in charge of the California Prison Health Care Receivership Corp. Known for his brusque style and "no-apologies" approach, Sillen was accustomed to being controversial, in charge, and was often in the headlines during his tenure in Silicon Valley.
Now the headlines are revealing something else about Sillen: a state audit has revealed serious questions about how more than $33 million in state money was used in the first 15 months of the receivership. An obvious question arose with the disclosure of Sillen's monthly salary of $52,000, but the salaries of other employees are also suspect. Twelve people associated with the receivership make more than the $225,000 annual salary of the prisons chief. Basic policies for reimbursement of travel expenses were ignored, documentation was unavailable for some high-ticket meals, and employees were give pay raises to cover health insurance costs -- at the same time they were receiving health benefits from the state.
For the prison system to go into receivership is an indication of serious problems. As an experienced public administrator Sillen knew the rules but chose to make his own. The money that should have been used for the benefit of the prisoners has been used for apparent personal benefit.
To have the person in charge of fixing the problem create new problems is a painful and expensive violation of public trust.
-
Appearances Count
Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008
at 3:22 PM
All politicians know that appearances count. You never know when you're going to interact with a voter or a reporter, and how those interactions are perceived by bystanders or the media. Perhaps that is why today's story in the New York Times on presidential candidate John McCain is getting so much attention. The paper began its story recounting concerns expressed by his staff during McCain's first bid for the presidency. At the time, a female lobbyist seen frequently at fundraisers and other events raised speculation that there might be a romantic relationship, noting that even the appearance of a relationship with the woman would be damaging.
In 1989 McCain was hurt by the Keating Five scandal, and has made many efforts to strengthen ethics and champion campaign finance reform. He is finding that the "aspirational goals" of limiting involvement with big campaign donors and special interests is far more difficult to attain.
In his memoir McCain speaks candidly of the aftermath of the scandal, saying "questions of honor are raised as much by appearances as by reality in politics, and because they incite public distrust they need to be addressed no less directly than we would address evidence of expressly illegal corruption."
It is clear that the statement he made to Bill Keller of the New York Times may only serve to focus the lens more clearly on his past and current activities. In responding to the story he said "I have never betrayed the public trust by doing anything like that." Perhaps, but we all know that it's appearances that count.
-
When Do You Need A Permit?
Monday, Feb. 11, 2008
at 2:40 PM
In most communities you can't even put up a backyard fence without permission from the local authorities and a building permit. Plans for municipal buildings, from fire stations to senior centers, all undergo public review and the same codes that apply to constructing your own home or office building apply -- including an inspection and sign-off on electrical work.
But in Medina, Washington, a new 40-foot-high police communications tower was built with no permits, no hearings, and no cost to the city. The $75,000 structure is the result of a contract between the police chief (who was then serving as city manager as well) and Clearwire Corp., a provider of high-speed wireless Internet service. Under the contract, Clearwire "loaned" the tower to the city and provides free wireless service to the police department. Included in the deal were mobile modems for officers, plus service for 13 residential units belonging to police officers and municipal employees.
The whistle-blowers in this case, two former code-enforcement officers, believe the tower violates both land-use and building codes. Both are alleging they were forced to resign because of their complaints and are threatening to sue the city.
Justification for the partnership is based on the argument that it is a "public safety enhancement at no cost to taxpayers." This kind of "creative" strategy can lead to ethical problems, as budget constraints drive public officials to consider partnerships and solutions that are outside the public review. The deal also excludes other providers from what should be an open process.
It's ironic that the tower, concealed in a flagpole outside City Hall, not only was built without permits or public discussion, but appears to violate a city ordinance due to its proximity to private residences across the street.
Even the police department needs to obtain proper permits. If the rules are not applied consistently we cannot expect the public to honor them or trust the people who make and enforce the rules.
-
We Need to Work on Public Works
Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2008
at 12:28 PM
"Infrastructure" is not a sexy word, so it probably didn't capture much public attention when New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell announced they have created a coalition to support federal funding for infrastructure investment.
But for anyone who cares about the condition of local bridges, levees, roads, and airports, this is big news. The non-partisan coalition, Building America's Future, is supported with funds from the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, and will be made up of elected officials from throughout the country at the state and local level. National organizations such as the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities, National Conference of State Legislators, and the National Governors Association will engage in the efforts to collect best practices and advocate for increased federal funding.
The enormity of the problem was summed up in a 2005 report by the American Society of Civil Engineer's report that the shortfall in infrastructure funding was approximately $1.6 trillion (yes, with a "t") over five years. That means "deteriorating conditions approaching dangerous levels of disrepair."
According to Governor Rendell "The infrastructure crisis includes the basic necessities communities and businesses need to survive: schools, waterlines, wastewater treatment systems, dams, flood mitigation, hospitals, energy, aviation, rail lines, and ports."
Local government has been forced to delay needed upgrades and repairs and defer important new construction despite growing needs. Bringing this crisis to the attention of the Congress and the next president will be a challenge, as the Iraq war, health care crisis, and mortgage foreclosures are on the "front burner". It will be up to the Coalition to raise enough visibility to raise the heat on this issue as well.
-
A Headline Worth Reading
Monday, Feb. 4, 2008
at 2:31 PM
Part of the ethics education program I do includes an exercise I call "Ripped from the Headlines." I collect headlines about cities, councilmembers, mayors, ethics codes, campaigns, and ethics reform, and share them with the seminar participants. Often these are things you would rather not read in the morning paper: "Mayor indicted on three counts of fraud," or "Council meeting ends in chaos." Occasionally I'll run across news of an ethics commission imposing a fine on a candidate or office holder, or the revelation that a city employee has been caught embezzling funds.
So it was refreshing to read recently a headline in the Gwinnett Herald, Georgia newspaper announcing "Duluth recognized as ' City of Ethics,'" This honor, presented by the Georgia Municipal Association, recognizes cities that adopt a resolution establishing ethics principles and also adopt an ethics ordinance that meets minimum standards approved by the Association board.
The principles are pretty straightforward: "Serve others, not ourselves. Use resources with efficiency and economy. Treat all people fairly. Use the power of our position for the well being of our constituents. Create an environment of honesty, openness and integrity."
There are approximately 700 cities in Georgia, and Duluth is one of about 140 to receive the designation. It's important to note the caveat that accompanies this honor, as described on the GMA Web site. "Certification under this program is not in any way approval of past or present conduct by the city or any city official. Instead it is an attempt to raise awareness about ethics issues at the local level and provide a local forum for the airing and resolution of legitimate concerns."
Most importantly, the program seeks to involve citizens in the ethics process at the local level, "where the voice and influence of the individual citizen is strongest." That's a headline worth reading.
-
A Sorry State of Affairs in Detroit
Thursday, Jan. 31, 2008
at 2:36 PM
The Miriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines apology as "an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret." Last night Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick apologized. He said he was sorry. Sorry to have caused embarrassment to his wife, his three sons, and the public by the revelation of his affair with former Chief of Staff Christine Beatty. That he had an affair outside his marriage may well be his own business, but the discovery of text messages exchanged between the two (on city-owned pagers) as well as an audit of the mayor's expense reports show that the revelations have significant public impact.
Kilpatrick and his wife Carlita spoke before television cameras sharing the pain this very public discovery has caused them and asking for "the space and privacy that is essential to anyone when they work through these very personal issues."
It is well and good to give the couple time to handle their marital problems, but in this case the investigation must continue. The mayor and Beatty appear to have lied under oath in connection with a whistleblower lawsuit filed by three police officers. The case was settled for some $9 million dollars in favor of the officers, and that is the public's business. His extravagant spending on travel, spa treatments, and evenings at nightclubs cost the citizens of Detroit. He has broken the trust placed in him by the electorate and aside from his mea culpa, he offers no reassurance that things will change.
Beverly Engel of the UMass Family business Center has a prescription for a meaningful apology, one that is based in "brutal honesty." She advocates three key ingredients: regret, responsibility, and remedy. Mayor Kilpatrick should not consider his statement as the end to this story, but just the beginning. His marriage may be at stake, but so is the public trust.
-
"Can You Hear Me Now?"
Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2008
at 3:11 PM
In government, the purpose of a public hearing is to hear the public's input on a project, proposal, or policy. There are formal rules established for the way the hearings are opened, the order in which speakers present, how the hearing is officially closed, and how the legislators deliberate and vote.
The key to good government is the ability of the public to speak and the responsibility of the elected officials to listen. This fundamental and important process is increasingly being jeopardized by inappropriate use of technology --cell phones, laptop computers, and PDAs such as the Black Berry.
Sometimes the culprit is in the audience, biding time until his or her issue comes up on the agenda. Unfortunately there are times that the elected officials themselves can be seen "texting" or checking email while a constituent or colleague is speaking. (This is especially apparent when the lights go down for a PowerPoint presentation and the "glow" of the screens are visible.)
I am not advocating formal rules for addressing this issue, as it seems to me that common sense and the Golden Rule apply: we should treat others as we wish to be treated. This is a modern-day application of old-fashioned civility.
No one, in the course of engaging in the public's business, should find the electronic distractions so great as to be forced to ask "Can you hear me now?"
-
Ovation Inflation
Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2008
at 3:49 PM
In watching the State of the Union address last night I was struck not by the text or delivery of the speech but by the reaction of the audience. I am accustomed to seeing a partisan Congress respond to the president -- some applaud, others sit with their hands folded in their laps. But last night I felt as though I was watching a high school awards assembly. The number of standing ovations was at first distracting, then overwhelming. In checking the White House Web site this morning for the official transcript, there were 71 interruptions for applause in a speech that lasted an hour.
Standing ovations used to be reserved for spectacular prose, amazing athletic feats, mesmerizing theatre performances, stunning arias, and the like. Now they are given for virtually any and every occasion, creating a phenomenon Joanne Kaufman calls " ovation inflation," which she describes as "yet one more example of our society's tendency to supersize every experience, emotion and commodity."
Last night was political theatre. The old-fashioned standard for standing ovations should apply there as well. Interrupting the president's speech more than once a minute with applause cheapens this expression of admiration and makes it less meaningful when we really want to acknowledge excellence.
|
