Her Honor

Ethics Exhaustion

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 04:45:38 PST

Campaigning is exhausting, even if you are not a candidate or involved in the election. The barrage of television and radio ads, dozens of campaign flyers, and endless robo-calls supporting or opposing a candidate or measure can really take a toll on a person. And in California, there are so many propositions you need a wheelbarrow to get the voter’s guide from the mailbox to the kitchen table.

But one of the most exhausting aspects of the campaign season is trying to discern truth from fiction, fact from fantasy. Studying the materials, reading the newspaper, talking with friends, attending candidate’s forums—it’s almost a full-time job. The results of any election are too important to leave to chance, so evaluating the way candidates conduct themselves and their campaigns requires effort. The ethics shown during the campaign are likely to reflect the way the candidate behaves in office.

So although it is exhausting, I believe it is well worth the effort. My only suggestion is to get plenty of rest, because the next election will be here before you know it.

Corporate Citizenship or Quid Pro Quo?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:12:09 PST

It is no surprise that non-profit groups benefit greatly from the generosity of local businesses and corporations. What may be a surprise is what drives the donations.

According to a recent story in The New York Times, defense contractors Northrup Grumman and General Dynamics each gave $100,000 to support the symphony orchestra of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, population 21,832. Other benefactors include Boeing and Lockheed Martin at $50,000 each. Why so much money for such a small community? New reporting records are requiring lobbyists and corporations to disclose the money they give to favorite causes of legislators, and the local symphony is a favorite charity of Representative John Murtha, whose Congressional committee handles lucrative defense contracts. The congressman’s wife (the opera buff in the family) has been an honorary chair of the gala for years.

Several congressmen have established scholarship funds in their own name, including the James E. Clyburn Research and Scholarship Fund, a beneficiary of the Nuclear Energy Institute. Just two months before a $10,000 donation was made, Congressman Clyburn assured nuclear energy marketers he would work on their behalf before his colleagues.

Uncovering this practice is unlikely to change the donation patterns, as most companies see this practice as being a “good corporate citizen.” During the first six months of 2008 that largess added up to some $13 million donated to charity and in honor of more than 200 members of the house and senate.

While the new regulations add transparency to the process of money flowing to members of the federal government, it does not address the appearance of quid pro quo, favoritism, or other unethical practices.

It Shouldn't Take A Law

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:55:52 PST

When Atlanta City Councilman Caesar Mitchell paid his brother’s consulting firm $49,223 there was no provision in the city’s ethics code to prohibit council members from engaging in contracting with family members or siblings, even if those individuals had a “financial or personal interest.”

Pendulum Consulting, which is co-owned by Mitchell’s former campaign manager, received the money in 2006 and 2007 for “a variety of goods and services.” Following a probe by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution the city ethics code was amended to prohibit council members from engaging in such transactions. The most current payments appear to be in violation of the code, and Mitchell is seeking counsel from the Ethics Board to see if he had followed the law.

Mitchell is both council member and candidate for mayor. It should not take a law for a public servant to understand that using taxpayer’s dollars to benefit a family member is wrong. The case is an excellent example of the need for a combined rules and values-based code, because there will never be enough laws to cover every single situation facing officeholders.

In this case, it shouldn’t take a law to see that nepotism is not a good way to run a city, and that both common sense and a respect for public trust should be the deciding factor in situations like this, not relying on a “formal ruling” after the fact.

Local Government Reflects The Real World

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:48:57 PST

If you have never attended a city council meeting, I encourage you to do so. On any given day or evening you will see a group of public servants making decisions on everything from multi-million dollar construction projects to whether or not to install a stop sign in a local neighborhood. Concerned citizens, “council watchers,” and occasionally a Boy Scout Troop looking to earn a badge can be found in the audience.

As a councilmember and mayor I saw my share of routine, challenging, and incredibly complex and controversial issues come before the council, and reading a news item about the city council meeting in Lake Havasu City, Arizona reminded me of the thoughtfulness and care that must go into these important decisions.

At a recent meeting the council voted to approve the annexation of a car dealership. According to the Desert Hills fire chief, loss of tax revenues from the dealership could impact the Desert Hills Fire Department, which provides some service to assist Lake Havasu City.

Land-use planning issues carry with them tremendous impacts on city services, including fire, police, and schools plus many services people don’t normally think about, such as storm sewers and street maintenance. Each vote should take into account all the ramifications, what would be best for the community at large, and how each decision helps or hinders creating an ethical organization. The Markkula Center’s Framework for Thinking Ethically is a practical guide, helpful in working through the decision-making process.

Given the discussion of the annexation, it was good to see that the other big item on the agenda was a proposal to consider establishing a Code of Ethics or conduct for the council. With new members coming into office in November, Vice-Mayor Dennis Schilling felt this was the right time to take this action, especially in light of public complaints about governance.

Some great examples for Lake Havasu City and other municipalities looking into adopting a code of ethics can be found by visiting the Web site of the Institute For Local Government.

I couldn’t help but feel encouraged that the city recognized its ethical responsibility to the community and is taking the first steps toward addressing a more formal program.

Vote Ethics

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:33:03 PST

Among the political mailers arriving in mailboxes this month is one that doesn’t tell you which candidate or proposition to support or oppose. This newspaper, titled Campaign 2008, is sent to all residents in Santa Clara, California, to support the “Vote Ethics” program.

For three consecutive election seasons the city has provided information to voters to encourage them to hold candidates accountable and help demystify the various claims made during campaigns.

Santa Clara began its Ethics and Values program 10 years ago, collaborating with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics to establish a Code of Ethics and Values developed by the community. I was mayor at the time, and although we had a Code of Ethics, this initiative was groundbreaking because it combined ethics and values.

Working with consultant Dr. Tom Shanks, the program grew to include public education outreach on the electoral process. The nonpartisan and nonpolitical program does not tell voters how to vote, but “provides voters with tools to make a candidate’s ethics and values an important part of the voting decision. It encourages voters to look to the candidate’s campaign for evidence of trustworthy leadership, a commitment to the City’s Code of Ethics and Values, and the capacity to lead the City’s Ethics and Values Program.”

An ethics “checklist” encourages voters to consider 11 ethical characteristics of candidates, including treating opponents with dignity and respect, and taking responsibility for any mistakes they make or mistakes made by volunteers or consultants.

The city also sponsors a candidates forum in October, and the night before the election holds another forum, “The Final Word,” designed to discourage last-minute “hit pieces.” Candidates are allowed to present their messages and refute any charges they feel are unfair.

Other communities, including the City of Livermore, California, have replicated this award-winning document. It serves as an excellent model and confirms, “Good government begins at the ballot box.”

When In Doubt, Just Bow Out

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:00:31 PST

Lee County, Florida has voted to create an ethics policy in the wake of a scandal involving County Manager Don Stilwell.

After an independent investigator said “Stillwell never lied to the board about his involvement in a land deal with his son-in-law,” four of the five county commissioners decided to keep him on the job.

Conflicts of interest are one of the most dangerous of the ethical violations facing city and county managers, so while the outside investigator has cleared him, the top administrator still may face scrutiny from the Florida Commission on Ethics or the Florida City and County Manager’s Association.

Stillwell and his staff will draft new ethics language that will attempt to clarify policies about how county employees do business in the county.

Board chair Ray Judah summed it up best, saying that while he was not suggesting Stillwell was unethical by investing in property where he is the top government official, he created the perception his actions were unethical.

The board hopes the “better, stronger ethics code” might prevent similar problems in the future. That may be true, but I tend to agree with Commissioner Brian Bigelow when he said “I think it is a very sad and pathetic day if we have to amend a county manager’s contract to include a requirement that he be ethical.”

More simply put, when in doubt about a conflict of interest it is prudent to bow out.

Ethics As A Work Of Art

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 04:26:11 PST

The United States Office of Ethics is a small agency with a big job. Established in 1978, it became a separate agency in 1989 when Congress passed government ethics reauthorization legislation.

According to their Web site, the agency ”exercises leadership in the executive branch to prevent conflicts of interest on the part of government employees, and to resolve those conflicts that do occur.”

The Office of Ethics works with other branches and departments of the federal government to assist in monitoring conduct and commends those agencies that have “demonstrated a strong commitment to ethics education and communication; created a stronger ethical culture as result of these efforts; and utilized model practices to encourage understanding and awareness of ethical behavior.”

In announcing the 2008 Education and Communication Awards Winner Circle earlier this month, director Robert I. Cusick lauded the award-winning agencies for producing “education and communication products that were innovative, creative, transferable, and successful,” saying “their products serve as models that can be adapted for use by other agencies.”

One agency taking home an award was the Department of Interior, which was recently in the news for an ethics scandal, not ethics excellence. According to news reports, employees in the Mineral Management Service were engaging in financial self-dealing, sexual misconduct, cocaine use, and accepting gifts from energy companies. The charges show many examples of conflicts of interest and illegal as well as unethical behavior.

Ironically, the ethics award given to the Interior Department was for “developing a dynamic laminated Ethics guide for employees.” In the press release announcing the award recipients, Cusick described the manual as a “polished, professional guide with colorful pictures and prints which demand employees’ attention. It also features tabs on a variety of ethics topics, and is small enough for employees to carry.”

Clearly it takes more than colorful illustrations, polished copy, and a pocket-sized guide to ensure ethical behavior. The Inspector General, Earl E. Devaney, in his cover memo to Congress on the scandal cited a “culture of ethical failure” throughout the agency. No graphic designer’s work of art can overcome pervasive bad behavior. Not even an award-winning work of art.

A Billion Here And A Billion There...

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:26:37 PST

I saw a bumper sticker on a luxury car the other day that proclaimed, “I’m spending my kid’s inheritance.”

That’s how it’s beginning to feel in California, where the legislature has not been able to come to a fundamental agreement that will allow them to pass a long-overdue budget. The governor is expected to veto the new budget tomorrow morning, and along with the veto will be a simple message: we can’t keep fixing our failed system with bailing wire and duct tape.

Even the legislature doesn’t believe this is a good budget, but it is what Assembly Speaker Karen Bass calls “a short-term solution.” Democratic Senate Leader Don Perata was more to the point: “Let’s be clear. All we’ve done is roll the problem over to the next Legislature.”

With accounting and budgeting logic like this, it is no wonder public confidence is low and the business community wary. To his credit, Schwarzenegger has brought up the forbidden word – taxes—as a way to temporarily ease the crisis. That plan is flawed, however, as it would be followed three years later by a tax cut. As Everett Dirkson was famous for saying "A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."

California should look closely at the financial collapse on Wall Street to see where this kind of “creative” financing can lead.

Scholar Karen Rowlingson wrote about this phenomenon in 2006, and referred to a group called SKIers – (people) spending their kid’s inheritance. She probably could not have imagined the federal government bailout of the venerable financial institutions, and I can almost guarantee she wasn’t thinking about California.

As for me, I would prefer those who ski do it on the slopes, not on the backs of the taxpayers or on the futures of the next generation.

Ethical Obligations and Disaster Response

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:00:29 PST

As Hurricane Ike has once again proven, when disaster hits a community it can be impossible to evacuate some residents. Officials in Galveston were thwarted in their efforts to force people to leave in advance of the storm, and now are facing the same resistance in getting the “hold outs” to relocate.

What is the ethical obligation of the residents to leave their homes in the face of a hurricane, tornado, wildfire, or other disaster? What is the ethical obligation of the rescue workers to risk their safety to force evacuations? Who pays the cost for the “extraordinary” rescue due to individuals who refused to leave when asked?

I understand that no one wants to leave his or her home, not knowing if it will exist in the aftermath. It takes time to gather the family treasures, photo albums, pets, and the like. And there is always the hope that you will be the one in a million that bucks the odds and survives unscathed. But as we have seen so convincingly during these natural disasters, the toll in human lives is far greater when people refuse to evacuate.

It seems to me that the policy makers, government workers, and volunteers have an obligation of protecting the community, and the ethical action is the one that serves the common good and welfare of society. If an individual refuses to follow the advice, admonition, or sheriff’s order to evacuate, that individual should not expect precious resources to be used to be rescued “after the fact.”

These refusals amount to civil disobedience, and to the degree that these actions endanger rescue workers and obstruct efforts to cope with the disaster and its aftermath, perhaps the government should take a stronger stance—“tough love.” Maybe those who choose to stay behind should be prepared to reimburse the community for any extraordinary costs they generate through their failure to follow the rules.

Have You Had Your Wheaties Today?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 11:05:59 PST

“To change government ethics is a Herculean task,” according to New Jersey Assemblywoman Amy H. Handlin. Consider that insider knowledge. The Garden State continues to be in the headlines for misconduct, illegal activities, and government corruption from the municipal level to the governor’s office.

Handlin was one of several panelists dissecting the problem at a forum last night at Brookdale Community College. She was joined in the discussion by Professor Ingrid Reed of the Eagelton Institute of Politics New Jersey Project; Bob Ingle, Trenton bureau chief for Gannett New Jersey Newspapers; and Sandra Mattison, advocacy coordinator for the New Jersey League of Voters.

In the 90-minute discussion of the current state of ethics in government in the Garden State, they all agreed there was “tremendous room for improvement” but couldn’t come to consensus on a solution. Ingle, co-author of “The Soprano State: New Jersey’s Culture of Political Corruption,” argued the lack of public trust has led to lower voter turnout and an attitude that nothing will ever change if the same people continue to be elected.

There was a suggestion to engage each of the 500 or so municipal governments to build strong ethical frameworks, as the rules can change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. (There is an effort to create a model ethics code for cities spearheaded by CityEthics.org.) Handlin’s efforts to require ethics training for state legislators have failed.

In the end it will take time to change the culture in New Jersey government. Not just time but discipline, persistence, tenacity, and moral courage. I hope they’ve had their Wheaties.

What Are You Complaining About?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 03:59:00 PST

This summer my family had the opportunity to host a college student from Ukraine. Antonina came from a small village, moved to Kiev at 16 to begin college, and was in the U.S. working to make money for her final year at school. Her English was excellent, and as a sociology major with a keen interest in politics and history she quickly became a member of the family.

Although she worked two full-time jobs—at a theme park and a fast-food restaurant—earning minimum wage and no benefits, she never complained. Because there are few cars in her country and she never learned to drive, she was happy to ride a bike to the bus stop, take the bus to work, and ride to her next job –no complaints.

As we watched highlights of both the Democratic and Republican conventions with her, she had dozens of questions. The one that sticks in my mind came as one after another speaker criticized the opposing party, the health care system, public education, foreign policy, to name just a few. Many stirring speeches called for change, demanded reform and promised a new way of doing things. Expressing true wonder in her voice, she asked, “With a country so wealthy and with so many wonderful social programs, freedoms, and technology, why do people want to change things?”

Indeed, from her perspective, we live in paradise. The stores have an abundance of fresh food, she could eat meat every day, and she could afford to swim at the municipal pool. People here can speak freely about their political beliefs, are free to criticize the government, and have even their letters published in the local newspaper. Her observations were endless –she noted everything from the way garbage is picked up by trucks with “arms” to the delightful discovery that the public library had books in her language.

The dictionary defines the word complain as a way “to express feelings of pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment.”

I’m not suggesting we stop complaining about the U.S. but I do think that Antonina may put our country in context better than many of us do, recognizing its strengths as well as its failings.

A New Spin On Campaign Ethics

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 04:28:05 PST

At some point in the the hard-fought political campaign to the White House it is inevitable that some bragging, resume inflation, or exaggeration will occur. Sometimes it is the candidates who are under the press “microscope” from dawn to dawn, who slip up or tell a story not supported by the facts. Often, it is the professional campaign strategists, communications directors, and paid political staff that are behind the ads, blogs, and talk-radio campaigns.

In a stunning press release, the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) has called upon the McCain and Obama campaigns to be more ethical. The organization represents over 30,000 professional and student members who are engaged in public relations work ranging from business and industry to hospitals, schools, the military, and nonprofit groups.

PRSA has challenged the two presidential candidates and their campaigns to sign a pledge obligating them to abide by the PRSA Code of Ethics in their campaign communications. In essence, they are being asked to: be honest and accurate in all communications; act promptly to correct erroneous communications; investigate the truthfulness and accuracy of information on behalf of those represented; and avoid deceptive practices.

The trade association issued the challenge because the ethics code “sets forth key principles that are essential to serving the public interest and contributing to informed decision making in a democratic society.”

Most states, including California, have a code of campaign ethics that candidates are either invited or required to sign. Unfortunately a signature on such a code has not prevented any determined candidate, supporter, or front group from lying, rumormongering, or participating in character assassination.

The voters are in charge here. Only when the public outcry over mudslinging and personal attacks is greater than the nasty campaigning will we see a change in the deceptive practices that have become commonplace in so many races.

What Would Santa Say?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:33:08 PST

The State of Alaska has reporting rules for public officials requiring them to list the source and amounts of income for themselves and family members. These statewide rules were strengthened last year, and now cities across the state are seeking exemption from the rules.

The latest city to protest is none other than – North Pole. Mayor Doug Isaacson says the local code of ethics “is less intrusive than the state’s rules but still effective.” In fact, he insists the city has been “double guarded” in ensuring public officials behave ethically.

The decision will be put to the voters October 7,and if the vote is successful North Pole will join roughly half of the cities and towns in Alaska that have opted out.

This should not be construed as Santa’s “Naughty or Nice” list. Public disclosures of sources of income are used across the country to allow the citizens to know more about their representatives and to guard against favoritism, conflicts of interest, and the like.

Navigating Without An Ethical Compass

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 11:17:10 PST

“ I do solemnly swear (or affirm) “ are the first words of the oath of office taken by public officials. The promise you take when accepting the public’s trust is that you will uphold the Constitution of the United States and the your own state, “according to the best of my ability, so help me God.”

Six years ago, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick took that oath, and in 2007 he took an oath before the Grand Jury to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth when sworn in to provide testimony in a case involving the dismissal of police officers and an affair he was having with his then-chief of staff.

To the dishonor of his family, the people of Detroit, and mayors across the country he failed on all counts, lying about everything from his expense accounts to his extra-marital relationship.

As the Detroit Free Press described it “Had Kilpatrick’s ethical compass been more finely calibrated over the past six years, he most certainly would have enjoyed the limelight at the Democratic National Convention this summer along with such new-generation black mayors as Newark’s Cory Booker and Philadelphia’s Michael Nutter.”

To disgrace yourself and your family, resign from office, destroy your political future, face time in jail be given a $1 million fine is only part of the fallout from Kilpatrick’s actions. Elected to the city’s top office at just 31 years of age, he stood for hope and was to be a role model for young people. His story should serve as a cautionary tale to all who take the oath of public office.

The Language of Government

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:13:41 PST

Finding out how to get a building permit or where to complain about code enforcement might not be a problem for most city residents, but if you don’t speak or read English it is nearly impossible.

In New York City, where approximately 170 foreign languages are spoken, Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently signed the Language Access Executive Order to help. This new legislation provides oral and written language translation services, translation of important public documents by some 10 city agencies. Language interpretation is also available for Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Korean, and French Creole.

“All New Yorkers should have the same opportunities,” says Bloomberg, saying “the [order] will make the city more accessible, while helping us become the most inclusive municipal government in the nation.”

This isn’t the first effort by New York to reach out to non-English speaking communities. In 2003, the city’s 311 Customer Service Center began serving callers in 170 different languages. Other special efforts have been made in critical areas such as the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Department of Homeless Services.

Not all cities have language barriers of this scale, but Bloomberg’s initiatives serve as a “best practice” that should be considered by others. And while working on the translations, perhaps someone could rewrite the materials in easy-to-understand sentences, eliminating what Webster’s Dictionary calls governmentese -- that confusing jargon used by government officials.

The Devil Is In The Details

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 03:36:52 PST

Is a campaign treasurer also a fundraiser? Is there a difference between a campaign strategist and a consultant? How do you define “an individual in a position of responsibility” in a political campaign?

These were among the questions facing the Rules and Open Government Committee of the San Jose City Council when they recently reviewed and discussed recommendations from the Ethics and Conduct Committee of the Sunshine Reform Task Force (SRTF).
The SRTF was created in 2006 to increase public access to information, enhance neighborhood participation, and ensure government accountability. Part of the overhaul includes a look at how campaigns are conducted and monitored, with special emphasis on the role lobbyists play.
The sticking points are in the descriptions of individuals with significant roles, and the proposal to prohibit registered lobbyists from “lobbying for compensation and for the purpose of influencing a legislative or administrative action, any elected official of the City of San Jose for whom the individual worked or volunteered for the entire time the elected official is in office.”

Seeking to encourage greater involvement by the community in campaigns, and also hoping to curb “insider influence,” the committee has sent the language back to the city attorney for further refinement. One suggestion is to enact a two-year ban; another suggestion was to try to quantify the work by keeping track of the hours volunteered.

Starting from a position of strength, it seems, would be best. A mid-course adjustment is always possible, but with committed leadership from the mayor and council, the language might not seem that restrictive after all.

Going For The Gold

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:04:39 PST

The 2008 Olympics ended with spectacular fireworks and much hoopla, breaking records for both the athletes and those who planned and produced the many events.

The in-depth media coverage offered an insight into the talent, training, and dedication of men and women who pursue an athletic event with a singular goal: to be the best in the world at what they do and win a medal.

In reading and viewing many of the personal stories of the competitors I saw a common thread: passion and commitment.

We know that in order to be a legendary swimmer, gymnast, or weightlifter you first need to learn the techniques that will allow you to be successful. Once the basics have been mastered, Olympic athletes train – usually 12 months of the year – and learn to perfect their technique, increase their stamina, and overcome the disappointments associated with injuries.

These setbacks often serve to increase the desire to excel, to sharpen skills, and find as many chances as possible to practice.. Along the way, coaches, trainers, and family and friends offer support and advice, and teammates often form necessary scaffolding.

Watching the Olympic coverage has made me ponder what it would take to “go for the gold” in government ethics. It would require knowledge, training, and dedication. An “ethics Olympian” would show tremendous passion and commitment for public service, and would practice his or her “ethical decision making techniques” 12 months of the year. To be successful, this individual would also need coaching, and support from family and friends. In the best of all worlds, colleagues on the city council, state legislature, or Congress—their “teammates--would be there as part of the framework for success.

I doubt we will ever see government ethics elevated to an Olympic event, but that should not dissuade you from beginning your training today.

Wowed By The Web

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:37:10 PST

You can tell a lot about a city by the way it is presented on the official Web site. In my work I view hundreds of municipal Web pages per week. Sometimes I’m impressed, but more often confused, frustrated, and unable to find the materials I need.

So it was with great joy that I discovered the new Internet efforts of Grants Pass, Oregon. This small town, located on the Rogue River in southern Oregon, has created not only an inviting Internet presence, but has also posted some of the most informative and user-friendly materials I’ve seen.

From the opening page forward, you are drawn both into the history and lore of the community as well as the plans and promise for the future. The site is loaded with facts and figures. You’ll learn the basics such as the population (34,2370), but also have a chance to view videos including a welcome from the city manager, information about economic development, housing, and tourism. When they launched the site in 2007, the city solicited photographs from the public, and more than 700 were submitted, adding depth and quality to virtually every page.

One button is “I want to know…” that includes 21 choices ranging from how to pay a parking ticket to how to have a yard sale. Click on “Let us know” and you can take a citizen satisfaction survey, pass along a compliment to staff, or report code violations.

Two items stand out as excellent examples of how important a Web site can be in building community involvement. The first is a document from City Manager David Frasher outlining city council goals and describing progress and accomplishment of those goals. Included in the laudable efforts are the new, award-winning Web site, the televising of city council meetings, and working with local high school students “to teach our future community leaders about local government and give them lifelong tools for goal setting.”

The second, and perhaps best link, is to a page called “How Your City Government Works.” Beginning with the city council’s mission statement, this page gives the reader a clear idea of how proposals are brought to the city, what happens at meetings and workshops, and outlines the respective roles of the elected officials and city administrators.

Grants Pass has come a long way since the 1860s, when it served as a stagecoach stop. It serves as an outstanding example of using technology to inform and engage residents, businesses, visitors, and researchers and writers like me.

Taking Responsibility

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:56:53 PST

“More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”

Woody Allen wasn’t talking about California’s budget crisis when he spoke these words, but they describe the current “state of the state.”

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has filed a suit to force the Controller John Chiang to cut employee wages in an attempt to force Democrats and Republicans to agree on the long-overdue budget. The governor moved ahead with the legal process in response to the Chiang’s refusal to reduce paychecks to reflect federal minimum wage while the state is without a spending plan.

Playing political games with hard-working employees who have no responsibility for the votes in the legislature sends the wrong message to the people of California. Rather than blustery brute force--punishing those who are struggling to feed their families and pay a mortgage--the members of the assembly and senate should be docked pay for each day they fail to agree on a budget.

The repercussions for this impasse should be borne by those who are responsible, the elected leaders of the state.

Ready To Change The Subject

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:32:58 PST

Thirty-four years ago, on the eve of my wedding, my family and friends were not reviewing the details for the ceremony, checking the guest list, or discussing any of the topics normally associated with a wedding. The subject of conversation at the rehearsal dinner was not about the bride and groom, but about much bigger news—the resignation of President Richard M. Nixon.

Perhaps this says something about the folks who were involved in the wedding, that we were “news hounds” or “political junkies,” but believe me when I tell you that the florist, organist, and even the people who delivered the wedding cake were talking about the downfall of the president.

During the spring of 1974 I followed the Watergate burglary from my position as a journalism and political science student in Washington, D. C. Reporter Bob Woodward came to my senior seminar in national affairs reporting and shared stunning details of his investigation, including many that never made it into the Washington Post. I found myself spending each morning that summer watching the Watergate hearings--gavel to gavel--and wondering how such powerful people, in the highest office in our country, could be involved in criminal activities and such an elaborate cover up.

There was no feeling of satisfaction with his announcement, just relief that the debacle was over and the hope that our country would never again have to spend time and energy discussing the questionable behavior of our political leaders.

Nixon’s resignation, unfortunately, was not the last scandal to rock the White House, nor did it provide any kind of protection to politicians on the local, state, or national level. The topic at our anniversary dinner last night was the extramarital affair of Senator John Edwards and the recent assault charges against embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. So I’m left asking myself the same questions I asked so many years ago: what is it that makes people in public life—those who know they are in the spotlight and who must realize the very high stakes—participate in behavior that is sure to be discovered and guaranteed to discredit any good they accomplished in office?

I’m afraid I’ll still be pondering that question on my thirty-fifth anniversary, and for many thereafter.

What Will Your Legacy Be?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:58:58 PST

“Public corruption” is a phrase I dread seeing in the newspaper, yet it was in more than one headline this week.

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens surrendered to authorities following a federal grand jury indictment. In New Jersey, former Newark mayor Sharpe James was sentenced to 27 months in federal prison on fraud charges. Both high-profile lawmakers protest their innocence, citing the many years of service to their constituents as evidence of their “good intentions.”

Stevens, the longest-serving Republican in the senate, is accused of failing to report $250,000 in gifts on his financial disclosure forms. The items, ranging from significant renovations to his home and an expensive Land Rover automobile, were gifts from an oil field contractor.

James served 5 terms as mayor of Newark, and previously served in the state senate. He was convicted of fraud, along with a former romantic companion, for facilitating the sale of city property at a discount --which she later sold for a huge profit.

It seems both men are being given some degree of deferential treatment, perhaps because of their age (Stevens is 84, James is 72) or their tenure in public office. In fact, neither seniority nor years of service can take away the sting of these stories. One would hope that age and experience would bring wisdom, not a prison term.

Serving in public office is an opportunity to make public policy, and to improve your community, your country, the world. It is also where you make - or destroy--your legacy.

Mayors Face Challenges, Resonsibilities

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:14:32 PST

When the mayors of this country met recently for their annual convention, Miami Mayor Manny Diaz, president of the United States Conference of Mayors, outlined five central themes for his upcoming year as leader of the organization.

Under the banner of “Strong cities, strong families for a strong America,” Mayor Diaz urged the next president of the U.S. to take action within the first 100 days on the following issues:
•    Energy and the environment
•    Crime and public safety
•    Reducing and breaking the cycle of poverty
•    Infrastructure investment and development
•    The economic impact of arts, culture, and travel

A similar group of leaders, the Congress of the United Cities and Local Governments of Africa (UCLGA) also met earlier this summer. This inaugural meeting, convened in Ghana, brought together elected mayors of cities and municipalities, chairpersons of district and local councils, and other locally elected leaders.

Their concerns are surprisingly similar to those of their American counterparts, with several dramatic differences:

•    Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
•    Achieve universal primary education
•    Promote gender equality and empower women
•    Reduce child mortality
•    Improve maternal health
•    Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
•    Ensure environmental sustainability
•    Develop a global partnership for development

The eight goals were adopted by the United Nations in 2001 as Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), an effort to create a common framework for measuring progress in developing countries. The timeline for attaining success is 2015.

As complex as these two sets of goals are, they have an important element in common – the need for strong leadership on the local level. As Dr. Tajudeen A. Raheem observed, “Crucial functions of government including health, education environment…are devolved to the local tiers of government but expenditure patterns and national budgets do not reflect these priorities.”

Dr. Raheem argues for sufficient financial and technical resources for local government, and transparent, fully accountable public officials. Good advice for mayors around the world.

Promises, Promises

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 11:47:59 PST

“All’s fair in love and war,” is the idiom used to explain that people in love and soldiers at war are not bound by rules of fair play. Some would have you believe this rule applies to political campaigns as well.

Despite the commonly held notion that negative campaigning wins, the public is growing weary and has expressed an interest in a novel approach: addressing the issues.

According to a USA Today/Gallup survey, the public is at least “somewhat optimistic” that candidates Barak Obama and John McCain will keep their promises and not engage in attacks during the remainder of the presidential race.

Respondents were asked about the likelihood that the men would conduct a presidential campaign based solely on issues and not driven by personal attacks. ‘More than two in three Americans think there is a reasonable chance that each candidate will run a campaign focused on the issues,” according to the poll results. Since the data shows the perception of what is “fair” is often based on partisan affiliation, it is likely that the answer will rest in the eye of the beholder.

With an electorate concerned about gas prices, the war in Iraq, skyrocketing health care costs, and the collapse of the home-mortgage industry, it is even more important for candidates to address the issues honestly and completely, and allow the public to engage in the debate before heading to the polls in November.

We have an opportunity to mark a turning point in elections on all levels of government. It’s time to create a new idiom: “Honest debate about the issues wins the election!”

Googling for Ethics

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:58:40 PST

You can find almost anything on the Internet – even ethics

When doing a Google search for the term “ethics” recently, I was astonished to find 91,700,000 references – just for the definition of the word. If looking for “ethics training” you would need to wade through over 6 million choices. And there are 8,250,000 references to “government ethics” based on that search. What is a person looking for ethics to do?

Fortunately there are several places providing basic information on ethics, including the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics ( www.scu.edu/ethics). The framework for thinking ethically provides both a basic understanding of what we mean by ethics as well as five ethical standards as a way to assist your decision making.

For a comprehensive look at laws about government ethics, consider visiting the site of the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws (www.cogel.org). Ethics commissioners, officers, as well as public officials will find up-to-date articles on current laws and members have access to a message board for sharing problems and solutions as well as updates on new laws and trends.

The Institute for Local Government (www.cacities.org) is dedicated to sharing best practices in local government and is a valuable resource for anyone interested in establishing a code of ethics and values.

For help with government administration ethics, the International City/County Management Association (www.icma.org) compiles survey data, publishes books and other materials on excellence in government, and is a resource for administrators, elected officials, and public employees.

These selected resources are a good starting point for learning more. Each has links to helpful Web sites that should make the ethics search less daunting and more productive.

The Coffee Conundrum

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:45:06 PST

The jokes about cops on coffee breaks got serious recently when it was reported that the Fort Worth police officers are officially allowed to accept free coffee while on the job.

A story in the Star-Telegram quotes Lt. Paul Henderson as saying that this practice is part of a “community relations gesture.” Former city councilman Jim Lane summed up his support this way: “If somebody wants to give an officer in uniform a cup of coffee or a soft drink – then that gets the officer out of the patrol car and into the store where people are. That is what neighborhood policing is all about.”

There are several troubling aspects to this story. First, the Fort Worth city policy states no police officer can “solicit, seek or accept” gifts. If this exception is made, employees in other divisions should likewise expect to be able to accept free coffee, since rules on gifts should be enforced uniformly.

Allowing free coffee, in this case it was from the Starbucks franchise, puts other merchants and vendors at a disadvantage, since officers are more likely to take their break at a location where they don’t have to pay for their refreshments.

Finally, what is the community going to think about a policy that encourages freebies for public servants? Will that daily gift of a grande double-shot, no-foam, decaf soy latte lead to coffee plus a pastry? Coffee plus a sandwich? The practice could lead officers to feel entitled to discounts or special treatment, which is why Fort Worth should avoid this “slippery slope.”

The police department teaches consumers “if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.” We are also reminded “there is no such thing as a free lunch.” Good advice for us, great advice for public employees.

Show Me The Money

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:11:43 PST

Raising money is a fundamental part of the election process, and has become a year-round event. There are rules to govern campaign contributions and strict reporting requirements. But what happens when an officeholder decides to raise money for a “good cause” while he or she is in office? These funds are not reportable, and yet the public’s interest in knowing what money is being raised for charity is no less important than knowing what comes into campaign coffers. (Remember the famous line from the movie Jerry McGuire: "Show me the money!")

The ethical issues relevant to fundraising of this type are twofold. First, using official stationery, government staff, or public facilities is generally prohibited. These assets are paid for by the public and should be dedicated to the public’s business. Using these resources also gives an unfair advantage to the benefiting charity, as it eliminates the cost of such mailings and this advantage is not given to similar non-profit organizations.

A second, and perhaps more troubling concern, is the specter of a quid pro quo. Can the CEO of the development company expect more favorable treatment in front of the city council if he or she has written a check to support the mayor’s favorite charity? Is it possible to decline to send money, if the request has come from someone in power who has the ability to grant or deny a project?

When you are in office you collect or have access to many “connections,” and most officeholders have a vast professional and social network before entering office. Politicians and their staffs should be mindful of the ways in which they access these relationships, and steer clear of situations where there is any question of undue influence or unethical behavior.

A Simple Truth

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 03:28:57 PST

There is no right way to do the wrong thing.

New York Congressman Charles Rangel is trying to explain how completely legal and ethical he is in occupying four rent-subsidized apartments in his Harlem district, when it is clear that at least one of them is not allowed by law. Rangel lives in a unit of three combined apartments and rents the other (on a different floor) for use as a campaign office. State and city regulations require rent-stabilized apartments be used as a primary residence.

Today, the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission against the legislator, alleging the reduced rate he has on the fourth unit is an illegal campaign contribution from the building owner, and further charging the contribution was never reported.

In an angry exchange with reporters, Rangel justified his arrangement and insisted it was a private matter and in no way influenced by his position as a member of Congress or his status as chair of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.

The legal issues notwithstanding, this situation creates greater cynicism in a community where rent-stabilized apartments are a prize out of the grasp of most residents. A posting on the New York Times web site comment section captured how many see the situation:

“Rangel needs to take a deep breath and do the right thing. He needs to give up the apartment used as an office that is separate from his primary residence. He needs to determine if the three combined units he uses as a primary apartment are rented illegally under the rent stabilization law. If they are, he needs to move out.”

This advice, simple and easy to understand, underscores the basics of ethics in government-- having the courage and integrity to do what is right, rather than finding an excuse if you have done something wrong.

Of Politics and Poker

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:59:01 PST

In the well-known ballad “The Gambler,” singer Kenny Rogers advises :

“You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em,

Know when to walk away and know when to run.”

Fortunately California State Senator Joe Simitian had the wisdom to “hold” and not give up on his proposal for a hands-free cell phone law. First proposed seven years ago, the ban went into effect July 1 and is a testament to his tenacity and political leadership.

When Simitian introduced the bill, no other states had similar legislation, and the cell phone industry went on the defensive. Plenty of people who feel government is already too involved in their private lives objected to the law, and there was little statistical evidence to back up the claim that the legislation would make for safer driving.

Now five other states have hands-free laws, and it is estimated that between 300 to 900 lives will be saved as a result of the ban. Granted, using one hand to talk on the phone is perhaps no more distracting than other activities I’ve observed -- shaving, putting on makeup, or reading the paper while driving. Yesterday a woman driving behind me was eating sushi with chopsticks.

While it’s unfortunate that we need to pass laws to dictate safe behavior, I am grateful that we have lawmakers with the courage to take on “common sense” issues and see them through the lengthy legislative maze.

Celebrity Candidates

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:16:33 PST

It has been said that politics is a contact sport, and if that is the case, candidate Kevin Johson should be well prepared.

The former NBA All-Star player will be facing incumbent Heather Fargo in the race to be mayor of California’s capitol city, Sacramento. The campaign has raised questions about what it takes to be qualified as a candidate and an officeholder. Critics argue the native son has no experience in politics and, unlike his opponent, knows little about the gritty issues facing Sacramento. His supporters cite his political science degree from UC Berkeley and his commitment to turning around his old neighborhood, where he established a charter school run by his non-profit organization.

Celebrity status does not make him a better choice or a lesser choice for mayor. But like all candidates, Johnson must make the effort to prove to voters he understands issues and is more than a man with a “megawatt grin” and boundless energy.

The voters have a right to know a candidate’s position on the issues along with details of campaign contributions and expenditures. And above all, they have a right and an obligation to hold all candidates to the highest ethical standards – first in their campaigns and once they are elected.

Still Idealistic After All These Years

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:13:58 PST

“The youth of our nation are the clearest mirror of our performance.”

These words, spoken by Robert F. Kennedy 40 years ago, are as true today as they were the first day I heard them. At the time, I was a high school student working on Kennedy’s primary campaign in Oregon. In recently going through some of the mementos I collected from the campaign, I was overwhelmed with the sense of promise and energy conveyed in his speeches and literature.

In language eerily relevant to today’s issues, Kennedy’s campaign rallied idealistic students like me. “Young Americans have made this year’s election a test of faith. They have taken the deepest beliefs of our country at face value: individual freedom, commitment to social justice, willingness to examine old ideas and choose new ones.”

In a call to action, he urged us to volunteer to work in the campaign, organize voter registration drives, speak out on the issues, and “communicate with your parents, with friends, with Democratic leaders and convention delegates.”

Forty years later, I work at a university and am privileged to see the “mirror of our performance” on a daily basis. While they are now busy with final exams and job interviews, the students still make time to engage in community service, speak out on behalf of the voiceless, and challenge the status quo with ideas for making things better. In the areas of sustainability, immigration, and globalization, the students have created innovative programs to address some of our most perplexing problems.

On this, the anniversary of Kennedy’s death, I feel a sense of loss for what might have come from his presidency. But I also feel tremendous optimism. As I scan the faces of the students I see the challenges of today turn into opportunities of tomorrow.

I have a feeling Robert Kennedy would be pleased.

The Dog Ate My Homework

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 23 May 2008 02:01:19 PST

One of the oldest (and least credible) excuses given when a student doesn’t turn in an assignment is “The dog ate my homework!” The modern equivalent is “my computer crashed” or “the printer is out of ink” or similar excuses shifting responsibility from the individual to the technology.

This is apparently the case in Philadelphia, where City Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr. failed to electronically file his campaign-finance report. After two requests from the Philadelphia Board of Ethics were ignored, the Board filed suit to order Jones to file and to pay a $1,900-a-day fine. Jones filed the next day, but because he was 91 days past the filing deadline he faces a possible fine of $172,900.

“There was no intention to hide anything from the public,” said the attorney representing the councilman. “My understanding is that when it was initially filed there was some kind of computer glitch or error that occurred with regard to the confirmation of the filing.”

The paper copy was filed on time, but attempts to get the electronic document appear to have been ignored. The attorney argues that the fine is “not really called for” since the document was finally filed.

Because few individuals will have the time or ability to visit City Hall to view campaign finance reports, allowing access to such documents via the Internet guarantees the kind of transparency that supports good government. A 91-day delay shows not only poor office management but also a disregard for the public’s right to know.

Ethics: A Campaign Promise Worth Keeping

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 22 May 2008 02:19:30 PST

When he ran to represent Montana in the U.S. Senate in 2006, Jon Tester criticized incumbent Senator Conrad Burns on ethics issues. One campaign promise was to have a judge conduct an "ethics review" of his first year of office, and publish the results.

The review was done by retired Justice John “Skeff” Sheehy of Helena, who performed the overview without pay. He checked not only Tester’s financial disclosures, office expenses, and policy on gifts and conflicts of interest for employees, but also looked at the senator’s schedule, earmarks, and voting record. In posting the 6-page document on his Web site, Sen. Tester said, “I believe in openness and transparency.”

In fact, Tester was the first senator to post his daily calendar on line, giving constituents access to his appointments and a glimpse into the life of their senator. A recent typical day included a meeting with Senator Dodd, meetings with representatives of the National Automobile Dealers Association and Montana Petroleum Marketers, as well as a chance to greet students from St. Labre Academy in Ashland, MT.

The report makes it clear that it is not the result of an “audit” in the traditional sense, but is “more in the nature of a review of the steps take by the Senator to assure moral sensitivity by him and his staff in handling the public business, and the apparent results of those steps. It concludes, “For the present, we can find assurance that Sen. Tester has opened the business of his office to daily inspection, and has provided rules of practice for his staff to assure ethical behavior.”

As Justice Sheehy notes in his summary there are probably areas existing in senate business “where avarice could collide with human frailty. We can hope that conscience, absent specific rules, will then prevail.” I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Can Ethics Go Too Far?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 22 May 2008 10:02:20 PST

The headline in the Daily Herald caught my eye : “Provo ethics rule goes too far.” It’s difficult for someone like me, who works in government ethics and ethical leadership every day, to imagine any ethics rule going “too far” so I read the editorial with interest.

The editorial board objects to a proposed ordinance by the Provo Municipal Council that would prohibit council members with a conflict of interest from speaking on an issue in addition to abstaining from voting.

The argument put forward in the column is one of protecting free speech. “It would unnecessarily undermine the free speech rights of elected officials and deprive the city of valuable input on important matters that affect all residents,” according to the editors.

Sharpest criticism was levied against the provision that would prohibit council members with a financial conflict of interest from discussing the issue at any time with another council member.

In a study session last night, a motion to advance the ordinance failed on a 3-4 vote. Opponents expressed concern, among other reasons, that good people would be prevented from running for office if these more restrictive measures were in place.

Conflict of interest is the number one cause of cynicism among the public today, and every measure must be taken to ensure that elected officials put the good of the public above their own personal interests. Unfortunately, the adage “if it isn’t broken why fix it” was at work in Provo. Absent a scandal, many cities are tempted to look the other way when ethics reforms are introduced. They should know that education and prevention are the best approaches to ethics.

Teen Mayor to Take Office

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 20 May 2008 01:41:04 PST

I am an admitted “political junkie” who follows campaigns and elections even when they don’t involve presidential candidates. I am also unabashed in my encouragement to young people to get involved in politics, so I was excited about the recent election of John Tyler Hammons as mayor of Muskogee, Oklahoma.

Hammons is a 19-year-old student who won a runoff election with nearly 70 percent of the vote, beating a former three-term mayor 51 years his senior. (The incumbent opted not to run for re-election.)

While a registered Republican, Hammons clearly sees the value of bi-partisan cooperation. In high school he ran for president of the Young Republicans and the Young Democrats – and was elected by both.

The University of Oklahoma student will be moving back with his parents until he finds an apartment, and plans to transfer to Northeastern State University, which has a campus in the town of 38,000.

Acknowledging his new job is a big one, Hammons has his priorities clear: he wants to create an independent ethics commission and plans to establish campaign finance reporting requirements.

With network TV interviews, offers for book deals, and the pressures of his new-found notoriety it may be tough for the new mayor to stay focused on ethics. I’m hoping he will be the “breath of fresh air” the voters were seeking, and that he serves as a model for others who are willing to take a risk and enter politics.

No Need To Delay Ethics Discussion

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:08:27 PST

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?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:59:02 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:58:33 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 11:14:18 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:43:01 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 11:25:31 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 01:52:17 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:12:46 PST

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?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 04:52:51 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:32:45 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:15:02 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 03:24:54 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:23:21 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:22:37 PST

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?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:40:06 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:28:56 PST

"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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 02:31:02 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:36:29 PST

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?"

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:11:40 PST

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

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:49:37 PST

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.

Questions from the Red Carpet

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:54:20 PST

Soon after Bill Clinton was elected president I was contacted by a San Francisco television station for an interview about the role of the First Lady in the new administration. Mrs. Clinton had been very involved in the campaign and was ready to launch her health care reform project, and I was prepared to make comparisons between her activism and that of Eleanor Roosevelt and other presidential wives.

Without much thought (and by sheer coincidence) the day of the interview I wore a headband--an accessory that came to be associated with Mrs. Clinton. I didn't see the list of questions the reporter had in his notebook, but I am quite sure that he had not intended to talk to me about hairstyles. Nevertheless, his opening question was about headbands. In fact, he tried to make some comparison between my own blond hair and black headband and those worn by Mrs. Clinton. There was no room for Eleanor Roosevelt in this interview, as I sadly came to the realization that this exchange was sounding more like commentary on the celebrities walking the red carpet than insights about health care reform or the role of the First Lady.

Mrs. Clinton is now a United States senator and presidential candidate, but unfortunately some things haven't changed. She no longer wears headbands but has been the subject of many stories on her choice of clothing and accessories. The political commentary is as likely to be about her pantsuits as it is about immigration reform. She brings up the subject herself, most recently on the David Letterman show, perhaps to strike a preemptive blow or show that she is a down-to-earth candidate.

The news media has a responsibility to keep focused on the "hard news" and provide the public information that will help voters make the best choices at the ballot box. Save the fashion commentary for the red carpet and the movie stars.

Truth in Advertising

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 04:30:19 PST

I suppose it is no surprise that in a political campaign photographs of the candidates are sometimes selected to make the candidate look good and the opponent look asleep, incompetent, crazy, or worse.

It was a surprise, however, to read recently that Dean Hrbacek, former mayor of Sugar Land, Texas and congressional candidate, sent a mailer with an image of his head attached to someone else's body. (I am not kidding.) The photo, which is, according to the Associated Press, "presented as a true image," is actually a composite of his face and another person's body, a body much slimmer than the candidate in real life.

His campaign manager explains that there was simply no time to pose for a full-length photo, hence the fake. Frankly that excuse ranks with "the dog ate my homework." I have been a candidate, and can assure you that the very first thing you do is to set up photo sessions, complete with clothing changes and props, for use during the campaign.

This appears to be an attempt to portray Hrbacek in a more positive way --as he and his staff wish to see him, not as he is seen. With the advent of computerized and digitized photos this ruse is much easier, but it is no different than a candidate using a photo taken 10 or 15 years ago and representing it as a true and current image.

An ethical campaign is one where the voters are given the truth -- in words, deeds, and yes, in images.

Bold First Steps

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:33:31 PST

On his home page Kentucky governor Steve Beshear quotes famous Kentucky Senator Henry Clay as saying "Government is a trust and the officers of the government are trustees. And both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people"

Beshear was elected in November, ousting former Governor Ernie Fletcher, whose administration was scarred by a merit-hiring scandal. One of Fletcher's more controversial actions was to issue a blanket pardon for everyone (other than himself) who had been charged or might be charged in the investigation. In the end, he and 14 others were indicted, those indictments were sealed, and he made a deal to have all charges against himself dropped.

To his credit, the new governor used last night's State of the Commonwealth address to amplify an earlier commitment to putting ethics at the top of his agenda. In addition to a self-imposed limit to a governor's pardoning power, Beshear is proposing mandatory ethics training for executive branch employees and voluntary ethics training for lobbyists. He seeks to increase penalties for violations of ethics laws and hopes to have these laws broadened to cover a wider range of individuals, including volunteers and all salaried board and commission members.

The state motto of Kentucky is "United We Stand, Divided We Fall." Beshears has shown leadership in reaching out to the legislature and the people. His actions and the state motto are worth consideration by America's other governors.

The Unkindest Cut

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:25:28 PST

Most of us have faced the challenge of trying to make ends meet. The increasing costs of fuel, health insurance, and everyday essentials can make living within your budget a challenge. You might consider ways to cut expenses, increase your income, or downsize (sell the house and move to a condo). None are necessarily easy choices, and these options don't take into account that the size of your household may be growing -- a new baby is on the way or an aging parent is moving in.

Now try to envision the challenge of addressing a $14.5 billion deficit, and you have an idea of the painful choices that will need to be made in California in the coming months. Governor Schwarzenegger's FY 08-09 budget calls for state park closures impacting 48 state parks, reducing staffing at least 50% for lifeguards on state beaches in some areas, and a $4.4 million cut from the management and operations side of the state park system.

The California State Parks Foundation, a statewide advocacy organization, notes the closures will impact "millions of California teachers and schoolchildren who rely upon historic museums and missions to showcase our state's rich history." In the eyes of foundation "Achieving a mere $9 million savings by hacking at the heart our state parks system inflicts maximum physical pain for minimal financial gain."

Local government faces these challenges regularly, and many cities end up making unpopular decisions like reducing hours or closing libraries, eliminating outreach for seniors, or dropping popular recreation programs.

The ethics of budget cuts involves balancing compelling and competing needs and looking for the best solution. Unless and until the people of California address the structural budget problem -- that the impact of Proposition 13 continues to cripple the Golden State -- we will be left with no solution . And that is the unkindest cut of all.

Potty Talk

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:07:06 PST

No one denies there is a water shortage in California, but few agree on a solution. After years of unbridled growth, drought, and a mediocre conservation plan, Orange County is ready to take a bold step in providing drinking water for the 2.3 million people in coastal, central, and northern Orange County. The answer lies in treated sewage.

Before you scream "yuck," here are the facts. When the facility opens January 25 it will be the world's largest, most modern reclamation plant. The state-of-the-art technology will turn 70 million gallons of treated sewage into drinking water each and every day. The water that is treated would normally be discharged into the ocean, but under the new system it is injected into the groundwater basin. The extra water will supplement the drinking water supply, and when the plant is fully utilized, experts predict up to 130 million gallons could be added to the fresh water supplies in Orange County.

The enormous expense - $490 million - is a good investment, although not all see it that way. Los Angeles tried a similar program 10 years ago (only $55 million was spent there). The public killed the project due to an uproar over what critics called "toilet-to-tap" water, although the state health officials certify the water to meet drinking-water standards.

We have been hearing a lot lately about the environmental impact of bottled water, from the resources used to produce the bottles to the fuel used to transport. An important ethical issue is conservation of our natural resources and a commitment to the common good. Dropping the "potty talk "references and reframing this project as a model for other communities might inspire courageous political leaders to take similar actions in their own cities.

Ethics 101

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:51:46 PST

Conflicts of interest. Contract negotiations. Funding priorities. Disclosure of confidential information. These are all issues public officials face regularly, but it may surprise you to know that these are the very same issues facing another type of elected official -- the student government leader.

Over the past three years David DeCosse, a colleague who is the director of the campus ethics program at Santa Clara University, has invited me to join him in discussing ethical issues facing elected and appointed university students.

Beginning with the challenges of running a clean campaign, students deal with many vexing issues: do I represent myself and my values and priorities or those of the student body? How can I be sure I'm voting for good policies and not just the interests of my friends and supporters? Do I have to resign from my fraternity, sorority, or other clubs now that I am in office?How can I handle the conflict between my role as a student leader and a member of the student body?

Like many who serve in local government, these students see their constituents daily, and in some cases share a dorm room or apartment. They go to classes and volleyball games together, and socialize on the weekends. The line between their roles can be blurry at times, and it is critical to be aware of these unavoidable ethical dilemmas in order to be better equipped to respond.

Good government is needed at all levels of our society, and a great place to establish, strengthen, and live your values is in college. The ethical decision making done by these students will serve them well both in office and upon graduation.

Rite of Passage

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:32:27 PST

My 18-year-old daughter voted for the first time today.

Of course she has voted for class officers, student body president, and her pick to win the Oscar for best film, but today she cast her ballot in California's presidential primary. She was the first person in our county to vote by touchscreen in this election, and it was such a big occasion we snapped a photo with her cell phone. She's keeping the "I Voted" sticker for her scrapbook.

It's easy to become complacent or even cynical when it comes to voting, but in her eyes this was right up there with getting her driver's license. Best of all, she has been following the candidates and their platforms, has engaged in spirited debate with peers and her parents, and took the time to inform herself about the two local ballot measures as well.

I cut my teeth in 1968, as an idealistic teenager working on Robert Kennedy's primary race in Oregon. Over the years I've become concerned that there have been no candidates or issues that could engage the "next generation" the way the turbulent issues of the 60s and 70s first engaged me. I will be happy to be proved wrong.

President John F. Kennedy may have said it best: "In a democracy, every citizen, regardless of his interest in politics, 'holds office'; every one of us is in a position of responsibility; and, in the final analysis, the kind of government we get depends upon how we fulfill those responsibilities. We, the people, are the boss, and we will get the kind of political leadership, be it good or bad, that we demand and deserve."

The Never-Ending Race

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:43:58 PST

When I ran for mayor it was an all-consuming effort. Between the campaign coffees, candidate interviews, debates, and precinct walking, there was little time for anything else. It seemed as though every conversation, from breakfast through the end of the day, was about the campaign. And because my campaign headquarters was my dining room table, there was no escape for me or my family.

One night, as I was tucking my 7-year-old daughter into bed she asked if I was still running for mayor. Yes, I explained, I was still running. Her earnest question in response was "Mommy, when are you going to cross the finish line?" It had never dawned on her or me that we might not have the same understanding of what it meant to "run" for mayor.

I thought of this story as I read about the emotional toll the campaign seems to be taking on the presidential candidates. My race lasted four months. Some of these candidates have been campaigning for years (or so it seems). The stress is caused in part to lack of sleep, dehydration, money worries, poll results, media coverage, and the overall grueling task of being perfectly dressed and incredibly intelligent and articulate every moment of the day.

There is a toll, also, on the voters, who have expressed exhaustion - already - and who may be so sick of this by November that they just won't show up. So tonight I'm going to sip a cup of chamomile tea, read a bedtime story, and hope the candidates do the same.

Good Fortune in the New Year

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 01:29:22 PST

The new year allows us an opportunity to both reflect on the past and plan for the future. For public officials, this can be a time to renew a personal commitment to open, honest, and ethical government. The public would be well served if 2008 became the year of government transparency, fiscal responsibility, civility, and personal integrity,
In looking back at events that most impacted public trust, conflict of interest was clearly at the top. Recognizing conflicts can be challenging, especially if one relies only on what is "strictly" allowed (or what an attorney is able to justify). This rules-based approach to ethical decision making erodes public confidence, since there are many actions that are legal but not ethical.
If you're having trouble coming up with a good resolution for the new year feel free to adopt this one, which came in my fortune cookie: "Don't let others stop you from doing what you know is right."

All Cities Great and Small

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:35:18 PST

The "wild west" has returned to Gold Hill, a town of about 2,000 in southern Oregon. As the name implies, it was a gold rush town, where over the years there has been more politics than policy. The city is closing out 2007 with another tumultuous chapter in its history.

Councilwoman Kathleen Price was recently recalled (with a 2 vote margin), Councilman Scott Baker announced his resignation from the council November 13, then reconsidered his decision a few days later only to find out that the city charter probably will not allow him to return to his post.

In a letter to the Gold Hill Nugget, Mayor Dan Morris announced he was resigning to take a job in Afghanistan. Councilman Gus Wolf said it was "disheartening to learn of the mayor's resignation via the local paper rather than through an official notice presented to the city." (That might be an understatement.)

And when you think matters couldn't get much worse, the Oregon ethics commission just issued a preliminary finding that Gold Hill's public works director misused a city vehicle. The city council is split on what to do: some feel he should resign, others believe his use of the vehicle was "within the city's guidelines."

What lessons can we learn from this recent series of events? That no city, regardless of its population, budget, or demographics is immune from ethics issues. That just because you elect someone it doesn't mean the or she will remain in office. We can also learn that "this too, shall pass." Councilman Wolf says the city has "been through worse. This is a tough old town and it will go on." That's the pioneer spirit.

A Fistfull of Dollars

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:57:59 PST

Brick Township, New Jersey is suffering this week from a black eye. Former four-term mayor Joseph C. Scarpelli admitted in federal court that he had accepted bribes, using his office to support the projects of a developer.

He resigned a year ago, with a press release citing "personal reasons." The swirl at city hall at the time was speculative -- he had been known to many as a successful politician, serving first on the Board of Education in the 1970s, then as a council member prior to his election as mayor in 1994.

But there were signs that Scarpelli had a corrupt side. The FBI has conducted several investigations in the township, one looking at the relationship the then-mayor had with the disgraced former director of public works, and another surrounding his friendship with an individual also under investigation by the FBI.

It may be tempting to adopt a a sense of privilege when in public office, but even the small "perks" can add up to a careless pattern of corruption.

In 2003 he admitted he had taken a township-owned vehicle on vacation to Vermont. It was only admitted as an "error" once the story appeared in the paper. This may have seemed a small transgression, but it gets at the heart of public trust. There is no such thing as a small transgression: every act by a public official is important and each decision must be made with utmost integrity.

Scarpelli was convicted of accepting some $5,000 in cash to push for approvals for a developer. He will most likely do jail time, and he has disgraced himself, his family, and his community. All for a fistfull of dollars.

Make Mom Proud

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 03:54:59 PST

When a politician gets advice from a media training expert it usually goes something like this : "Don't do or say anything you wouldn't want to read on the front page of the newspaper."

Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England, in recent comments at Texas Christian University, said the code he lives by is "Never, ever embarrass your mom." The lesson, he says, came from his childhood. His mother allowed the kids to do anything they wanted with one rule: "We could never embarrass her. Now, that is a very high standard."

This is the standard England says has helped him throughout his career, which has included time as Navy secretary and the first deputy secretary of the Homeland Security Department. "Ethics are the foundation of everything you are going to do in life," he told graduates at the recent winter commencement.

I would suggest an even higher standard. Make your mom proud. Yes, you should avoid the things that reflect poorly on your judgment, character, and integrity. But most importantly you should exercise moral courage, speak hard truths, stay true to your principles, and make ethics an everyday practice.

What's good for one is good for all

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 02:15:51 PST

The City of San Jose has made it official: elected officials must adhere to the same nepotism policies already in place for city employees. In a unanimous vote yesterday the council addressed an issue that became a scandal under former mayor Ron Gonzales, who had an affair in 2000 with an aide. The affair led to a Grand Jury investigation and subsequent recommendation that the city adopt a policy discouraging relationships between supervisors and their subordinates. That policy took effect in 2005.

But staff members are not the only ones impacted by office romance, and elected officials also needed to be included in the ban on hiring or supervising an immediate family member.

It's refreshing to see the standards for all public officials, whether elected or appointed, equally applied. Working in government is very challenging, and this type of policy will go a long way to making the challenges about the policies and not about the people.

Politics and kindergarten

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:43:22 PST

When the media buzz began on Barack Obama's aspirations in kindergarten I was amused by the superficial coverage of the campaign . But now that the matter seems to have real traction I am worried. Yes, there are many more important issues before the voters - the war in Iraq and health care costs, to name a few. But this issue of what you were like in kindergarten may just turn out to be something that will become a part of future campaigns. And that is why I am worried.

It never came up when I campaigned for city council or for mayor, and I have no intention of running again for public office, but in case my kindergarden record becomes part of some future research project for an investigative reporter I will admit here that you will find absolutely nothing on me. I never went to kindergarden. In fact, I skipped the whole thing. As the youngest of five children you could say that from birth to age five I was essentially "home schooled" by my older brother and sisters, and had the benefit of parents who organized regular homework sessions for my siblings after school. I didn't know that I knew how to read, but apparently I did, in fact, read words and books. So I was given a placement test and entered first grade at age 5.

I hope the candidates and the media get back to the real issues. I don't think I can survive this presidential race if the next big expose is what happened in middle school.

Note to self

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:15:10 PST

After bragging that he was going force openness and transparency in government, California Governor Arnold Scwarzenegger has failed to fully disclose details of $1.7 million in funds used for travel expenses, support staff, and other costs associated with his overseas travels. The money has been donated to "California State Protocol Foundation," a non-profit that lists as its mission, in part, to promote California to the world."

According to its website, the Foundation "will lessen the burden of government through various events that promote California as a place to do business. The Foundation will also advise the government on diplomatic and consular matters."

The organization raises funds from "individuals, corporations, and other foundations that will be used to pay for State events that a particular department of the government would pay for traditionally."

The state's Fair Political Practices Commission requires public disclosure of such expenses, and until late March 2004, when the governor's Office of Protocol was established, his travel expenses were itemized and disclosed. When asked by the Los Angeles Times how expenses are now recorded, staff members indicated that they "recorded some of the costs in memos they wrote to themselves and filed away in the governor's legal affairs office."

The governor is not above the law. The financial information about the donors and details of these expenses should be available to the public, and by law must be made within 30 days of the payment. Some details were finally filed, but only after the paper filed state Public Records Act requests.

Jet-setting, lavish hotels and meals, and extravagant entertainment are de rigueur for Hollywood stars, but should not be for governors, even if they are former Hollywood stars. Most troubling is not that the donors are receiving tax benefits from their donations, but that the public has no idea where the money is coming from or where it is going. The donors can give unlimited amounts of money in complete anonymity.

My advice to the governor and his staff responsible for this abuse of the public trust: drop the "note to self" and disclose fully, on time, and on the internet.

No problem?

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 11:09:24 PST

To an elected official, the line between what is legal and what is ethical can sometimes look thin. Sometimes even a city attorney can suffer from blurred vision. This appears to be the case in Flint, Michigan, where City Councilman Darryl Buchanan plans to vote for himself when the council votes to confirm his appointment as city administrator.

The city attorney notes that the charter has a conflict of interest policy, which says "no elective officer, appointee, or employee of the city may participate in, vote upon, or act upon any matter if a conflict exists." This said, the lawyer says that because the charter does not specifically define a conflict of interest there would be a recommendation to abstain, but not a requirement.

According to an article in the Flint Journal, Councilman Buchanan says "The city attorney says there's nothing illegal about it, and other attorneys I've talked to don't see where that would be a problem. Past practice shows we've been able to vote for ourselves."

Those votes have been for council leadership positions, not a $97,000 job as city administrator. This is clearly a case demonstrating that past practice is not necessarily best practice. If Buchanan is confirmed as the second most powerful person at City Hall the voters and council should beware. If he doesn't see anything wrong with this situation it is unlikely he will be the ethics watchdog the city needs and deserves.

The letter of the law

jnadler@scu.edu (Judy Nadler) — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 04:25:18 PST

Five county commissioners in Texas are under investigation for spending more than $2.3 million in campaign funds over the past few years, without full disclosure.
The expenses include reimbursement to staff members, meals, and shoe store purchases, most with the description "misc." or "public relations.

Virtually all states have strict reporting requirements outlined in state law. The enforcement agency in Texas is the Texas Ethics Commission, which is responsible for enforcement, but acts only when it receives a sworn complaint. Apparently there have been no complaints filed in this jurisdiction, Harris County, in more than 15 years.

Commissioner Jerry Eversole declared as "public relations" a $6,850 trip to Florida (this is currently being investigated by the district attorney). One of his colleagues complained that the rules were too confusing, and Eversole defended his actions by telling the Houston Chronicle "When the law says we have to state what an expense went for, I'll follow the letter of the law."

Perhaps the commissioners in question should take a closer look at the letter of the law, then consider that the public is also interested in having elected officials honor the spirit as well as the letter of the law.