Saturday, August 17, 2013

The Ethics Code Issue

It's time for us to review the issues of the Ethics Code, in view of the fact that on Wednesday's Board Agenda is the replacement of the Ethics Board's Draft with a draft from Malone, Mangold and O'Brien.  Here's Jack Conway's letter of resignation from the Ethics Board from last October in response to the refusal of the Board majority to deal with the issue.  It's a great summary of the issues involved.



                                                                                                "October 26, 2012


Members of the Town Board of the Town of East Greenbush:

This letter is my resignation from the Town of East Greenbush’s Board of Ethics.  I appreciate the opportunity to have served on this board but I can no longer continue in this capacity.  It has been more than two years since I was appointed and more than sixteen months since the Board of Ethics recommended a new Code of Ethics but there is still no new Code in place and the Town Board now seems uninterested in pushing the matter to a reasonable conclusion.  I realize there is pressing town business but there has been ample time to address the question of ethics which is clearly not a priority for this board.

The Board of Ethics was empowered and I was appointed in October 2010.  By January 2011 we had a full board that immediately set to the task of producing a new Code of Ethics. The local law that established the original Code was passed in 1974 but a Board of Ethics was not constituted until 2010.  Meeting twice monthly in order to expedite what we considered to be an urgent matter, the Board of Ethics submitted a draft of a new Code to the Town Board in June 2011.  This draft was the result of careful study of other Codes and a series of rigorous deliberations by the five members of the Board of Ethics in public meetings that included valuable and substantive input from members of the public.  We felt, and I still feel, that the draft produced by the Board of Ethics offered a guide for ethical conduct of which residents of the town could be proud.  Critical aspects of this draft were rejected by the Town Board.

The primary purpose of a Code of Ethics is to ensure the public that every decision made by its municipal officials is made in the public interest and not for the benefit of an individual, family, private business, political party or other faction.  Above all else, it is supposed to eliminate both the appearance and reality of conflicts of interest.  The requirement for annual financial disclosure, strongly recommended by the Board of Ethics, was eliminated by the majority on the Town Board, an act that seriously undermined the Code’s ability to protect the public interest and monitor potential conflicts of interest.  More distressingly, the elimination of financial disclosure was done for the convenience of sitting members of the Town Board who chose to place their own interest above that of town residents.  The Town Board also objected to provisions that would govern the ability of employees to appear before the town after they leave municipal service, and certain provisions in the Nepotism section that affected the hiring of relatives of members of the Town Board.  Taken together, these changes transformed a draft Code that would protect the public interest into a guide for the kind of insider politics that a Code of Ethics is expected to prohibit.  In good conscience I cannot endorse or condone this approach.

           
There is a fundamental conflict of interest in having the Town Board write the Code of Ethics that is supposed to regulate the conduct of its own members.  The Association of Towns has published a series of suggestions for increasing the independence of municipal boards of ethics and I would encourage the town to adopt these.  They include passing a local law removing the requirement that one member of the Board of Ethics must be a municipal official, the establishment of a three-person independent panel that would select the members of the Board of Ethics, and the acceptance by the Town Board of the Code proposed by the Board of Ethics pending the opinion of the Town Attorney that all of its provision are legal and do not contradict provisions of State or local law.  Such an approach would assure the public that its interests are protected and will not be subverted for partisan political advantage.

I would like to thank Ginny O’Brien for appointing me to this board.  It was an honor and a privilege to serve with Jim Breig, Justine Spada, Joseph Slater and Dave Youmans.  Each of them has done a rigorous, professional job and continues to serve with distinction.  When you decide on my replacement, I will work with that person in any way that might help get them up to speed.  Every town needs a strong commitment to ensure the ethical conduct of elected and appointed municipal officials and I will continue to advocate for such a commitment here in East Greenbush.

                                                                                                Sincerely,
  
                                                                                                John J. Conway, Ph.D

10 comments:

  1. It's pretty clear from the looks of Wednesday's agenda that Malone, Mangold and O'Brien intend to dump a dumbed-down Ethics Code on the citizens of East Greenbush. One drafted in their own personal interest, rather than in the interest of the community. What a legacy for Ginny O'Brien after all the years she has served on the Town Board and County Legislature. It's a real shame. Another Ginny's Law to remember? Really a shame!!!

    One concrete pledge (the first of several, I hope) that the Republican candidates for Town Board can make is that they will join Keith Langley in rescinding the the Mangold, Malone and O'Brien self-serving Ethics Code and adopt the Ethics Code drafted by the Ethics Board. That would be a great starter for an issue-based campaign.
    ReplyDelete

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will Supervisor Keith Langley make his appointment prior to next Wednesday's Town Board Meeting? Mr. Langley's Ethics Board appointment, if he indeed makes one, will help to clarify his position on the Ethics issue. If Mr. Langley appoints a respected individual to the Ethics Board, that appointment will send a positive message to the people of EG and indicate that Mr. Langley is indeed serious about the eventual enactment of a strong Ethics Code.
    If however, Mr Langley chooses to appoint a Chris DeFruscio approved crony, that appointment would send a negative message to the people of EG.
    The choice is yours Mr. Supervisor Langley!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gadfly.. You might want to do a little investigating of your own. There is a rumor floating around that Mr. Conway may be getting his arm twisted to conform with the majority. Lets hope this isn't the case.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous 7:13: And by 'rumors floating' you mean your hallucinations have returned? There's medication you can take for that nowadays. Trust me I know. But then again there's a difference between rumors, hallucinations and things you wish were true. Come to the town board meeting on Wednesday and the public hearing in September and you can dispense with the rumors and see for yourself how the democrats have co-opted me. I haven't had a single contact with the democrats over their new Code of 'Ethics.' They know better and you should too.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear 7:13 AM (Chris?):
    Looking forward to seeing you at the Wednesday Town Board meeting.
    "There is a rumor floating around that" a Times-Union reporter is planning to ask you a number of questions about your position on the Ethics Code and a couple other issues.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tom Grant (the elder)August 19, 2013 at 11:42 AM

    Dear Don:

    My two cents...

    I would encourage the Town Board members to vote to send BOTH the Ginny O'Brien and Rick Matters sponsored Ethics Proposals to a Public Hearing. A YES vote for BOTH would facilitate a public side by side comparison that might very well lead to a compromise acceptable to both.

    Be well,

    Tom

    ReplyDelete
  7. Three questions for you, Gadfly:

    1. Ginny O'Brien said that there have been no patronage complaints filed by individuals or agencies against the town or town officials..." To what person or office would such a complaint be filed?

    2. O'Brien said the Democrats consider "part" of the proposed [ethics] law draconian for a small town of just over 16,000 people. Which part of the law fits into that "draconian" category and what does the size of the town have to do it? Is a small town not entitled to a strong, protective ethics law?

    Her arguments made no sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Listening to the majority board discuss ethics last night was very puzzling to me. I agree Ms. O'Brien comments made no sense to me. It only sounded like political excuses for not having the BEST ETHIC'S CODE possible. If our town had a population of two thousand, still we should have an extremely strong ethic's code. So a lot of people know each other in this town, that doesn't mean all decision making will be done for the right purposes.

    I can except a council-person stating, I'm an honest person, but still that's not an excuse for not excepting the original ethic's draft. Excuses were thrown out in abundance for a different ethics code.

    One council-person stating were are looking for a balance in the ethics code. A balance for what reason??? The ethics code is suppose to represent the best interest of the taxpayers, not the elected officials who spend our money. I want to see elected officials walking the talk, it was very disappointing last night.

    I have now figured out, who is the most likely council-person not deserving to represent us. Gadfly, I will not speak any further on my previous comment as you know who it is. Throw the bait in the garbage where it belongs. Respectfully, Bonnie L.

    ReplyDelete
  9. there were items in the board of ethics draft that could be construed as too intrusive by those to whom it would have applied ... notice, I said could not would.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Where is Big Bad Jack Conway? The board majority released their cleaned up ethics code and the cat has your tongue? You should jump on that donkey and ride around town and ask for forgiveness. Now your on a new rant about finance and that already sounds stale. You silly man.

    ReplyDelete