HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - December 10, 2012 B-01 SMEthics and Public Service
Laws and Principles
Or
• Don't let this happen to you
.. .
Or: Top Ten Signs Your City
Attorney Is A Crook
• He has a quarter horse ranch in Wash. State
• She gets a referral fee from outside Counsel
• He's got this great paralegal he wants to hire named L. Schwabauer
• She proposes a Charter City "so we can both make more money"
• His bike race team is sponsored by outside counsel
• She is also the Mayor
• His expense reimbursements net more than his salary
• She says her husband's construction company does not need to be low bidder
• He claims his contract is not a public record
• This one is easy... She passed the bar!
Session Objectives
1. To familiarize you with laws that govern
your service and when to ask questions
2. To encourage you to think beyond legal
restrictions and provide tools for doing so
3. Help you comply with AB 1234 requirements
Quotes
• Nearly all men (and women) can stand
adversity, but if you want to test a man's
character, give him power.
— Abraham Lincoln
Quotes (cont.)
• Live so you would not be ashamed to sell
the family parrot to the town gossip.
— Will Rogers
Quotes (cont.)
• If you are not on the line when you trip, you
will not fall over it.
- unknown
Public Service Ethics is Different
• Laws play a bigger role
• Perception as important as reality
• Gut is not a reliable guide
Ethics versus
Ethics Laws
Ethics Laws
• Law = Minimum standards
• What we must do
• Ethics is what we ought to do
—Above and beyond law's minimum
requirements
Thinking Beyond Ethics Laws
• Law tends to be starting point for most
ethical analyses in public service
• Floor for ethical conduct—not the ceiling
Where do you want to set your sights as a
public servant?
• Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it is
ethical (or public will perceive it to be so)
Public Service Ethics—not always
mandated by law
• Remember that your role is first and foremost to
serve the community.
• Be truthful with your fellow
public and others -even when
hard or unwelcome truths.
elected officials, the
it involves speaking
• Avoid any actions that would cause the public to
question whether your decisions are based on
personal interests instead of the public's interests.
Its not always the law --continued
• Make decisions based on the merits of the issues.
• Honor the law's and the public's expectation that agency policies will be applied
consistently.
• Support the public's right to know and promote meaningful public involvement.
• Support merit -based processes for the award of public employment and public
contracts.
• Be impartial and do not favor those who either have helped you or are in a position to
help you.
• Promote equality and treat all people equitably.
Its not always the law --continued
Treat fellow officials, staff and the public with courtesy, even when you
disagree with them.
Focus on the merits in discussions, not personality traits or other issues that
might distract you from focusing on what is best for the community.
Search for value from diverse opinions and build consensus.
Follow through on commitments, keep others informed, and make timely
responses.
Be approachable and open-minded.
Listen carefully and ask questions that add value to discussions.
Involve all appropriate stakeholders in meetings affecting agency.
Understanding Ethics Laws
• What They Cover
• When You Need to Ask
Questions
• Resources for Further Reference
Four Groups of Ethics Laws
1. Personal financial gain
2. Personal advantages and
perks
3. Governmental
transparency
PEbRSOddNAL FNMCkAL G"
Akac
. w�raw.ara...a.er�ru�swaw..
wrs. n...w..�.r r.rac+ma.mi mw.ti.
• CrsKtMun�aaMwml�rMw�wvW eryda�d
Wxne�lyda.yxl mlq/er.d SAia
• 4n.ah+wm�vrddMn.wM:.bva.ald
PERSONAL AO1051EGAf.ES � PERILS
laM `_ .ndb..ar.�dsfoer w.a. mL wqm
.od�a7k.oP.�snsa ire. W�s14m.��.
.wmraa•d.1nn..
• r..eamw.r�dw f.estQ
crmw Eea�opw.wa.�n.nr+�xnipmwy
GDYERNMEME TRANSPARERCT
• mraraw.A.aAe..u.I�
• >wusw.tuau.swr.w�.p�w�.ws.nkrm
nuA.P.•s�pt {x1Y lNkd . xim a<
• fl�a{w Edt �grAlondd�mffi'--'-
�Ml���rt•ln�dkl+..
■w.�uM.wo�t.e h�L..
• x�erb.is.�.n.r.ywe�r lssmaa
mnl fiudWa.i«MY� bl.dlWsp.wa..�x�n
dWIebMPuepnd
MR PROCMES
Pdae melee
• FtwvrnPuwAlYgw.wmr5kad.omPM1lMaMeq
.P
�wmE�•e.ohar
omm P.vap..egma,ueran
..,
• 4mp.i.w�hq.Nw�ki Lynn
aVr b eMeinNh xAdtlw Ju1.evlS�wt Daa
e n.nk�a.Lsn.
9..�- W.Irl.�.syiP�aahlW.laa.
• � � wpm dYP�d
tr a...�ww q4 a a.dm� [ay.+.s.usb oa.�t
l.dsl
• 4�.w.Aw..�i�.k�l hRs.4.6Ngb....
yrr.AwLw4�a.� 7'Y^�.
• stro�a�k �r�k.��,aoa�
4. Fair processes i =EV&N-
Group 1:
Personal Financial Gain Issues
• Principle: Public servants should not
benefit financially from their
positions
Examples of Laws
• Bribery and related crimes
• Financial interest disqualification
requirements
• Revolving door restrictions
Bribery
• Rule: Public officials may not
solicit, receive or agree to receive a
benefit in exchange for their official
actions
• Penalties: Loss of office, prison
time, fines, restitution, attorneys
fees and public embarrassment
VOL 118 NO. 28
San Bernardino
Officials Charged
W-ith Taking
Developer's Bribes
Prosecutors Say Developer
Paid to Fix $102 Million
Lawsuit Settlement
By Jason W. Armstrong
' Dally Journal Staff Writer
SAN BERNARDINO — A $142 million settlement be-
tween San Bernardino County and a high-profile developer
could be on the verge of collapse as a result of a raft of new
bribery charges filed Wednesday by local and state authori-
des against county officials who helped to get it approved.
Expanding their ongoing investigation into government
corruption in the county, District Attorney Michael Ramos
and California Attorney General Jerry Brown jr. filed more
than a dozen charges against former Board of Supervisors
chairman Bili Posimus and farmer assistant county asses-
sor Jim Erwin, including bribery and misappropriation of
public funds. People a. PosImm, FSB1000523 (San Ber-
nardino County Super. Ct., filed Feb. 9, 2010).
V1. .a ....- . . A »...-A-' ---1 -- --'- i-iti-----{,'-- __'_I -- -A-_—
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2414
Case Study0
:
City of Ringa Linga Linga Ding Dong Ding
named by The Ronnettes
Salary Trading:
City Manager allegedly bribed the City Council to raise his
salary in exchange for converting the City to a Charter City
where Council Salaries are not limited by the Gov Code.
Employee Loans:
Several management team employees with post
employment loans in excess of $100,000.00
Similar Crimes
• Receiving rewards for appointing
someone to public office
• Embezzlement—converting
public funds or property to your
own
Ex -Lynwood councilmembers get prison in misuse of city funds
Louis Byrd, 80, is given five years and Fernando Pedroza, 47,
is given four years for illegally boosting salaries.
Double Claiming Expenses
"Its not the amount of money. It's the audacity of the conduct."
said Denuty D_ A _ Stenhen Tavlor
nti el
Oil
SER.N.A.,
RE.SIG,NS, ACCEPTS D.EAL
Enters" =no contest plea to charge of `double-dipping' oa travel. expenses
l�esY
-By Mugoo C,�
-is:rbriant�wadso fs fiscal he�.
Mdnam
NEVdSSUUR4ELSMFF-,,
a
rte. eohrs a
sePb'his
is
Staaktoo.
_ Mame Skis :Darn of Lodi abruwUy
Years and is in her Sftit t-- In iEcent
1wobobW what she will. be. remembered
eenrb— on
resigned 8vm tbje Delta Colisge board
years, she worked to get a satellite tam_--
Jur7 he sai[C
wftav '
Alondav and mknutea later pleaded so
Pus in the Y.odiand Call aaha
"from
The chsrge -of false:Pini mc•[�_.
ear allann%
omtmt cn a emminat nharFm 4)f-dnuhle-
- Sbe . had retired bear .Crmk
meat Sled -FrUlay vR=s mlginall r a
-.-to
Ad flea. Sarna
dipping' an travel rehnburaemente-
Serna nwelved three years probation
High Sebool inthe Eod1UnMedSchool
District wbem site taught history -
- felony but was nednoed :a- Miade?
meanor at Srrerw'� ATaljjbbtat hZoa;
rssWted free
for oDllecting money flrom bath Delta
.
The datwgleter of 1hrtuww*:era, Senna
day Sacs JOaquJn IIe�1 .-Distti %Attkr
the Delta
Qoll� iaa�
and the Community Canege League OF
[Eli[arnta for trips she tools mom WM
has been a $W*ng edyocate ft r HLs�te
students and miuoriLy 'oarnneunitLas.
- -eY 3rc0— IPEY aid- :' '
trig -
Tnstebd of p pt, -Om tlr a'trig-
and pleaded .
a
Until this ye= -
She has also been a candi Ivate icor the
Serna.67, de_,k4. v ,t_i a.a�.
casual U
Ther were about five trips, with one
Lodi City Oumtcil.
as gtiraerit 77�y1ur said. .. - .
daft
cnatLng as little as Sieth and anothel-
Her Plea bargain and resignation
Sbodcbon Cama-JvdgeeIih�an�-Guit'
ilpple�oe
Cuing $000, saSd Delta C ollega Stinger--
Btunueli tnatty tri the.I-�6di mrffinmriiy
twit smemeed Semm afkar strong a
trtrret
intenllerrt and PtrBident Rail Ito-
i.0di irlayot- FArry Hansen vAnited
with Serna's lawyen'Al EM& T%e
Expanses.
degu— In. toAa1, sire poc ,e about
w1W'Searna trying to get a Deitia 1701-
Z 3 -di NewsSetiinrel triad.: haotataC
t1700. het ea d_
1008 5Utdlile COUIpUs in IAds
32rna several t[mes I d ondaF 2dtaa seen
-some BeOYle 7112bt see it as a well.
She Las always rrorired so bald fir_
' but dtd nat hear bacIL
- - -
- WN _kmgaw .cr. su. Fast matters but we d,otz"k' It�k6u� said.
YOtmg people m- the' community.
please "M Serwa. VW& I
Its Not Always About Money
Campaign Ethics
�'`:prceptlat:o#. Violation. If
14ftW+ d money 1 vranf 10
o#fet in-Y-fkpologlos'
Gal 'ktgh- Dmic b"rd&Wm
. L
^ i d rnuox 006 Ooks :
fix: -email' candidates
e� pw tru ii cuing for f
urth
USM wg'=
H�ELSa1iF.Yi[UTFR '. �;" DBlsi1� r�
fmlm5a pxepared �t at
ALT— i5e�pite � pgxlili� &P� `�� i`e�' Uoaid m$s
''fn& wZ; �aapalagf�efaa eve
Tues. ne�v. Gait F09h school a.peL+�el), 4£ a►�dn
�is#ict boalA t$tann�B. '`Cv�ded eu3yes?nt:tg
�i� st i westta to r�er'?nY singe. apo1ogw-.
.thy �nuia acid O tauex .�` "
Art,*
rt ,..'�°� ..gertiacaDe
'F1iat.Ycust�e sent an t'to -: and claea�ea.Emgum xtiuiis
Of mid C1e]saer iu�i�e a iat aP.kaavFi
oq O 7 puiulielY edot e"PAY biv
-t'htee �hool board' iandi�a�a;. e< t1�s'. ,.
gl o f di$fri� r.: •. . P7B B sae 1 ;'
0
0
Disqualification Based on
Financial Interests
Rule: You may not participate in
a decision if financial interests are
affected by a decision
Effect can be positive or negative
Allen, a lawyer, Votes as Santo Rosa Planning Commissioner
votes to approve project he was a consultant on, in 2009 but
fined after election to assembly
Disqualification versus
Abstention
• Abstention => voluntary
• Disqualification => Legally required
—Does not imply wrongdoing
—Unless you don't disqualify
What Kinds of Interests?
Sources of income of $5500 or more
—Your own income
—Promised income
—Partner's/child's income
—Loans/guarantors
What Kinds of Interests?
Real property interests of $2000 or more
— Direct or indirect
— Partner/child's property
— Tenant interest
(except month to month)
— 500 foot rule
What
Kinds of
Interests ?
See reverse of
handout
PERSONAL FINANCIAL GANN
Pb& dSlak
• Mw d6grwbfy amweim Gam pmkipad4lodambiom
Ihrt e4 oti.cl fpodtbvyor � Sandal
IrnerCs6 [rae rcxne Far wd d typesoF thlarrdd bRern6}.
• Gmlol haoemirltemtinacoOmcE tmwk bl Wdr ae"r%
• C�mrtegrltat. rads or.gmewreo-'s.md�gd
nhle or otberamm4es In encbonge for a decblml.
, CoWirdm=casmkydccdd topomW
htg ms aoquw a� In PropertywIdda
mlelrlvpmem arew—er wbkb"bme ded0 m-
mlldng 3b&n
PERSONAL AOIR MAGES A PERILS
Pb&effirl•1c
• Wo d6dow all gldk received ofM or more sad mq wt
,ctrl. galb.W.Wklbg n Wer $iad rlaaal Rom a dogk
a ollreeinaplwemyesc
a Cmrwr nodrammprbor6nfmm Shd parlim for
.paddrq. rrl0rr)ran.rtkk a attm�%A mnwence.
• Gawp we pn6& ogaaoy woanw(moner, veal
07 -mac waltme m d -raw egdprdmU For paromdor
powkn PwPo�
• bda o*b..gmbwad Sar whW and mcemrYcipm.
amsiil dwftb tbdr wwyn mGahw rrt Pow.
• f%. puddp wj, dacia•m WalmryaRacl(poshhry
Re�Brely}tI bper—d the
• G]mar"L R[e tYikWipofwtdutl bmu babpntYljotl
OXRPRW-
• Gmot wmd mafa mdlW at pub& expmre.
• Ommae owdm etlk ofpah&n.uR�or foR�
• comer raehe loam.wri330fian iasewlaWR the
agerlcyar thme who do 6wNrK wlah t.e vgacy.
GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY
P".d3cbt
• hGald6clmalhdr tburldati0tmm4
• War ooedacr l6e puhMct;huta�Wopen and p.hHdad
D.�aPI Foe the kmlled dretunwrrces whaR the
1111.1Mff dared a�io.l
Mix-URw Wp k Lmlwebn ofdoamamb arrd rear-',
gwK lad by pubU a9irck+accept wban acti-W me
b apedbgdynrdgrb+ed bl lrp.
h0b946ckse U*cm dmsbow (Sq"M
more) 9. ke k6m,@ �tml oe
FAIR PROCESSES
P sc .ffidak
• NmerspomalMll" rime U, agrnry
ft rote -
• Caamm pardclpow in&cw m than MM bmdp tY•k
immedioe ruWy rspomeldomnOc a� •r ■
• CEMN pndelpk In gNsi-wk61 proaxdlrep In wbkk
dk y bee. drong Mm whb rmpod w the pmts. or &m
• ccmw skmdmnm*baw oatrdo public aA'mar
dwVinolkrownide a dwW%IbalwLddaldjMthem
eoo,tw*fi-
Cm
ww
Ppb bd—
bot apply b dected bodla}.
• GmlwmMdlamlpaapmubuklom ofmaelhm3370
bmlptmdtappb mlrwllkappsotkn Ypmdbgmd
for Ibroe mrorhs altaradecwM(dare=appysadecud
bodlai.
• Gmal mprtlmllndl`aduda be(ora rhdeagffgrfor ou.
yuu.Ikr kmlrrd+tyency smke-
• MWomaducl pabMriaarlgpW wmdaocewhhdua
F—jdmda-
INSTITUTE Fox
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
.
.
.
If You Are Disqualified
Don't discuss or influence (staff or
colleagues)
Identify nature of conflict at meeting
Leave room (unless matter on
consent)
Limited exceptions
Owned property
Owned/controlled business
Alt
�ud���wn
*�• h`a �
rhe
.ai
t
M
Penalties
• Invalidate decision
• Misdemeanor (could result in loss of office)
• Fines ($5,000 to $10,000 per violation)
• Attorneys fees (yours and others)
• Embarrassment (personal/political)
Warning!
Special Rules for Contracts
• Disqualification may not be enough
— Direct or indirect interest
— Limited exceptions
• May have to refund money paid
• Felony: $1,000 fine,
imprisonment, and loss of office
Case Study: The Travel Store
• Elected school board member owned travel
agency
Twice failed to disclose interest on SEI
• Voted on 15 decisions to approve payment to her
travel agency ($28,481 total)
• Possible fine under PRA: $76,000 (ultimate fine:
$29,000)
Case Study
Financ40
ial Interests
Board Member Bill is married to H.R.
Consultant Joan. County is in the process of
entering into a contract for H.R. consulting
services. Joan wants to bid for the contract
work. Bill and Joan have had a prenuptial
agreement in place during their I I years of
marriage. As a result, they have no
community property. Does Bill have a
financial interest in this contract?
Case Study on Financial Interests
YES
Conflicts of Interest When Leaving
Office — Govt. Code § 87407
• Before leaving office:
— Public official may not make, participate in
making or influence government decisions;
— directly relating to any persons with whom
public official is negotiating or has any
arrangement concerning prospective
employment
Conflicts of Interest When Leaving
Office — Govt. Code § 87407
• For one year after leaving office:
— An elected official/city manager/chief administrative
officer, or general manager;
— May not be compensated as an
agent/attorney/representative of another person;
To appear before or communicate with their former
agency for the purpose of influencing
— Regarding an administrative action or a legislative
action (permits, licenses, grants, or contracts
proceeding sale or purchase of goods or property,
adoption of rules, ect.)
Future Employment Issues
• New revolving door prohibition
— Elected
Officials
and top
managers
— Cannot
represent
people
for pay
for a year after
leaving their agency
— Effective July 1, 2006
• No participation in decisions involving
future employers
9jBest Practices
• Avoid temptation to look at public service
as an opportunity for financial gain
• Look at every decision and ask yourself
whether it involves some kind of financial
interest for you
Group 2: Perks
• Principles:
— Democratic equality
— Public servants should not receive
special benefits by virtue of their
positions
Two Kinds of Perk Rules
1. Perks that others offer you
2. Perks that you give
yourself/use- of-public-
resources issues
Gifts Don't Always Have Bows
• Meals, food and drink (including
receptions)
• Entertainment (concerts & sporting events)
• Certain kinds of travel and lodging
Villaraigosa Ethics Fine: Record $42,000
Punishment Recommended After Mayor Accepts
Free Tickets
Does the Gift Limit Apply to You.?
• Elected state or local officers or candidates;
• City Managers, City Attorneys, Public
Officials who manage public investments
(Govt. Code § 87200);
• "Designated employees" who are identified
by an agency's Conflict of Interest Code
Gifts — Case Study
• Beth, a city manager, gets married. Beth
registered for a chandelier that cost $3,000.
Harold, a local resident, purchases the
chandelier for Beth as a wedding gift. Beth
donates the chandelier within 30 days to a
local, non-profit battered women's shelter.
Does Beth have to disclose the chandelier
because she donated it to a nonprofit entity?
Gifts — Case Study
No
Gifts — Case Study
• The Mayor has been invited to make a
presentation at the League of Mayors statewide
conference. The Mayor's lodging, food, and
transportation costs total $4,000 and are paid in
full by the League. He arrives the day before the
conference, delivers his talk the next day, and
leaves the day after the talk. Has the Mayor
violated the gift limits because his expenses are
covered for two days he is not presenting?
Gifts — Case Study
NO -
If costs are reasonably related to
governmental purpose, and the lodging
and subsistence limited to the day
before, day of and the day after the
presentation.
Perks Others Offer
• Report $50 and up (over a year)
• Limit (2012 $420 and 2013 $440 per
year)
• Exceptions for some kinds of travel,
informational materials
• May also be a disqualifying interest
(over $420/$440 in prior 12 months)
Penalties
• Up to $5,000 per violation
• Own attorneys fees ($3,000-$30,000)
• Others' attorneys fees (for private actions to
enforce law)
Other Perks Others Offer
• No free or discounted travel from
transportation from transportation carriers
— Result — Immediate forfeiture of office
• No honoraria (fees) for speaking or writing
Use of Public Resources Issues
• Personal use of public resources
(including staff time and agency
equipment) prohibited
• Political use of public resources
also prohibited
Misuse of Public Funds
• Bella, a physician for a Hospital District,
went to Sri Lanka to provide emergency
medical care for victims of the tsunami. The
Hospital District reimbursed Bella's travel
expenses to Sri Lanka. Is this a misuse of
public funds by the Hospital District?
Misuse of Public Funds
True, False or Maybe
Maybe —
If the governing body decides there is a
public purpose.
Attorney General Opinion OS -309
Example:
Expense Reimbursement
• Familiarize yourself with your agency's
policies/limits
— What kinds of expenses
What rates for food, lodging and transportation
The importance of documentation
• Note: Spouse/partner expenses not reimbursable
Consequences of Violations
• Civil penalties: $1,000/day fine + 3X
value of resource used
• Criminal penalties: 2-4 year prison
term +disqualification from office
0 Can also have income tax implication
Case Study: Sacramento
Suburban Water District
• Staff and directors misusing public resources
• Investigative report by Sacramento Bee
— Use of agency credit card for personal purposes
Misreporting of income
Double-dipping on expense reimbursements
• Legislative response: AB 1234
Political Use of Public Resources
• By individuals or agency itself (support
of ballot measures)
• Mass mailing restrictions
— Goal: restrict incumbents' advantage
• Gifts of public funds
Examplee:First Five Commission
• Agency resources used to produce pro -
preschool ads
• Legal? Maybe
• Ethical? Director resigned
Common Law Bias Prohibitions
• Common law bias based on personal interest:
public officials cannot use their position for
personal gain
• Common law bias or prejudice based on unofficial
source: decision at a hearing should be based on
the record
• Common law prohibition on prejudging: public
official should not be committed to an outcome
before the hearing. Opinions are OK, but should
not approach a hearing with a closed mind
91 Best Practice
• Avoid perks and the temptation to
rationalize about them
—Legally risky
—Public relations headache
Group 3:
Transparency Laws
Principles:
• It's the public's business
• Public trusts a process it can see
•
Transparency Rules
Conduct business in open
and publicized meetings
Allow public to participate
in meetings
Allow public inspection of
records
The A,s of Open
Government laws
L $a po1$u �nofpmoeus .umlabe � ��
.i�1e. aooti ifomp �ofv elm»
�� mdtrmpQ�u m.}pmiffi61 � made
potiaem P— ,
m�d.adu�am tyliia�a'� om.cmlrioa
CALMIL m►s 7RlUi'iFA Mr LrylYs
RNWO PLEUC OFF LKS 10.
A. 116. ,_suti 6-1.._ b .,o .a
> _..&Mp..—*, 16� 0
C. ■n— Pu f.L� a
u • i q—w..]Lr
Mmpimpbla ff—Ldm fL- myh. ]al
�m2plyh�ygL dMLLH� hd—H-
�t.-1t,dAmdILO-Y.tft-y..
'melu Lh. mmolo t. he hmp¢mt
.),vt9d�p®olA.�.+.i lodes nd +'+a�•1M..7r
a� bJ— Lhnt tb e x phmnh, d:
M3MUWI bolooaknuded .My MbWI Ls MMVOs fox
7a1 rjFFItl.l.• .odAZ—rufeiilrbfiw owJffitr
Is. coffin nA.hle m wrmilm& mgrw. t
Conducting Business
at Open Meetings
• A majority may not consult outside an
agency -convened meeting
• Key concept: what constitutes a meeting
— Example: Serial communications
• Exceptions for certain kinds of events
— As long as a majority does not consult among
themselves
Brown Act — Case Study
• Police Chief creates a policy which provides that
police will not respond to home alarms unless
verified by a third party. City Manager meets
separately, individually and privately with
members of the City Council to provide
information regarding the policy but does not
communicate or share comments or position of
any member. The City Manager obtains the
support of a majority of the members. Has the
manager violated the Act?
Brown Act — Case Study
NO,
But the legislature passed §54952.2
to clarify that just because a " collective
concurrence" is not reached does not
mean that the meetings do not violate the
Brown Act
Consequences of Violations
• Nullification of decision
• Criminal sanctions for intentional violations
(up to 6 months in jail/$1000 fine)
• Intense adverse media attention
Public Records
• Agendas and meeting materials
• Other writings prepared, owned, used or
retained by agency (including electronic)
• Penalties: Adverse media attention +costs
and fees if litigated
Financial Interest Disclosure
• Transparency includes obligation for high
level public servants to disclose financial
interests
— Assuming office
— Annually while in office
— Upon leaving office
Economic Interest Disclosure -
Government Code §87200
• Covered officials:
— planning commissioners,
— county supervisors
district attorneys/ county counsels
county chief administrative officers/ treasurers
city council members/ mayors,
— city managers/ attorneys/ treasurers
— public officials who manage public investments
— candidates for any of these offices at any election
— other officials designated by local agency conflict of
interest codes
Economic Interest Disclosure -
Government Code §87200
• Filed upon taking office/ leaving office/
annual basis
• Form 700 requires disclosure of personal
financial interests
• Alerts public officials to actual and
potential conflicts to help avoid conflicts
• Informs the public about potential conflicts
Charitable Fundraising
• Rule applies to elected officials
• Disclose $5,000 or more from single source
• Charitable, legislative or governmental
purpose
9jBest Practices
• Assume all information is public or will
become public
LI
Don't discuss agency business with a
quorum
fellow decision -makers
outside of meetings
Group 4: Fair Process Laws
• Principle: As adecision-maker, the
public expects you to be impartial and
avoid favoritism
Fair Process Laws
• Due process requirements and rules against
bias
— Nasha v. City of Los Angeles
— Clark v. Hermosa Beach
• Incompatible office prohibitions
Fair Process Laws, continued
• Competitive bidding requirements
— State law defines
— Also local requirements
— Principles:
• Everyone has a right to compete for agency's business
• That competition produces the best price for taxpayers
• Example:
— Council member steered contracts to sister's firm and
apparently received kickbacks
Fair Process Laws, continued
• Disqualification requirements if
decision involves family members
• Campaign contribution restrictions
(appointed bodies)
• Soliciting campaign contributions from
employees
91 Best Practices
• Think fairness and merit -based
decision-making in your decisions
• Keep politics separate from
relationships with agency staff
Resources for Further N
Prohibitions
I
Beyond the Law:
Public Service EthID
ics
Principles
Ethics =Values
• Six universal ethical values:
— Trustworthiness
— Loyalty
— Responsibility
• Community interest
— Respect
— Fairness
— Compassion
Source: Institute for Global Ethics
Applying Values to
Public Service
Trustworthiness:
• I am truthful with
my fellow
officials, the public
and others.
wr,. r.l.Q.ww Ir INa.N �r I�,.s1+�o.f ar+afJ.J.ra rw .,_ . ,�wJw d...eNa •nl.A�wer� ++�+
JrrA4Jn r wdmr J✓41f nm&F••.rr4P�,n.kr.wl,�+rnxgtalel•wunlru •won wnl. �s�radrx
• l�sYxq xYr Ywrhwr
.a+he.�ll
.lwrdW Hr eJlirxrrlm�
AN�[xxl wra
• 7 wW �rrx Y•df nr h
MMe NgeRM`MOer M 011Mexl w
Iud x.p.rd rrxw.lxwrJreb
l.lt4 sr.
• I b r rpe� wAn yrSi
r�rr�e�111W=T'�+
• lb r �I� � Eki�Y
rre.dx.�rn�lrr
• 16 r w N!!db irk h
pNwrllk
IrdFrnx�flmpyw.l W tln
• 1 wlNpr_rde h.a4 d
WWe
•Irry¢Y✓.MhlMw JgnMMw
M�7xnhrkwr.#I ti wMM
IJl rd —4—d p-6
dlir nx�Jer.r Iilt�>
dN1Avl,.ra,�arr,.y.
• fw1+N.e rwMl lnl wnigk
• I errnNJftlilwldwMr xAn iwl •
k b Drax.
1srJH.aulrrnrwwrxr.�r
�1 res rr..a.
1 rr.�r rriilw a
tirrlJy.rr.hra-rlt..J�l
. Irkb�eh�illd Yfe.�
• I ohxlJkMJl�Oal wxeJwlvnwwca.
• tb � er.p�l r�ph Pwi e
�d 1nNR
• wamNwnr.rwapw,.saNJrler
it riw d 4fr�l.ho�iwYwl w
• �xy�fre r wr.IwW �r b
� h YrsvAr hIb
.reyr.��.rwra ��•�
• I Mxwl r Wrr� iY [ fgrlrr w
Y� FJwrWww
• ! doxw yurr . -. � 1 rw wrrr
ra..r�rrr.
- ! i•L yuf d Yr�m f iywleYR
t.b �eprr Wilgl�t l ae
rrfirJrpmAvinfv ler4d
• I irI1xMMIrwxMiMIAMkIwfYN1
.Ww pepfJ IryY x1A11WMa
• I w �wm.rNilw.Jrf.MiN IIIIK
1wMrdmiaW7'ier.
• 1 [Jxxrr MMv+/N Nyllxl W
•1u.iwfix• _.. wtW !lilt
pe�ll•i Ndb�Y �l
AFw r hw hw4[w x}x •rah
tlenxlr.xlil.
•I �vf.e�ewa�lnrTlrs...�rw
• 1Flydwylwawr,.r..M,
.r• IlrxJxn4 W rY Yry x>♦�
• 1 r q/IxrrY rxpr.rrrir
-1 r.aw.yr+xr.l�r r
-1 r.r. a7l.�r rbrifm r
xr4r+wJr<xs.Rlefu�N
• INxY NJrulwwkinarb>•el
• 1 ww{ r rll�•r�l••b] Yee r xq
• J xxbr r xwe lwlkJwra.YlNd
y1V i.kr P.o r qw rr hr
f.r..nrr�mr..p�lr_
- 1�lrtY sf�d
s✓�rni�b rrm
•J. wedYdsdwLtb�
+Mmnn. d14tlxlk,ld�d xxf.
. 1Nm��q�Merderylls
lx/wwc
•1s I* � rWlde.
+M1f111MMJIrMAlaMJ wwepnewq
lxxxflLpwwJl M Pnx.xr wYepp duf
.onAkJ W 1urfll. MSM
•JIfWwW r•xn MxJluw
.a..+l.11.r`�`w.tl.Jrr dr+k
• 7M wor h{{�epiwx.wtlwl W
d -OW " h.. wr4n.nar
rley,__ _' r.rrwnnlxxkrrf.
•J YI�W IYeid s �
f�. rilrYilll+r
JYh.�eJJiti��J�l.f�lf]..C.
—tea■ w�Ip1�Y:ia
1�1wrM�1!weti �.�. w
jgq�C'A �MiMM1�A;i
L7YOc"r1y�Wry11� . �. Y
�1M�lMM�MMi�+�iiwl�a�w�1k
Y�il�Opi��MM� i� e� ywlj�
il�linefw ��w�iFlirr
�y�
Yryigil�Rliil�.
' �� ltstpel�ilN'we�1
�. "IrMi
��Yy(llierl/11ai
�i�.17'V'Yb�IIYe:>rJ111�� �
. ifr�Y.11gr.11/wwa�lHil
•.•. ��iYe� �fnlilii►
�YujINIY.*IIwY�i�Anlria
�J�..�,�wwf:'�M�i:�l♦�
�••7��f��71Y11jW(111��1l1
+:b���iMtlMlr�'
�reJ.:ir�pr#}.Jr
iYilwAMi�M�'Y.'
iF!ifl�.W.ilr.Mlri:e
rrr.err��rwrw:.
�r.r.
Analyzing Ethical Dilemmas
Two kinds of dilemmas:
• Two competing "right values"
• Doing the right thing costs more than one
wants to pay —the personal cost
Example
• Campaign contributor wants you to do
something
You are not convinced it's in the best interests of the
community
• Right versus right dilemma (loyalty versus
responsibility)
Doing the right thing (acting on responsibility) then
becomes a personal cost dilemma
Questions to Ask
• What would make the public
feel best/inspire public
confidence?
• What would you want to read
about on the front page?
• How do you want to be
remembered?
LO CAL 0 F F IC IALS
ETH ICS
CH EC14LIST:
Sam
Questions to
Ask in Sti&y
Situations
Key Lessons
• The law sets minimum standards for ethical
behavior
— Violations of ethics laws carry stiff penalties
— When in doubt, ask and ask early
• It's your choice how high you want to set your
sights above the minimum requirements of the law
AB 1234 Compliance
• Sign in
• Proof of participation certificate
• Provide to City Clerk as public record
• Consider going beyond the minimum in
terms of education
One Last Case Study
• Are the cookie prizes reportable on
your Form 700?
Ask two lawyers a question.. what
do you get.?
• Steve: Yes
Janice
• No! Not worth fifty dollars!
One Last Quote
• The means are the end in a democracy and
good ends cannot come from questionable
means.
— Martin Luther King, Jr.
Questions ?
Note that the following are not statements of law, but rather principles the law is designed to achieve.
The goal in providing this list is to identify the kinds of issues addressed by public service ethics laws.
If an issue arises under these principles, public officials should consult agency counsel.
Personal Financial Gain Laws
Generally speaking, California law says public officials:
Cannot request, receive or agree to receive
anything of value or other advantages in exchange
for a decision.
Must disclose their financial interests to the public.
Must disqualify themselves from participating in
decisions that may affect (positively or negatively)
their financial interests.
Cannot have an interest in a contract made by
their agency.
Cannot be involved in agency decisions that affect
an official's future employer.
Cannot lobby their agency for pay for a year
following their departure from the agency.
Perk Issues: Including Compensation,
Use of Public Resources and Gift Laws
Generally speaking, California law says public officials:
Receive limited compensation for their service to
the public.
Cannot receive compensation for speaking, writing
an article or attending a conference.
Are reimbursed for only those expenses allowed in
agency expense reimbursement policies because
those expenses have a demonstrable public purpose
and necessity.
Cannot use public agency resources (money, travel
expenses, staff time and agency equipment) for
personal or political purposes.
Cannot send mass mailings at public expense.
>> Cannot make gifts of public resources or funds.
For more information on these principles, see www.ca-ilg.org/EthicsLaws.
INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
» Must disclose all gifts received of $50 or more
and may not receive gifts aggregating to over
$440 (2013-14 proposed) from a single source in
a given year.
» May only accept free trips and travel expenses
under limited circumstances..
» May not accept free or discounted transportation
from transportation companies.
» May not use campaign funds for personal benefits
not directly related to a political, legislative or
governmental purpose.
Transparency Laws
Generally speaking, California law says public officials:
» Disclose their economic interests when they take
office, annually while they are in office and when
they leave office. These economic interests include
such kinds of interests as: sources of income,
property ownership, investments, certain family
members' interests, business interests, loans,
contracts and gifts received.
» Disclose information about who has agreed to
commit significant resources ($5,000 or more) to
legislative, governmental or charitable purposes at
an elected official's request.
» Disclose campaign contributions.
» Conduct the public's business in open and
publicized meetings, except for the limited
circumstances when the law allows
closed sessions.
» Allow the public to participate in meeting,
listenening to the public's views before decisions
are made.
» Allow public inspection of documents and records
generated by public agencies, except when non-
disclosure is specifically authorized by law.
» Disclose gifts given to the public agency and how
they are ultimately used.
Fair Process Laws and Merit -Based
Decision -Making
Generally speaking, California law says
public officials:
» Cannot receive loans from those within the agency
or with whom the agency contracts; loans from
others must meet certain requirements.
» Cannot engage in vote -trading.
» Have a responsibility to assure fair and competitive
agency contracting processes.
» Cannot participate in quasi-judicial proceedings in
which they have a strong bias with respect to the
parties or facts.
» Must conduct public hearings in accordance with
fair process principles.
» Cannot participate in decisions that will benefit their
immediate family (spouse or domestic partner and
dependent children).
» Cannot simultaneously hold certain public offices or
engage in other outside activities that would subject
them to conflicting loyalties.
» Cannot participate in entitlement proceedings—
such as land use permits—involving campaign
contributors (does not apply to elected bodies).
» Cannot solicit campaign contributions of more than
$250 from permit applicants while an application is
pending and for three months after a decision
(if sitting on an appointed body).
» Cannot solicit agency employee support for their
political causes.
» Cannot retaliate against those who whistle -blow.
INSTITUTE FOP, LOCAL GOVERNMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
✓ A public agency's decision should be based solely on
what best serves the public's interests.
✓ The law is aimed at the perception, as well as the reality,
that a public official's personal interests may influence a
decision. Even the temptation to act in one's own interest
could lead to disqualification, or worse.
✓ Having a conflict of interest does not imply that a public
official has done anything wrong; it just means that the
official has financial or other disqualifying interests.
✓ Violating the conflict of interest laws could lead to
monetary fines and criminal penalties. Don't take
that risk.
BASIC RULE
A public official may not participate in a decision — including
trying to influence a decision — if the official has financial or, in
some cases, other strong personal interests in that decision.
When an official has an interest in a contract, the official's
agency may be prevented from even making the contract.
WHEN TO SEEK ADVICE FROM
AGENCY COUNSEL
The rules are very complex. A public official should talk with
agency counsel 1) early and often, 2) when an action by the
public agency, 3) may affect (positively or negatively), 4) any
of the following:
✓ Income. Any source of income of $500 or more (including
promised income) during the prior 12 months for the
official or official's spouse/domestic partner.
✓ Business Management or Employment. An entity for
which the official serves as a director, officer, partner,
trustee, employee, or manager.
✓ Real Property. A direct or indirect interest in real
property of $2000 or more that the official or official's
immediate family (spouse/domestic partner and
dependent children) have, including such interests
as ownership, leaseholds (but not month-to-month
tenancies), and options to purchase. Be especially alert
when any of these are located within 500 feet of the
subject of the decision.
✓ Gift Giver. A giver of a gift of $440 (2013-14 proposed
amount) or more to the official in the prior 12 months,
including promised gifts.
✓ Lender/Guarantor. A source of a loan (including a loan
guarantor) to the official.
✓ Personal Finances. The official or official's
immediate family's (spouse/domestic partner and
dependent children) personal expenses, income,
assets, or liabilities.
✓ contract. A contract that the agency is considering
entering into, in which the official or a member of the
official's family may have an interest (direct or indirect).
✓ Business Investment. An interest in a business that
the official or the official's immediate family (spouse/
domestic partner and dependent children) have a direct
or indirect investment worth $2000 or more.
✓ Related Business Entity. An interest in a business that
is the parent, subsidiary or is otherwise related to a
business where the official:
• Hasa director indirect investment worth $2000 or
more; or
• Is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee,
or manager.
✓ Business Entity owning Property. A direct or indirect
ownership interest in a business entity or trust of the
official's that owns real property.
✓ Campaign Contributor. A campaign contributor of
the official (applies to appointed decision-making
bodies only).
✓ Other Personal Interests and Biases. The official has
important, but non-financial, personal interests or biases
(positive or negative) about the facts or the parties that
could cast doubt on the official's ability to make a fair
decision.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT?
Agency counsel will advise the official whether 1) the
official can participate in the decision and, 2) if a contract
is involved, whether the agency can enter into the contract
at all. Counsel may suggest asking either the Fair Political
Practices Commission or the State Attorney General to
weigh in.
EVEN IF IT'S LEGAL, IS IT ETHICAL?
The law sets only minimum standards. Officials should ask
themselves whether members of the public will question
whether officials should act solely in the public's interest.
If they might, offiicals should consider excusing
themselves voluntarily from that particular
decision-making process.
INSTITUTE Fop, LOCAL GOVERNMENT
'•. .MP3',3bk��'.^�;3�.iSh+,.r.d,5..:t:�w�'3'.ec.�.#..d_.�.,..nFVlr,.ri�;rN.:,�st x.,. ?zt y.: f.. X�!,isatr,�e: ; ..
Beyond the Law: Ethics and Values
» Ethics is what one ought to do in a given
situation. It's the kind of conduct that would
make the world a better place if everyone
engaged in it.
» The law provides only minimum standards for
ethical conduct. Just because a course of action
is legal, doesn't make it what one ought to do.
» What one ought to do is typically tied to a series
of values:
-Trustworthiness - Compassion
- Respect - Loyalty
- Responsibility - Fairness
For more information on this topic, see
vvvvw.ca-ilg.org/LeadingValLies,
The Institute is grateful to the following firms
for their support for the intitute's work in
public service ethics:
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Best Best & Krieger
Burke Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Hanson Bridgett LLP
Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
Meyers Nave
Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai LLP
Richards, Watson & Gershon
I INSTITUTE FOR
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
The Institute for Local Government is the nonprofit
research affiliate of the League of California Cities
and the California State Association of Counties.
Its mission is to promote good government at the
local level.
The Institute's current program areas include:
Local Government 101
» Public Engagement
» Public Service Ethics
» Sustainability
Ethics Law Principles for Public Servants:
Key Things To Know
www.ca-ilg.org/EthicsPrinciples
02012 by The institute for Local Government
1400 K Street, Suite 205
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8208 • FAX (916) 444-7535 9 www.ca-ilgmg
limINSTITUTE FOR
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
mIDED "Is
Doing the
Right Thing:
PUTTING ETHICS PRINCIPLES
INTO PRACTICE IN PUBLIC SERVICE
n the hurly-burly, competitive world of politics, it can be easy to overlook
a fundamental fact: the public expects and deserves its public servants to
serve the public's interest—not private or political interests.
Values are very
important to the public.
The public is strongly
supportive of public
officials' following their
sense of "what is the
right thing to do" in
making government
decisions.'
"...how does the conscientious
public official sort through competing
considerations and determine
"the right thing to do?"
The key question is: how does the conscientious public official sort through
competing considerations and determine "the right thing to do?" When it
comes to being a public servant, how does one put one's values into practice?
"The Right Thing to Do"
There are a number of sources of guidance. One, of course, is the law.
For example, California has a complex array of laws relating to ethics in
public service.
The law, however, only sets a minimum standard for ethical conduct. Just
because an action is legal doesn't mean that it is ethical. Or that it reflects
your or the public's values.
The key is to go to the source and think in terms of values. The chart on
the next page identifies key ethical values that tend to resonate with nearly
everyone—irrespective of culture, religion or national origin.'
Of course, the next question is: What do these values mean in the context
of being a public servant? The chart on the next page provides some food
for thought.
When we talk about the values that ought to guide one's public service, what kinds of values do we mean? The following provides
some ideas on values that can inform one's public service and suggests examples of what those values mean in practice.
Trustworthiness
• I remember that my role is first and foremost
to serve the community.
• I am truthful with my fellow elected officials,
the public and others.
• I avoid any actions that would cause the
public to question whether my decisions are
based on personal interests instead of the
public's interests.
• I do not accept gifts or other special
considerations because of my public position.
• I do not knowingly use false or inaccurate
information to support my position.
• I do not use my public position for
personal gain.
• I carefully consider any promises I make
(including campaign promises), and then
keep them.
Fairness
• I make decisions based on the merits of
the issues.
• I honor the law's and the public's expectation
that agency policies will be applied
consistently.
• I support the public's right to know and
promote meaningful public involvement.
• I support merit -based processes for the award
of public employment and public contracts.
• I am impartial and do not favor those
who either have helped me or are in a
position to do so.
• I promote equality and treat all people
equitably.
• I excuse myself from decisions when my or
my family's financial interests may be affected
by my agency's actions.
• I credit others' contributions in moving our
community's interests forward.
• I maintain consistent standards, but am
sensitive to the need for compromise,
"thinking outside the box," and improving
existing paradigms.
Responsibility
• I work to improve the quality of life in the
community and promote the best interests of
the public.
• I promote the efficient use of agency resources.
• I do not use agency resources for personal or
political benefit.
• I represent the official positions of the agency
to the best of my ability when authorized to
do so.
• I explicitly state that my personal opinions do
not represent the agency's position and do not
allow the inference that they do.
• I take responsibility for my own actions, even
when it is uncomfortable to do so.
• I do not use information that I acquire in my
public capacity for personal advantage.
• I do not promise that which I have reason to
believe is unrealistic.
• I disclose suspected instances of impropriety
to the appropriate authorities, but I never
make false charges or charges for political
advantage.
• I do not disclose confidential information
without proper legal authorization.
• I am proactive and innovative when setting
goals and considering policies.
• I consider the broader regional and
statewide implications of the agency's
decisions and issues.
• I promote intelligent innovation to move
forward the agency's policies and services.
Respect
• I treat fellow officials, staff and the public
with courtesy, even when we disagree.
• I focus on the merits in discussions, not
personality traits or other issues that might
distract me from focusing on what is best for
the community.
• I gain value from diverse opinions and build
consensus.
• I follow through on commitments, keep
others informed, and make timely responses.
• I am approachable and open-minded, and
I convey this to others.
• I listen carefully and ask questions that add
value to discussions.
• I involve all appropriate stakeholders in
meetings affecting agency decisions.
• I come to meetings and I come to them
prepared.
• I work to improve the quality of life in my
community.
Compassion
• I realize that some people are intimidated
by the public process and try to make their
interactions as stress -free as possible.
• I convey the agency's care for and
commitment to its community members.
• I am attuned to, and care about, the needs
and concerns of the public, officials, and staff.
• I recognize my responsibility to society's less
fortunate.
• I consider appropriate exceptions to policies
when there are unintended consequences or
undue burdens.
Loyalty
• I safeguard confidential information.
• I avoid employment, contracts and other
financial, political and personal interests that
can conflict with my public duties.
• I prioritize competing issues based on
objective benefits and burdens to the public
interest, not to myself, my family, friends or
business associates.
• I don't oppose final decisions once they have
been made by the decision makers, except
through internal lines of communication.
• I put loyalty to the public's interests above
personal and political loyalties.
■ Types of Ethical Dilemmas
At some point in your service as an elected official, you will likely face two
common types of ethical dilemmas:
• Personal Cost Ethical Dilemmas. This involves situations in which
doing the right thing may or will come at a significant personal cost to
you or your public agency. These also can be known as "moral courage"
ethical dilemmas.
• Right -versus -Right Ethical Dilemmas. This type of ethical
dilemma involves those situations in which there are two conflicting
sets of "right" values.'
Of course, some dilemmas are a combination of both: a conflict between
competing sets of "right" values (right -versus -right) and a situation in which
doing the right thing involves personal or political costs.
■ Personal Cost Ethical Dilemmas
With these kinds of dilemmas, the costs can be political — such as the loss of
a political support or perhaps even one's prospects for reelection.
Or, the cost can be financial, for example a missed opportunity for financial
gain or material benefits. Issues relating to the proper use of public resources
fall into the "personal cost" type of ethical dilemma, inasmuch as these
dilemmas typically involve whether one is going to forgo a tempting political
or personal benefit.
Finally, the cost can be more directly personal, as when a particular course
of action may jeopardize a friendship.
In these situations, the answer is relatively simple, but certainly not
easy. The bottom line is that being ethical means doing the right thing
regardless of personal costs.
■ Right -versus -Right Ethical Dilemmas even legalir
Right -versus -right ethical dilemmas can be more difficult to resolve.
for office an(
One example is when a lifetime, best friend urges you to do something that
creating the'
conflicts with your own best sense of what will serve your community's
on your, timf
interests. In this dilemma, there is a conflict between your responsibility
As the Greek
to do what is in the public's best interest and your loyalty to your friend.
Demosthene
Responsibility and loyalty are both bona fide ethical values.
is so easy, as j
• The key is, as a public servant, the ethical value of responsibility (and
the responsibility to do what is in the public's best interest) trumps
the ethical value of loyalty. This is when thinking about the public's
perception of the right thing to do can be a useful dilemma -resolution
strategy (see box at left).
Endnotes
Meg Bostrom, By or For the People?A Meta -Analysis of Public Opinion of Government (January 2005) at 31.
4,
z See Rushworth M. Kidder, How Good People Make Tough Choices (Simon and Schuster, 1995) at 77-92.
3 7d. at 13-49.
hing
:u11ca1
Generous support for this publication provided by:
KRON IC K
MOSKOVITZ
TIEIRARD N
� A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Sacramento I Bakersfield I www.kmtg.com
Full service and cost-effective legal solutions for our
municipal, public agency, and public finance clients
for over 45 years.
Sorting through Ethical Dilemmas
If you find yourself faced with an ethical dilemma, the following questions
may help you come to an answer:
• Which ethical values are involved in this decision (for example,
trustworthiness, compassion, loyalty, responsibility, fairness, or respect)?
• Is this a situation in which ethical values are in conflict (right -versus -right
dilemmas) or in which there is a significant personal cost associated with
doing the right thing?
• What are the facts? What are the public benefits to be achieved or the
public harm to be avoided by a particular decision? Is there a decision that
does more public good than harm?
• What are your options? Is there a course of action that would be consistent
with either both sets of ethical values (for right -versus -right dilemmas) or
consistent with the ethical value and avoid the anticipated cost of pursuing
the right course of action?
• Is one course of action more consistent with a value that is particularly
important to you (for example, compassion or trustworthiness)?
• What decision best reflects your responsibility as an officeholder to serve
the interests of the public as a whole?
• What decision will best promote public confidence in your agency and
your leadership?
It can also be useful to think about common ethical dilemmas (or clearly
improper) situations that arise for public officials and how you would handle
them/what you would say.
For more information about public service ethics, visit www.ca-ilg.org/trust.
For additional copies of this publication, contact CityBooks at (916) 658-8257 .
or visit www.cacities.org/store.