Components of a Local Law Establishing and Empowering a Board of Ethics

 

Introduction

 

          Local government officials (herein includes employees) must make significant decisions that affect directly the lives, property and livelihood of people in the community.  They have business and personal relationships and therefore, may be faced, with actual or apparent conflicts of interests and ethics issues.  In some instances the conflict will be obvious.  In others, a judgment must be made.  Should a local official participate in a determination when faced with a possible conflict or abstain?  What are the standards whereby local officials can make these difficult decisions?  State law provides few standards. 

          There is a balance that must be struck between recusal to avoid apparent conflicts of interests and the duty of public officials to perform the responsibilities of their offices.  Thus, the question of conflict of interests is a two-edged sword that involves the balancing of two competing considerations.  In making this determination, the official should error on the side of caution.   

          How can an official be sure that his or her decision was not influenced by personal interests?  There may be subtle but powerful psychological forces acting on these officials in these circumstances.  Most important, when an official acts in the face of an actual or apparent conflict of interests, the official cannot objectively defend himself against charges of improper conduct by the media and members of the public.  Even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided.       

The Need For A Board of Ethics

In the field of ethics there is a vast area that has been left unregulated by State Law.  For example, there are few ethics standards applicable to the many applications that are received by the town board, planning board, zoning board of appeals, building inspector and other municipal agencies.  This is a very large void.  Apparently, the State Legislature envisioned that local governments would provide standards in local codes of ethics and make judgments by establishing local boards of ethics.

Codes of Ethics

          Although codes of ethics [1] can provide specific standards, such as private employment restrictions and prohibitions on holding of specific offices, there are many areas in which only general standards are feasible.  In these areas, a municipal official must exercise judgment.  He must balance his duty to exercise his official functions against any apparent conflict of interests or ethics problem.

          In these situations, a board of ethics performs an important function.  If prior to taking action, the municipal official has received an advisory opinion from the board, he can objectively defend his decision to participate or recuse himself from participation in the matter. 

Most codes of ethics provide that officials should avoid circumstances that may compromise their ability to make decisions solely in the public interest, the so-called appearance of impropriety.  In any event, questions will arise falling in this category.  These are questions that involve the exercise of judgment by applying specific facts to determine whether an official should recuse himself or perform his duties.  Very often, these are subtle questions, which are not amenable to easy answers. 

          Thus, a board of ethics serves an important role in assisting municipal officials who inevitably will face an ethics problem at some time during their tenure.  But more important, ethics codes and boards of ethics help to ensure the public that governmental decisions are being made solely in the public interest.

 

BOARDS OF ETHICS

 

Unlike codes of ethics which are required by State law, local governments are authorized but not required to establish boards of ethics.  As indicated earlier, a board of ethics is indispensable.  Unfortunately, in our view provisions of state law authorizing boards of ethics are in large part ambiguous or inadequate.  State law, is located in section 808 of the General Municipal Law.

Section 808 is Inadequate

          Section 808’s purpose to provide advice to local officials is compromised and inadequate in the following ways:

1.  Members of the board of ethics are appointed by the town board, whose members may request advisory opinions or be subject to enforcement actions – we will suggest an independent nominating committee. 

2.  The board can consist of as few as 3 members, one of whom must be an officer or employee of the municipality.  This is not an independent board. 

3.  The members of the board of ethics serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.  Once again, their independence is compromised.

4.  It is not clear under section 808 as to who may request an advisory opinion. 

5.  The ethics board has no enforcement authority to the board of ethics.  

Local Law Power

          There is authority to amend or supersede Section 808 by local law.  Because your town attorney should advise you, the footnoted material is provided as a guide for your municipal attorney. [2]

Content of a Local Law Establishing a Board of Ethics

1. How should members be selected?

          Although the town board has ultimate responsibility for selection of members of a board of ethics, town board members may be subjects of inquiries by the board of ethics and, therefore, should be insulated to the extent possible.  A committee composed of respected residents of the town, that is bipartisan, or nonpartisan, could nominate persons for consideration by the town board to avoid this problem.

2.  No Officers or Employees on Board

 

          The local law should eliminate the requirement that a town officer or employee be a member of the board of ethics in order to establish a board that is truly an independent body.  This would encourage officers and employees to request advisory opinions from the board.  An opinion of the Attorney General concluded that a local government may by local law change the composition of a local board of ethics to eliminate the requirement that a local officer or employee be a member of the board.  Informal Opinion No. 86-44.

 

3.  Composition and Terms

 

          Also, the board of ethics should be composed of at least 5 or 7 members with alternates to serve in the event of an absence or conflict of interests.  A majority vote of the entire board of ethics (not only those present) should be required to take action.  Board members should have terms of office to protect them from arbitrary removal.  The Board should establish rules of procedure and choose a chairman.

4.  Advisory Opinions to Officials and Employees Faced with Possible Conflicts

          If an official with a possible ethics problem has received an advisory opinion from the board of ethics that participation in a matter will not violate ethics standards, the official can objectively defend his or her participation or need to abstain.  This is an important role that a board of ethics can serve in providing direction to public officials who sometimes are faced with difficult decisions.

          Advisory Opinions help to ensure the public that governmental decisions are being made solely in the public interest. 

5.  Investigative and Enforcement Authority

 

          A local law may authorize the board of ethics to receive complaints from any officer or employee of the town alleging that other officers or employees have violated ethics standards, determine whether these complaints should be pursued, and, if appropriate, conduct investigations.  The board should immediately dismiss a charge without basis.  Further, a board of ethics could be given enforcement authority through the administering of penalties. 

          Under State law, a body that has been given the authority to conduct investigations may issue subpoenas for witness testimony, documents and other evidence.  CPLR, §2302(a).  Thus, a board of ethics with the authority to conduct investigations may also be given subpoena power. 

          There is ample authority for enforcement.  Towns are authorized to provide for the enforcement of local laws.  They may provide for enforcement through legal or equitable proceedings and may prescribe that violations constitute offenses or infractions and provide for the punishment of violators by civil penalty or fine.  Municipal Home Rule Law, §10(4)(b).  A local law providing for enforcement must include the right of the officers or employee to appear with legal counsel to defend him or herself.

 

6.  Discipline and D.A.

 

          In some instances a board of ethics with enforcement authority, including the power to levy fines, may not have jurisdiction and will have to refer matters to the town board.  If an employee is subject to disciple under sections 75 and 76 of the Civil Service Law or if disciplinary procedures are set forth in a collective bargaining agreement those provisions would control.  Also, evidence of a crime should be referred to the District Attorney.

 

Procedural Rules

          The local law should authorize the board of ethics to promulgate rules of procedure.  The following are suggested:

1.                 The board of ethics should only permit requests for advisory opinions from officers and employees having the apparent conflict. 

2.                 The opinion request should be in writing, clearly state the question and provide relevant facts. 

3.                 The board of ethics may request additional information or require that the individual making the inquiry appear before the board to clarify ambiguities or provide additional material.

4.                 In considering inquires the board should review the municipalities code of ethics, consider opinions of the attorney general and comptroller and relevant provisions of the state General Municipal Law.

5.                 The advisory opinion should only answer the question raised and only include facts that are relevant to its findings. 

6.                 In considering the inquiry, the name of the individual seeking the advisory opinion should be kept confidential, thus encouraging inquiries.

7.                 The board of ethics should have access to an attorney assigned to it by the town board.

Application of Freedom of Information Law to the Advisory Function of a Local Ethics Board

          Boards and commissions are subject to Freedom of Information Law (FOIL).  A board of ethics may, however, withhold records when disclosure would result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

          A board may also withhold inter-agency or intra-agency records, except statistical data, staff instructions that affect the public, final agency policy or determinations, or external audits.  Specifically, an agency may deny access to opinions, advice, evaluations, deliberations, proposals, or recommendations because these are preliminary, rather than final determinations.

          Applying these principles an advisory opinion of a town ethics board would be exempt from disclosure.  The officer or employee may want to voluntarily release the opinion or ask the board of ethics to state its conclusions.  In this way, he can objectively defend his decision to participate or abstain.

Application of Open Meetings Law to a Local Ethics Board

          The Open Meetings Law (OML) does not apply to quasi-judicial proceedings.  As indicated earlier, ethics boards are empowered to investigate complaints, conduct hearings, make determinations and impose sanctions.  This is a quasi-judicial function exempt from the OML.

          Section 105(1) of the Open Meetings Law specifies subjects that may be discussed in executive session.  Among the matters that may be considered in executive session are those that relate to a specific investigation or criminal prosecution, “the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation, or matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation.”  An inquiry relating to a particular person and falling within one or more of these subjects may be considered in executive session.

          In conclusion, a board of ethics is an indispensable tool to help maintain confidence in the integrity of government. 



[1] See our website – nytowns.org – for sample codes of ethics.

[2] Changing Composition of Board of Ethics and Powers by Local Law

                A town can reconstitute its local ethics board by enacting a local law.  Towns are authorized to adopt and amend local laws relating to their property affairs or government and in relation to the duties, qualifications, number, terms of office and other terms and conditions of employment of their officers and employees.  Municipal Home Rule Law §10(1)(i) and (ii)(a)(1).   This is sufficient authority to permit a town to reconstitute its board of ethics.

                A limitation on the enactment of a local law is that it must be consistent with a general State Law.  Id. For home rule purposes a ‘general law’, as applied to towns, is a State Law that in terms and in effect applies alike to all towns.  Municipal Home Rule, §2(5).  General Municipal Law, §808 gives towns the option to establish a board of ethics and, therefore, does not in terms and in effect apply alike to all towns.  It applies only to those towns opting to come under its provisions.  For these reasons, Section 808 is not a general law.   Thus, a local law relating to the composition and powers of a local board of ethics need not be consistent with the provisions of section 808 of the General Municipal Law.  Johnson v. Etkin, 279 NY 1 (1938).  In any event, arguably a local law strengthening ethics provisions is consistent with section 808 of the General Municipal Law in that it would further the State Legislative purpose of promoting the integrity of municipal officials and public confidence in government.  Jancyn Mfg. v County of Suffolk, 71 NY2d 91 (1987).