2008-10-08 Handouts at Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1- -- --- - AS I SEE IT The Importance of Ethical Conduct ecently, I sat through the annual interviews of city officials for openings on the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors. As occurs every year, I was impressed and thankful that so many qualified city officials are willing to serve in this most important capacity for our organization. This year, I also was struck by the answer many gave when asked about the most pressing issue facing cities that the League should address. They talked about how the image of cities has eroded and how the contribu- tions and sacrifices city officials make often are not appreciated. Some elabo- rated that the conduct of city officials was sometimes responsible for the pub- lic's jaundiced view and that cities need to do more in establishing expectations for respectful interactions between elected officials and the public, staff, and themselves. This is not a new issue. Two years ago, the League Board set as one of its five strategic goals to "promote the value and improve public perception of cities." In stating this goal, the Board recognized that while the League alone may not be able to improve the envi- ronment in which cities govern, it can start by better understanding that envi- ronment and helping city officials func- tion more effectively within it. To accomplish this goal, the League has undertaken several initiatives, including a statewide survey of 800 citizens to better understand the public's attitude toward cities and city officials, and importantly, why that attitude exists. The May issue of Minnesota Cities reported on the survey results, which, perhaps to the surprise of some, were generally positive. These citizens clearly recognize the connection between good local government and their quality of life; they value highly By Jim Miller the services cities provide and the deci- sions elected officials make. Hopefully, that realization is widely shared. Because trust is the foundation of any successful relationship, perhaps the most important survey question con- cerned the level of trust citizens have in their city government. The responses to this question are encouraging, but not resoundingly so. Citizens clearly indi- cate more trust in city officials than in their state and federal counterparts. Also, almost 90 percent of respondents indicated trust in their own local gov- ernment. However, of those, almost two-thirds indicated they trust their local government only "somewhat," suggesting room for improvement. Many factors contribute to trust. A person's actions must be consistent or predicable, for example. When citi- zens can rightfully expect an elected official to respond in the proper way based on previous actions, trust devel- ops. Moreover, trust involves a sense that public officials will be fair. Deci- sions may not always be popular, but decision makers must be seen as acting impartially in the interest of all and not a select few. Conversely, when trust erodes, the cause is most often the unethical conduct of public officials; an act or pattern of acts that causes citi- zens to doubt the integrity of the offi- cials involved and, sometimes, the local government itself. Unfortunately, defining "ethical" conduct can be elusive. It would be simple if it were merely measuring actions by whether they are legal, but clearly much more is involved. Most often when we read about the suspect conduct of public officials, it involves a lapse in good judgment and not viola- tion of the law. Yet, paraphrasing Justice Potter Stewart's famous observation 40 years ago about pornography, we seem to intuitively recognize unethical conduct when we see it, even if we can't define it. Nevertheless, while in hindsight an action may be seen more clearly as inappropriate or even unethi- cal, it may not have been so obvious to the public official at the time. This most often happens when city officials fail to recognize and accept that election or appointment does not create entitlement, but rather obligation. They are there to serve, not to benefit, and when this distinction is understood and observed, public officials act in ways that uphold the integrity of their office. When it is not, public officials can come to believe privilege or undue discretion is a matter of personal right. Perhaps the most illuminating ques- tion a public official can ask is: Would I be able to do or take advantage of this if it were not for my position? For example, ifI weren't the mayor, would I be receiving these tickets from the developer? Or, would anyone else who is not the city administrator receive this favorable mortgage rate? This type of introspection, if done consistently and seriously, may help sort out the distinc- tion, but it will not always be enough. Recognizing this, the League is now embarking on another project to meet its goal of improving the public per- ception of cities. Over the next several months, city officials serving on the Ethics Advisory Panel will be develop- ing a model code of ethics for cities to consider along with an ethics training program that could be implemented. These efforts alone will not eliminate the potential for unethical conduct, but they will undoubtedly help. Nothing seems more important. ... Jim Miller is executive director if the League if Minnesota Cities. Phone: (651) 281-1205. E-mail:jmilIer@lmc.org. JUNE-JULY 2008 3 MINNESOTA CITIES