[Mpls] New Ethics Code for Minneapolis

[Ellen Trout]

Like most of the other forum members commenting on the proposed new Ethics Code, I enthusiastically support it. As the Chair of the Ethics Task Force, I know that the proposed new Code is a huge improvement over the current Code.  It is clear, it is comprehensive, and it tackles the tough issues of conflicts of interest, outside employment, nepotism and what happens when someone violates the Code.  I believe that it will form the basis for building a new, better ethical culture and climate in the City of Minneapolis.  Please take a look at the proposed Code and a chart showing the major differences between it and the current Code on the City’s web site at http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/mayor/priorities/ethics. I want to comment on the concern raised by Greg Abbott in his overall positive review of the Code.  Greg was concerned that the sections designed to prevent elected officials from using their power to inappropriately influence the judgment of employees is too broad, because it prohibits the elected officials from asking an employee to do “a special favor or make an exception for a constituent or other individual or organization contrary to existing law or adopted City policy.”  Greg said, “ I think the proposed guidelines are a little tough by seeking to outright ban elected officials from advocating an exception to city policy on behalf of a constituent.”  As Greg later pointed out, the ideal process when an elected official discovers that a City policy has an unintended or unfair impact on a constituent is to bring the issue before the whole City Council, and change the policy.  This is exactly what we hope the proposed new Code’s provision will achieve.  The new Code is not an outright ban on elected official advocacy on behalf of the official’s constituents.  But, by prohibiting an elected official from “solving” a problem with a special exception, the elected official, to advocate for his or her constituent, will need to get the policy changed by taking the issue up with the whole Council.  We know that this will be a slower process than the case-by-case exception model, but the Task Force believes it is the right process.  It is a process that will ensure that all citizens affected by the unintended consequences of a City ordinance or policy will get the situation corrected, not just those citizens who have the time, resources, or influence to get a special exception.  In addition, it protects employees from the pressure of an elected official whose interpretation of or willingness to change a City ordinance or policy may be different than that of the Council as a whole.  I think the proposed policy will result in the process Greg advocated. Finally, I want to correct a statement in Dore Mead’s post on the Ethics Ordinance about my ethics experience.  When I worked as an attorney for the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis I was the Ethics Advisor.  My boss, the General Council, was the Ethics Officer.