Local Ethics Oversight in New York: Problems and Solutions
By: Joseph T. Burns
The ethics and conflict of interest policies of local governments in New York State are under renewed scrutiny after a report criticized many of the state's local governments for having nonfunctioning ethics boards
State law requires most local governments – including counties, cities, school district, villages, and towns – to adopt a code of ethics. Local governments not required to adopt a code of ethics may also have the ability to adopt one. Among other provisions, these codes are required to address matters such as the disclosure of certain investments by officers and employees; the interest in legislation under consideration by the local government of officers and employees; and the future employment of the local government’s officers and employees.
State law also allows local governments to establish a board of ethics. When established, these ethics boards are required to provide advisory opinions when advisory opinions are sought by the officers or employees of the local government.
An annual financial disclosure framework for local government employees and officers is established under state law. Under most circumstances, local ethics boards are primarily the entities responsible for receiving these filings.
The report examining the functionality of local ethics boards reviewed a number of New York State’s largest counties, cities and towns. It found that only half of the ethics boards reviewed met annually, prepared an annual report, and/or conducted a periodic review of the local government’s code of ethics. The report determined that the vast majority of the local ethics boards that were reviewed failed to comply with certain requirements of the General Municipal Law. It also found that most local ethics boards were not ensuring that all officer and employee financial disclosures were filed and complete.
A lack of transparency by local ethics boards was also raised by the report. It found that many local ethics boards lacked a web site; some that had a web site lacked a board meeting schedule. The report also found instances where ethics board web sites failed to list vacancies while others provided too little information to even determine if vacancies exist.
The report outlines a number of suggestions for improving local ethics boards. Among the suggestions made by the report are amending the General Municipal Law to mandate all local governments have an ethics board or be overseen by one from a higher level of government; establish minimum statewide standards for local ethics board membership, including board member appointment procedures and terms of office; and require uniform, statewide transparency standards for local ethics boards.
While most of the report’s suggested changes would require action by the state legislature, local governments interested in improving the operations of their ethics boards can take many proactive steps right now.
Local governments can start by confirming that its ethics board actually exists as constituted and that seats are filled by someone properly appointed under the appropriate provisions of state and/or local law. A body not properly constituted is not in a good position to police others’ conduct when an issue arises.
Ethics boards can also adopt a regular meeting schedule to which the board adheres. Boards should ensure that these meetings are conducted in compliance with the appropriate provisions of the state’s Open Meetings Law.
Another simple change that a local government can make is to ensure that its ethics board has a regularly updated web site. The board’s web site should also provide easy access to meaningful information such as the local government’s ethics code and minutes of past ethics board meetings.
A variety of state laws (for instance, the General Municipal Law, Open Meetings Law, and Freedom of Information Law) in addition to local laws are likely to have an impact on any of these ethics board changes. Before any significant reforms to local ethics boards are undertaken, local governments should seek guidance from experienced counsel.
State law currently delegates much authority over local ethics boards to county, town, city, village, and other local governments. Until this is changed by the state legislature, local officials who want to avoid criticism for lax ethical oversight should consider conducting a thorough review of their own ethics boards and codes.
