The city of Sacramento's ethics commission does no good if it doesn't have good rules to enforce
What's the use of a watchdog without any teeth?
There was a fair bit of self-congratulation at Sacramento City Council last week, following a unanimous vote to move ahead with a package of good-government reforms, including creation of an ethics commission and independent redistricting commission.
“It’s the most sweeping reform any city has ever initiated on its own in the history of California,” said Councilwoman Angelique Ashby.
Not sure about that. I do know the proposal falls far short of the reforms needed to curb the bad behavior we’ve seen at City Hall.
Recent scandals and lawsuits, and public outcry, have brought council members around to support an ethics commission, with dedicated staff and enforcement power.
But the whole point of an ethics commission is to enforce a strong ethics code and strong rules ensuring government transparency. Unfortunately, those items aren’t in this most-sweeping-ever proposal. Sure, we’ll have a new watchdog on the job. But it won’t bark much, unless some changes are made.
The basic plan gives the mayor power to appoint ethics commissioners, with confirmation from the City Council. In other cities, the appointment power is a bit more diffuse, with a city attorney or other officers sharing appointment power.
A bigger problem, I think, is that only judges and law professors will be allowed to serve on the commission. The danger here is that we end up with a commission that considers ethics issues in a narrow, legalistic fashion, and serves to rubber stamp whatever the council wants to do. Call it the Five Frawleys plan.
This is not how other big California cities do it. They have ethics bodies that draw commissioners from a much broader variety of professional backgrounds.
But the real problem with this actually-not-so-sweeping ethics proposal is that it makes no real changes to the city’s woefully deficient ethics and transparency rules.
It does nothing to fix the city’s stupendously dumb and reckless policy on emails. A big part of our city government—the mayor’s office, which sets the city’s policy agenda more than any other office—does its Sacramento News & Review - The city of Sacramento's ethics commission does no good if it doesn't have good rules to enforce - Essay - Opinions - September 24, 2015:
Secret K.J. emails reveal even more business-as-unusual inside the mayor's office. Will City Hall's newly minted good-government reforms change things?
City council passed admittedly ambitious good-government reforms last week. But will the fight for sunshine touch the mayor’s office?
ILLUSTRATION BY CHRISTOPHER FRIEDMAN
When Mayor Kevin Johnson sued this paper in June, he did so to stop the release of emails and documents that he claimed were private attorney-client conversations. But, upon acquiring a list of them last month, SN&R has learned that the emails in question involved more than just the mayor. Everyone from city staff to public-relations experts, volunteers and even interns are included on the threads, all discussing Johnson's “coup” (their words) of the Atlanta-based National Conference of Black Mayors in 2013.
Based on the emails, it’s also actually difficult to tell who is a city of Sacramento employee and who is simply latched on as an employee of one of Johnson’s many private groups and nonprofits.
And, of course, there’s the question of who is paying for all these noncity people to do what the mayor has said is city work—and whether they’re operating out of City Hall or private offices when they perform whatever public or private work that they’re doing.
All these questions come on the heels of last week’s unanimous city council vote to approve sweeping and ambitious good-government reforms. The electeds passed a new ethics code, a watchdog commission to enforce said code, a new “sunshine ordinance” and a lot more.
Councilwoman Angelique Ashby, who pushed the reform package to the finish line, told SN&R that the city was “biting off a big chunk” when it comes to accountability and restoring trust in leadership.
That may be true. But will the reforms change business-as-unusual inside Johnson’s office?
Or will the mayor continue to blur the lines when it comes to public and private (and even campaign) work inside City Hall? Will the use of private Gmail accounts by city employees persist? And will K.J. continue to raise unlimited monies for his private groups, which pay for the employees and volunteers who run Where the sun don’t shine
Mayor Kevin Johnson finally realizes gang prevention strategy several years after young mother's death inspired him
Sacramento city and county leaders will team up to redirect at-risk youth toward positive alternatives
Nearly five years after Monique Nelson threw herself over her baby boy and took a gangster's bullet straight to the heart, a political response inspired by her memory has finally stirred to life.
Buoyed by $1 million in Measure U sales tax revenues, the Sacramento City Council last Tuesday approved the first-year goals of its newly re-established Gang Prevention and Intervention Task Force.
One year is all the Measure U monies buy right now, though officials sketched out countywide objectives that would keep the task force busy for the next five years. Whether it still exists in the year 2020 will depend on the ability of the task force’s 27-member policy board to secure additional resources and grants.
But that’s for the future. And the present is already precarious enough.
This is actually the council’s second stab at establishing a gang-prevention body. Mayor Kevin Johnson spearheaded the first effort following the December 2010 killing of Nelson, a young mother who caught stray gunfire during a gang-related shootout outside of a south Sacramento barbershop. Nelson’s final act was to shield her infant son, absorbing the bullet that raced toward him.
“You know, I think all of us remember the barbershop shooting that took place,” Johnson said during the
Buoyed by $1 million in Measure U sales tax revenues, the Sacramento City Council last Tuesday approved the first-year goals of its newly re-established Gang Prevention and Intervention Task Force.
One year is all the Measure U monies buy right now, though officials sketched out countywide objectives that would keep the task force busy for the next five years. Whether it still exists in the year 2020 will depend on the ability of the task force’s 27-member policy board to secure additional resources and grants.
But that’s for the future. And the present is already precarious enough.
This is actually the council’s second stab at establishing a gang-prevention body. Mayor Kevin Johnson spearheaded the first effort following the December 2010 killing of Nelson, a young mother who caught stray gunfire during a gang-related shootout outside of a south Sacramento barbershop. Nelson’s final act was to shield her infant son, absorbing the bullet that raced toward him.
“You know, I think all of us remember the barbershop shooting that took place,” Johnson said during the
