HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnnual Report of the Board of Ethics and Discussion of Ethics Training
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Board of Ethics Members:
Melissa Frost, Mary Jane McGarity and Chris Carraway
SUBJECT: Board of Ethics 2010-2011 Report and 2012 Ethics Training
MEETING DATE: February 13, 2012
MEETING TYPE: Action
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to accept the 2010-2011 Board of Ethics Report.
BACKGROUND: Since the Board of Ethics last reported to the Commission in November,
2009, they have accomplished a number of the goals established by the City Charter and City
Code of Ethics. Please see the attached report for a background on the board and further details
on the following accomplishments:
• Creation of the Ethics Handbook
• Distribution of the Ethics Handbook to all employees, public officials and board
members
• Online ethics training administered to all employees and most board members
• Mock ethics hearing planned and completed
• Extensive discussion regarding revisions to the City Code of Ethics
• Discussion with the City Commission regarding possible revisions to the Code
• Planning for the 2012 ethics training
The Board of Ethics has also outlined future goals for the next year in the attached report and
would encourage Commissioners to offer any suggestions. Board members are available for
questions and discussion.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
Attachments: City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Report for 2010-2011
96
City of Bozeman
Board of Ethics
Report
2010 - 2011
www.bozeman.net/bozeman/Residents/Ethics
February, 2012
97
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
2 of 12
Table of Contents
Board of Ethics Summary ………………………………………………………………. Page 3
Members…..……………………………………………………………………… Page 3
Support Staff………………………………………………………………...…… Page 3
Membership Details………………………………………… ………………….. Page 3
Creation…………………………………………………………………………… Page 4
Duties and Responsibilities………………………………………………………Page 4
Bozeman Municipal Code of Ethics……………………………………. Page 4
Requirement of Annual Report …………………………………………Page 5
2010 – 2011 Report……………………………………………………………………….. Page 7
Ethics Handbook………………………………………………………………… Page 7
Changes in Board Membership………………………………………………… Page 7
Mock Hearing……………………………………………………………………. Page 8
2011 Ethics Training Summary………………………………………………… Page 8
2011 Survey Regarding Online Training……………………………………… Page 9
Ethics Research on the Effectiveness of an Ethics Program………………... Page 10
2012 Proposed Ethics Training………………………………………………... Page 10
Recommendations of Legislative and Administrative Changes…………... Page 11
Summary of Decisions and Opinions………………………………………… Page 11
Upcoming Goals………………………………………………………………... Page 12
98
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
3 of 12
Board of Ethics Summary
Current Board Members:
Melissa Frost - Chairperson Appointed June, 2009 Term expires July, 2013
mfrost@bozeman.net
Mary Jane McGarity Appointed January, 2011 Term expires July, 3013
mmcgarity@bozeman.net
Chris Carraway Appointed August, 2011 Term expires July, 2012
ccarraway@bozeman.net
Past Board Members:
Rodger McCormick Appointed August, 2008 Term expired July, 2010
Stephen Schultz Appointed August, 2008 Term expired July, 2010
Support Staff:
Aimee Kissel – Deputy City Clerk Administrative Services, Recording
akissel@bozeman.net
Greg Sullivan – City Attorney Legal and Procedural Recommendations
gsullivan@bozeman.net
Membership Details
The Board of Ethics is made up of three members appointed by the City Commission to
two year terms. Members cannot be city elected officials, city employees, or currently
serving on any other city board or commission.
99
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
4 of 12
Creation of the Board of Ethics
2008 Bozeman City Charter
The Bozeman City Charter (the “Charter”) was proposed by the City of Bozeman’s
2004-2006 Local Government Study Commission and was approved by the voters at the
November 7, 2006 general election. The Charter became effective on January 1, 2008.
The Charter confers certain powers and restrictions, prescribing procedures and
governmental structure. The Charter was created …to secure the benefits of local self-
government and to provide for an honest and accountable commission-manager government.
(Preamble, City of Bozeman Charter)
Section 7.01 (b) of the Charter called for the establishment of an independent Board of
Ethics as well as the requirement for annual training and education of city officials, city
board members and employees regarding the state and city ethics codes.
Ordinance No. 1726, Creation of the Board of Ethics
To establish a Board of Ethics (the “Board”) as required in the voter approved Charter,
the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1726 which provide guidelines for the
creation of the board and other ethics related content required in the Charter. These
provisions are codified in the Bozeman Municipal Code at Chapter 2, Article 3, Division
4 (Sect. 2.03.460 et seq., BMC). Duties and powers of the Board, who may request board
action and the limitations of the board’s power, are included. In May of 2009, the City
Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1759 which amended the original Ordinance.
Changes made relating to the board itself were minor.
Board Duties and Responsibilities
Bozeman Municipal Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Division 4 – Code of Ethics
The Code of Ethics is an important piece of City law. As the declaration of policy
section 2.03.460 states, The purpose of this code of ethics is to set forth standards of ethical
conduct, to assist public officials and employees in establishing guidelines for their conduct, to
foster the development and maintenance of a tradition of responsible, accountable and effective
public service, and to prohibit conflict between public duty and private interest.
100
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
5 of 12
Following are sections within the Code of Ethics directly related to the Board and a brief
summary of each. Other sections within the Code of Ethics provide additional direction
to the Board and the public in addressing ethical issues and violations.
Sec. 2.03.580 - Board of Ethics.
This section defines the composition and terms of the Board, requirements for
membership, and lists the support City staff will provide.
Sec. 2.03.600 - Duties and powers of the board.
This section provides details about Board procedures related to meetings, conducting
hearings and reporting and establishing procedures for administration and
implementation of the Code of Ethics. These duties include:
· Evaluating all aspects of the Code of Ethics to ensure the public and all public
servants have a reasonable opportunity and are encouraged to participate;
· Developing and plan to educate public servants about their rights, duties and
responsibilities;
· Submit an annual report of summary decisions, opinions and recommended
actions regarding ethical practices or policies;
· Arrange for an annual workshop or training program for all employees, elected
officials and board and committee members; and
· Conduct hearings as needed.
Sec. 2.03.610 - Who may request board action.
This section outlines that any person may file a complaint with the Board and who may
request of the Board an ethics opinion.
Sec. 2.03.620 – Limitations on board’s power.
This section explains in detail what limitations are placed on the Board and that the
Board may refer a matter to the city attorney for review.
In addition to the City’s Code of Ethics, the Board has jurisdiction over State of
Montana Ethics laws. These provisions are codified at Title 2, Chapter 2, Part 1, MCA
(Sect. 2-2-201, et seq., MCA).
Requirement of Annual Report
101
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
6 of 12
The annual report of the Board is a way to inform the public, officials and city
employees of what the Board has accomplished in the past year and report any
decisions or opinions.
The Bozeman Municipal Code Sec. 2.03.600 specifically states that the board shall:
4. No later than December of each year, submit an annual report to the city commission
concerning its action in the preceding year. The report shall contain:
a. A summary of its decisions and opinions, both open and confidential; the board
shall make any alterations in the summaries necessary to prevent disclosure of
any confidential information pertaining to any individual or to any organization
if the disclosure could lead to the disclosure of the identity of a person who is
entitled to confidentiality; and
b. Recommend any legislative or administrative actions regarding the city’s policies
and practices which the board believes would or could enhance the ethical
environment in which public servants work.
102
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
7 of 12
2010 - 2011 Report
Since the Board of Ethics last reported to the Commission in November, 2009, they have
accomplished a number of the goals established by the City Charter and Code of Ethics.
While this report is meant to be annual, a formal report was not submitted in 2010. This
report will therefore cover 2010 and 2011 and summarize plans for 2012.
Information can be obtained throughout the year on the city of Bozeman ethics
webpage. Staff and board members have been slowly adding more details to this
website as opportunities arise. Features of the webpage include links to relevant code,
resources, the city of Bozeman Ethics Handbook and a link to the board webpage. The
Board of Ethics webpage has links to the agendas, minutes and audio recordings of
board meetings.
City of Bozeman Ethics Handbook
The majority of 2010 was focused on planning, reviewing and revising the City of
Bozeman Ethics Handbook (the “Handbook”) The creation of an ethics Handbook, was
a requirement of the Bozeman Municipal Code section 2.03.600.A.16. Paul Lachapelle,
with the MSU Local Government Center Extension office, was hired to assist in drafting
the Handbook. A peer review of the draft helped ensure the handbook was clear and
concise. In July of 2010, the final Handbook was brought before the Commission for
approval. Soon after, the Handbook was produced and distributed to all City
employees, officials and board members and made available to the public through the
City’s website. Recipients were asked to sign and return a form acknowledging they
received and reviewed the Handbook and would not knowingly violate the Code of
Ethics. Every new board member and employee receives the Handbook and is asked to
sign the acknowledgment form.
Changes in Board Membership
After serving diligently for several years, Stephen Schultz and Rodger McCormick’s
terms expired in July of 2010 beginning the search for additional members. Mr. Schultz
and Mr. McCormick spent many hours working on behalf of City residents to assist in
getting the Board up and running.
Original member and Chairperson Melissa Frost was reappointed to the Board in July
of 2011.
103
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
8 of 12
In January of 2011, Melissa Frost welcomed aboard Mary Jane McGarity. Ms. McGarity
brought experience in development of governing documents and board management.
In July of 2011, Chris Carraway was appointed as the third and final member to the
board. Mr. Carraway is an attorney and litigator.
Mock Hearing
Experiencing a mock ethics hearing was a goal the board felt necessary to tackle in 2011
to help them prepare if a real hearing were needed. The City Attorney’s intern Sherine
Fernando was tasked with setting up fictitious documents for the hearing. These
included a complaint, response, findings of fact, and a subsequent legal advisory
opinion.
The Board continued to work with the legal department throughout the year as time
allowed to better understand the upcoming hearing and procedures. In November, City
Commissioner Carson Taylor and nine City staff played various characters established
within the mock findings of fact. City Attorney Greg Sullivan asked staff to use the
findings of fact as the basis of their testimony, but to also be creative and have fun with
the hearing. The hearing gave Board members a way to practice hearing procedures and
become more comfortable with their responsibilities if a complaint was filed. While the
mock hearing was somewhat light hearted, Board members noted how serious a real
hearing would be and the importance of conducting a hearing in a consistently fair
manner.
2011 Ethics Training
Towards the end of 2010, the Board hired the Montana State University Local
Government Extension services again. A professional services agreement was
established for development and preparation of online ethics training. The Board
focused the training on the newly created Handbook. Staff member Aimee Kissel
utilized email to request that all employees, public officials and appointed board and
committee members take the free online ethics course set up through MSU. Upon
request, the training was also offered in a mailed paper format. By the March 1, 2011
deadline, all but 5 of about 375 employees had completed the online training.
Compliance among board members was slower; with 40 of about 200 board members
had yet to complete the training by April. With some prompting, almost all board
members have completed the training as of the date of this Report. Newly appointed
board members throughout the year were also directed to take it. If board members do
104
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
9 of 12
not take the training, mention of their noncompliance is made on the City Commission
memorandum if they decide to apply for another term.
Ethics Survey regarding On-line Training
One of the many benefits of working with the Local Government Center is there
connection to graduate students. In June of 2011, Joe Pioro an MSU graduate student
with the Political Science Department, worked with Paul Lachapelle on an online
survey to better understand how effective the online training was and how future
trainings could be improved. The survey was optional, anonymous and confidential. 99
employees or board members who took the online ethics training chose to also reply to
this survey.
The implications of this study as written in Joe Pioro’s professional paper “The
Effectiveness of Online Ethics Training Programs: A case study of the city of Bozeman
Ethics Study” are as follows:
“Data from this study suggest that online ethics training participants express higher
measures of training outcomes than those who participated in both online and in-
person training sessions. These differences may result from an initial increase in
baseline measures of ethics training outcomes for respondents who had not participated
in ethics training programs before that exceeds the net increase in these same outcomes
for respondents who had previously participated in an ethics training program (the in-
person training sessions in 2009). Comparisons of means for age, sex, and position
found that online-only participants consistently displayed higher measures of training
outcomes than respondents who had participated in both training formats regardless of
these demographic variables. Respondents who had participated in both formats rated
in-person training as more effective and engaging than those who had only participated
in online training, suggesting that higher self-reported measures of training outcomes
for the online-only group may be inaccurate (as noted above). However, this perception
of in-person training effectiveness noted by respondents who had participated in both
formats must be considered in conjunction with the fact that both groups reported
online training as being more convenient, an important factor for busy public servants.
Another interesting finding of this case study is that online-only participants expressed
more interest in follow-up sessions with colleagues and the city’s legal department,
suggesting a desire for ethical discourse that the online format may lack. It is possible
that the greater effectiveness of in-person training as compared to online training
reported by respondents who had participated in both formats could be the result of the
opportunity for discourse and communication that in-person training sessions
provide.”
105
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
10 of 12
Ethics Research on the Effectiveness of an Ethics Program
Elizabeth Webb, a Montana State University Graduate student and employee of MSU's
Extension Local Government Center recently conducted a 38 item survey with
randomly selected employees of the City of Bozeman and the city of Kalispell.
The items were designed to answer questions about the effectiveness of an ethics
program, asking the question, does the presence of a formal ethics program effect how
employees observe and report misconduct or the perception of an ethical culture.
Results from Ms. Webb's research will help guide the development of the next ethic's
training for city employees, elected officials and board members and will be presented
to the City Commission on February 13, 2012.
2012 Ethics Training
The Charter mandates annual ethics training. This year's training will again be
conducted by the MSU Local Government Center. Building on results from her newly
completed research study, Ms. Webb and Local Government Center Director Dan Clark
are creating an ethics program focused around participation in critical thinking and
discussion of practical case studies to work through ethical dilemmas. They plan on
creating three separate tracks. One track will focus on supervisors and the role of a
leader in modeling and setting the tone for ethics. Another will assist the remainder of
city of Bozeman employees in strengthening an ethical culture. The third track will be
designed for board members and focus on issues more common to appointed officials.
Twenty, ninety-minute sessions will be provided during a wide range of times to allow
for maximum flexibility and participant compliance. Some of the employee trainings
will occur in meeting rooms located onsite rather than exclusively at City Hall.
Trainings will take place in late March and April. Deputy City Clerk Aimee Kissel and
Human Resources Director Tricia Gowen will assist with logistical planning for the
trainings. Board of Ethics members and City Attorney Greg Sullivan will attend many
of the trainings. After the trainings have been completed, the case studies discussed will
be posted online.
All new employees and newly appointed board members or elected officials will take
the online ethics training throughout the year in addition to the in person training being
currently planned. The online training provides a general overview of the Code of
Ethics and the contents of the Handbook. The in-person sessions will offer a much more
in depth focus. A combination of the two would ensure that new members were given
the basics before joining a more in depth discussion.
106
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
11 of 12
Recommendations of Legislative and Administrative Changes
Board of Ethics members have spent considerable time discussing revisions to the City
Code of Ethics related to conflicts of interest, the gift provision and post-employment
restrictions. The Board has also had ongoing discussions regarding the City
Commission’s Rules of Procedure related to dealing with tie votes when a
Commissioner has a conflict. They undertook further review of previous amendment
attempts (2009) and related City Commission discussion and delved further into the
nuances of the purpose of the Code of Ethics and how that purpose can best be
conveyed.
Conflict of interest issues were highlighted mid-year as Commission candidate Chris
Budeski inquired into the Code of Ethics provision regarding representation before City
boards by an appointed or elected official who is a sole proprietor (Sect. 2.03.520.D,
BMC). In light of these issues and Board requests for input, Mayor Krauss added a
Commission discussion to the August 1st Commission meeting regarding revisions to
the Code of Ethics. The ensuing discussion and Commission direction further informed
the Board as did conversation and public comment from Mr. Budeski during the
August 17, 2011 Board meeting. While the Board never issued an opinion in this matter,
the board continues to work towards revisions to these provisions in 2012.
Summary of the boards decisions and opinions
This section is designed for reporting to the Commission and public regarding any
advisory opinions or ethics hearings that were requested and may have been granted
throughout the year.
At this time, the Board has not been asked for, or provided, any advisory opinions to
either the public or an employee.
107
Board of Ethics Report, 2010-2011
12 of 12
Upcoming Goals
· Election of officers.
· Continue to review the conflict of interest, gift, and post-employment provisions
of the Code of Ethics and bring recommended revisions before the City
Commission.
· Assist with 2012 ethics training for all employees, public officials and board
members.
· Evaluate effectiveness of 2012 ethics training.
· Update and order copies of the Handbook with new municipal code cite
references.
· Review Model Rules of Procedure for boards.
· Draft hearing procedures to use as guidelines in an ethics hearing.
· Assist City Clerk in determining budget needs for the Board (Handbooks,
training costs, etc.) for the next budget cycle.
· Examine Charter and Code for further board duties and responsibilities.
108