The Supreme Court of the United States should have a code of ethics. Maybe the highest court in the land should also come under the review of a board of ethics. Lots of lower-ranking government employees at the federal, state and local levels are subject to both a code of ethics and a board of ethics.
But, as the following informal case study will show, enforcement in some cases can easily be circumvented. For example, in Detroit, all Detroit city employees are subject to review by the city’s Board of Ethics. It was established, surprisingly, in 1997, the same year Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (D?-Detroit, 1997 — 2002) took office.
If you have any doubt as to Kilpatrick’s character, consider that he very recently attended a Trump rally: birds of a feather. The Detroit News seems to be the only to report this so far, but the article’s only available to subscribers.
A month ago, I submitted five ethics complaints against five Detroit employees. The process starts with a notarized form. My credit union offers free notary public service to members. One Wednesday morning, I took three of the forms to the notary and mentioned I hadn’t yet finished filling out the other two.
The notary told me I could get the other two notarized any time the credit union branch is open, even a Friday like at 5:45 p.m. But I wasn’t in that much of a hurry. Even if I got the other two notarized Friday evening, I wouldn’t be able to submit them until Monday.
And the Board of Ethics only meet once a month, or at least they’re supposed to. Operating under that assumption, I figured I had another week to get the other two complaints notarized in time for the next meeting, with a few days to spare.
Both of the notaries remarked that the procedure for a Board of Ethics complaint is not entirely clear as far as the notarization is concerned. I don’t know much about notarization, but I do know there are a few different kinds. Both notaries concluded that I simply needed the kind in which I solemnly swear or affirm I am the person signing the documents, then the notary seal stamps the document.
Worst case scenario was that upon submitting the complaints, the board’s receptionist would tell me I had gotten the wrong kind of notarization and needed to do the complaint forms over again.
I was told I could fax the complaint forms over, but I decided to bring them over in person. The Board of Ethics don’t have offices in the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center downtown. Instead I had to go to a rec center on the East Side? Theoretically I could have taken the bus there, but I didn’t feel like getting stranded on the East Side, so I called on a reliable method of transportation (which Detroit’s buses are not, to be absolutely clear).
The person I handed the complaint forms seemed kinda surprised. The complaints were numbered 2024-04, 2024-05, …, 2024-08. Could there really be so few so far this year?
I gamed out in my mind how the board might rule on these complaints. The ones against Mayor Mike Duggan (D?-Detroit) and Councilwoman Gabriela Santiago-Romero (D?-Detroit City Council District 6) would probably get dismissed on some excuse or other. The two complaints against two city employees lower on the totem pole might prompt something close to actual accountability. And the fifth one might get dismissed on a jurisdictional issue, and might serve no other purpose than to register strong disapproval of the dishonesty, racism and negligence of Detroit at Work.
I didn’t consider the possibility that the board might not meet at all! The board are supposed to consist of seven members, but there are currently two vacancies. Two absences means no quorum, and therefore no meeting. I just found this out on a phone call with the board’s support staff yesterday.
It was also explained to me on the phone that complaints expire in 91 days, unless the board vote to extend due to “extraordinary circumstances” (like presumably a natural disaster). So if the board don’t meet this month nor in June, then my complaints expire. It might be like they never even happened at all.
And who appoints the board members? If it’s the mayor doing the appointing, and there are ethics complaints against him, he might simply decide to not fill the vacancies and hope the board never gets quorum before the complaints expire.
Though on the other hand, if the board do meet and decide my complaints all have merit, the board can… issue an advisory opinion that maybe has legal teeth or maybe it doesn’t?
The Board of Ethics have a website. It probably has a lot of information that I have overlooked. But it’s arranged in such a confusing manner that you might be just as puzzled by it as I am.