System and Professional Integrity

Public Integrity, Spring 2012, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 127–149. © 2012 ASPA. All rights reserved.

ISSN 1099-9922/2012 $9.50 + 0.00. DOI 10.2753/PIN1099-9922140202

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics An Analysis of Violations RobeRt D. eskRiDge, P. eDwaRD FRench, anD MaRy McthoMas

abstract

The stated mission of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) is to create excellence in local government by developing and fostering professional local government worldwide. Agreement to adhere to the ICMA Code of Ethics is a requirement for membership and is intended to further the mission by providing principles of conduct to members. A review of all violation cases pre- sented to the ICMA board from 1998 to 2008 that resulted in some form of sanction demonstrates that virtue-based code tenets have been invoked more frequently than deontological or act-based tenets. The board is apparently as concerned with the member’s character as with his or her conduct.

keywords: city management, ethics, honor codes, local government

Scholars and practitioners have for years analyzed and debated the subject of ethics in the public sector from several perspectives, including administrative usefulness, moral values, and constitutional principles. In addition, constant scrutiny from the public, media, special-interest groups, and others regarding policy decisions, imple- mentation, and the conduct of officials has highlighted the important role of ethics in governmental processes. Citizens insist that their leaders exhibit integrity, honesty, credibility, moral stature, and a keen sensitivity to the ethical dimensions of their policies and actions. However, questions arise about how responsible a responsive

128 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

government should be. Immediate financial crises, pressing constituent needs, and a multitude of other urgent issues compel administrators to pursue strategies and courses of action similar to those found in the private sector. Nevertheless, public service is different from private enterprise. Democracy is sustained by public trust, and the burdens that encumber officials are often more consequential than those faced in the private sector (Lewis and Gilman 2005).

Almost two decades ago, Dennis F. Thompson (1992) pointed out that because “those who serve come from more diverse backgrounds and begin with fewer values in common, the rules of government ethics are more likely to become more important and more explicit. Private virtue will not automatically become public virtue” (257). Personal integrity and ethical actions often involve commitment to family, community, and professional organizations that aid in defining conscience and moral judgment involved with political responsibility. The American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), the International City/County Management As- sociation (ICMA), the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), and other professional associations are forthright in assuring that members are cognizant of their obligations to the public interest, public authority, and colleagues. ASPA and ICMA have been very operative in identifying roles appropriate for administrators in government and in advancing professionalization in the public sector (Streib and Rivera 2009–2010).

Many professional associations have guidelines, prescriptions, and codes of con- duct that members are required to uphold and advocate, and some impose sanctions for failure to adhere to these rules, including censure, membership bar, and the loss of professional certification. The present research evaluates the guiding role of the ICMA code. A typology was developed to categorize the twelve tenets and twenty- eight guidelines that shape and define conduct for ICMA members. The authors examined a summary of ethics violations that resulted in published disciplinary action by the ICMA board over the ten-year period from 1998 to 2008, and classified these violations according to the typology in order to explore the nature of enforcement.1

Decision-Making and ethics

Scholars and practitioners have come to realize that practice requires more than the simple subordination of the administrative role to the political role and the dominance of functional rationality as the only legitimate style of thought (Ap- pleby 1947; Cooper 1987; Frederickson 1982; Golembiewski 1962; Levitan 1942; Leys 1943; Richardson and Nigro 1987; Scott and Hart 1973; Svara 1999; Thompson 1985; Wheeland 2000). As public administration has endeavored to become more businesslike to meet the demands of citizens, many traditional val- ues have been displaced (de Vries 2002). Academicians and managers understand that confidence in administration and its leaders rests on many factors, including accountability (Piotrowski and Van Ryzin 2007), performance (Glaser and Hil- dreth 1999; Marlowe 2004), and legitimacy in the formation and implementation of policy (Berman and West 1998; Hall and Jennings 2008; Ruscio 1996). As a result, public officials and employees today are required to be more cognizant of the ethical dimensions and consequences of their actions or failures to take action (Denhardt 1991; Kane and Patapan 2006; Macaulay and Lawton 2006; Van Wart 1996). Numerous principles encompassing professional integrity, proficiency,

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 129

and knowledge have been proposed, codified, and debated in order to define this obligation to the public.

John Rohr (1998) reasoned that “part of the problem of developing an ethic for bureaucrats is that they have been so deeply imbued with the civil service reform mentality—the dichotomy of politics and administration—that they fail to see themselves as policy makers” (6–7). Rohr considered codes to be part of the “low road” to ethical decision-making which addressed ethical issues in terms of rule adherence thus assisting the public servant to stay out of trouble; and he also weighed the appropriateness of social equity approaches incorporating normative political theory and humanistic thought—the “high road” (1978, 52–59). He sug- gested that greater reasoning could be found with the internalization of the “regime values” of the “political entity that was brought into being by the ratification of the Constitution that created the present American republic” (Rohr 1978, 59). Equality, freedom, and prosperity should serve as the foundation of a public service ethic (Rohr 1998). Bowman and Knox (2008) have found, however, that ethical codes can accomplish the task of keeping managers out of trouble as well as encourage greater ethical reasoning and discretion. “Ethics codes promote more than simple compliance; they foster the use of judgment and recognition of responsibility for decisions rendered—the real work of ethics. Acknowledging the ambiguities and complexities of public service, ethics codes offer interpretive frameworks to clarify dilemmas, encourage a philosophy of excellence, and abet individual ac- countability” (2008, 633).

Svara (2007) describes three distinct approaches to ethical decision-making: (1) decisions based on expected results (consequentialism), (2) decisions based on the application of rules (duty ethics), and (3) decisions based on proper moral charac- ter (virtue ethics).2 This “ethical triangle” is based on notions of duty but relies on three philosophical orientations in ethics—teleology, deontology, and virtue ethics. Teleological ethics subordinates duty and moral obligation to the achievement of the desired consequences of action (Brady 2003; Lewis and Gilman 2005). In this per- spective, the ethics of an action is evaluated solely by the outcome, not by the action itself or the intention of the actor. In common parlance, the end justifies the means. While an eye to consequences is important, if not crucial, for public administrators and policymakers, a purely teleological approach is not without its dangers. There are certain means that can never be morally justified. As a result, there is an appeal to avoid a purely teleological approach, calling instead for a combined perspective that includes deontological or virtue-based ethics (Pops 1994; Thompson 1992).

Deontological ethics holds that an act is morally obligatory and rests upon the duty of principle (Brady 2003; Lewis and Gilman 2005). This perspective embraces an ethical viewpoint based on rules. Deontological ethics is based on the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. In Kant’s view, individuals are morally obligated to act in certain ways that are determined by universal rules of obligation. He termed this principle the “categorical imperative”—categorical because it is universally binding, impera- tive because it instructs individuals how to act (Kant 1785/1994). In this framework, ethical behavior is not judged on the consequences of actions, but rather on the actions themselves. Regardless of the results that emerge, it is the actual action taken—and observance of the rules—that is considered important. Taken to the extreme by an organization, a “displacement” of goals may result if obedience to the rules becomes more important than the ends that the rules were put in place to achieve (Merton

130 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

1957). Svara circumvents this outcome by making a distinction between duties and principles. He argues that “the principle-based approach emphasizes what is right in a universal or objectively verifiable sense, whereas the duty-based approach em- phasizes obligations derived from the nature of the public service role” (Svara 2007, 53). Therefore, a duty-bound deontologist can still be steered by larger conceptions of the good—albeit ones embodied in accepted rules.

The third philosophical framework is derived from a theory of virtue emphasizing the character of the moral agent. Virtue ethics perceives behavior as simply an applica- tion of an individual’s personal moral character. A virtue is seen as “a personal trait, valued and admired for its own sake” (de Vries 2002, 315). This approach emphasizes personal feeling and preference (Brady 2003). Virtue ethics is largely based on Aristo- telian philosophy (Hart 1994; Macaulay and Lawton 2006; Menzel 2005; Thompson and Leidlein 2009). Aristotle’s ethical theory includes a process of habituation in which one trains oneself to be virtuous. This process is assisted by good laws that help to form character. In Aristotle’s view, character is essential, because a virtuous act is only virtuous when done from a position of firm and unshakeable character. An individual of firm and unshakeable character will be able to make virtuous choices even when the laws are silent. In a similar vein, Cooper (2004) describes virtue as “character understood as the predisposition to behave consistently with one’s espoused values and principles,” and states that it “is built slowly and consistently over time” (398). He goes on to conclude that “virtue, or character, is clearly one of the elements of the normative foundations of public administration ethics” (398).

While these different approaches are born of ethical theory, the use and exten- sion of the three philosophies are evident in public administration. As Macaulay and Lawton conclude, “it is not necessary to reunite virtue and public management but to recognize that seemingly new approaches have these age-old moral concerns at their heart” (Macaulay and Lawton 2006, 709). Differences between these three approaches are evident in the way moral dilemmas are resolved. The approaches also take different forms when codified into codes of ethics.

codes of conduct

Contemporary codes of conduct (or ethical codes) have been devised in part to help guide the modern manager through the ethical dilemmas that may occur in serving the public interest. The theory behind codified standards is that it is easier to do the right thing when one is well aware of what the right thing is (Lewis and Gilman 2005, 136). Codes can be instrumental in encouraging a high standard of behavior, in assisting in ethical decision-making, and in enhancing public confidence. The more standardized and objective set of guidelines offered through formal codes ensures that the many facets of a decision are examined and resolved (Cava, West, and Berman 1998).

Several professional associations of public servants, including the American So- ciety for Public Administration (ASPA), the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), and the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), have codes that provide guidelines for professional and ethical management. The GFOA Code of Professional Ethics sets forth standards of professional conduct for members regarding personal standards, responsibility as public officials, professional development, professional integrity— information, professional integrity—relationships, and conflicts of interest (GFOA

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 131

2010). The AICP adopted its Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct in 2005 to serve as a guide to the ethical conduct required of its members and a means to inform the public of the principles to which its members subscribe (AICP 2010). This code addresses the principles to which AICP members aspire, the association’s rules of conduct, and code procedures. The AICP also has a formal process for addressing charges of misconduct and imposing sanctions.

ASPA adopted its original Code of Ethics in 1984, with the last revision occurring in 1994 (Van Wart 1996). Members affirm their commitment to five principles: (1) serve the public interest, (2) respect the Constitution and the law, (3) demonstrate personal integrity, (4) promote ethical organizations, and (5) strive for professional ethics. In a survey of ASPA members, Bowman (1990) found that 70 percent of respondents felt that the code provided an appropriate set of standards, and almost 70 percent indicated that they used the ASPA code or its principles on the job either occasionally or often. They also believed that properly designed codes of conduct play a crucial role in fostering integrity in public service. Members were less sup- portive regarding the enforcement of the code’s principles, as only 38 percent sup- ported giving ASPA power to enforce the code (Bowman 2000).

The ICMA Code of Ethics, first adopted in 1924, is designed to help fulfill a guiding role for the membership of the association. Specifically it states, “The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance,” and to “further this mission, certain principles . . . shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA” (ICMA Code 1998). Three basic values are shared by the individual members and supported by the tenets and guidelines of the code: (1) representative, democratic local self-government, (2) standards of honesty and integrity that go beyond what is required by law, and (3) the highest possible quality in and continuous improve- ment of services to the public (Hansell 1994, 25). The code consists of twelve tenets that are voted on and may only be amended by the membership. The tenets have been amended only eleven times since they were adopted in 1924 with the latest amendment occurring in 1998 (see Appendix A). The tenets are complemented by the attachment of twenty-eight guidelines that advance or stipulate professional behavior (Hansell 1994). The guidelines have been developed through the work of ICMA’s Committee on Professional Conduct (ICMA Procedures 2005).

This constitutional standing committee is charged with enforcing the Code of Ethics and deals firsthand with ethical issues confronting the organization. In addi- tion to addressing actual ethical complaints, the committee reviews ethics inquires directed to the ICMA staff. If the committee determines that there is a serious gap in an ethical area, it can make a recommendation to add or change an existing guideline to the ICMA board for review and approval (Martha Perego, personal communica- tion, April 28, 2010). The guidelines are officially adopted by the ICMA executive board, and every member is required to sign a pledge affirming that he or she has read the code and will abide by it.

In a survey of municipal managers who were ICMA members, Rowe and Hug (1998) found that 87 percent of respondents felt that the ICMA code applied to either most or a high percentage of their administrative realm (131). In comparison to other ethical influences, the code was ranked among the top four influences by 89 percent of respondents. Fifty-three percent indicated that the code was more substantive than symbolic; 84 percent considered it very important in defining their roles as professional managers (134).

132 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

The basic values to which ICMA members subscribe, and the way the organiza- tion frames its views on ethics, impart insight regarding the reasons for the code’s existence. The language of the code reflects the original views concerning ethical conduct within the profession. Although no record exists of the discussions of the committee members charged in 1924 with developing the original code, it is apparent that they wanted to proclaim with certainty that the new organization represented a profession made up of individuals worthy of the public’s trust (Stillman 1974). The code was intended to help legitimize the new profession to both the elected

officials who hired its practitioners and the citizens whom the new system was meant to serve.

Codes of conduct, whether adopted on a professional or an organizational level, may vary in terms of systematization, generality, and enforceability (Cooper 1987; Huddleston and Sands 1998, 145). In the present study, examination of the actual enforcement of the modern-day ICMA code by the board’s standing committee revealed that some com- ponents are enforced in a greater percentage

of ethic violation cases brought before the board each year, while other tenets are never mentioned. In order to explore this finding, the authors developed a typol- ogy of the ICMA ethical tenets to evaluate 109 violation cases sanctioned by the board.

Methodology and Data

The ethos of a group is often thought of as the general moral principles or rules of conduct distinctive to the profession. The description of ethical behavior then becomes a function of the principles or rules of conduct used as the moral base for the group (what is considered right and wrong conduct). The framing of this moral base can be critical to understanding how it is to be applied to the everyday practice of ethics. Each tenet in the ICMA Code represents an individual directive to group members to behave, think, act, or not act in a particular manner. With the typology, the tenets were classified as to the ethical viewpoint espoused: teleologi- cal, deontological, or virtue ethics. In order to categorize the tenets, the authors assessed whether it was directed at outcomes (teleological), principles and duties (deontological), or beliefs (virtue ethics).

None of the tenets was based on teleological ethics, the approach that evaluates behavior in terms of its ends or outcomes. It may be argued that such aspects are in place exactly because of the assumed consequences. However, the tenets are focused on the actions themselves, not on the outcome of the actions. Similarly, ethics charges are brought and evaluated based on the action itself and do not take into account the outcome of the action, be it positive, negative, or inconsequential. Tenets focused on rules and principles were labeled “deontological.” These statements may entail positive or negative action. Key words include “refrain from,” “resist,” “submit,” “de- velop,” and “emphasize.” For example, Tenet 5 dictates that one must “submit policy proposals to elected officials” (ICMA Code 1998). Similarly action-oriented, Tenet

In the present study, examination of the actual enforcement of the modern- day ICMA ethics code by the board’s standing committee revealed that some components are enforced in a greater percentage of ethic violations cases brought before the board each year, while other tenets are never mentioned.

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 133

7 states that individuals should “refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional administrators” (ICMA Code 1998). Tenets based on personal or moral character and beliefs were labeled “virtue-based.” Keywords that indicate this classification include “believe,” “deep sense,” and “attitude.” An example of such a phrase is Tenet 1, which requires the member to “believe that professional general management is essential to the achievement of this objective” (ICMA Code 1998). This statement requires, in essence, an internal conviction as opposed to specific conduct.

Results of the typology

As shown in Table 1, the authors classified five of the code tenets as virtue-based and seven as deontological. Tenets 1, 2, 3, 4, and 12 were categorized as virtue-based; tenets 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 as deontological-based (as indicated, none of the tenets was based on teleological ethics). In addition to the twelve tenets, the code also incorporates twenty-eight guidelines. The guidelines are approved for adoption by the ICMA board upon the recommendation of the Committee on Professional Conduct and are meant to fill the needs of members who have requested more specific guidance for behavior violations of the code (Hansell 1994, 24). The guidelines may suggest or even require a certain behavior, and most of them are attached to only three tenets (3, 7, 12). The vast majority of the cases evaluated here list a violation of one of these three tenets as the primary charge.

Most of the twenty-eight guidelines are highly deontological in nature, whether they are attached to a virtue-based tenet or a deontological-based tenet, in that their purpose is to suggest or prescribe behavior. All of the guidelines contain at least one specific direction that denotes a rule such as “should not,” and some contain multiple precepts. The fact that each contains specific behavioral directions is especially interesting when the seventeen guidelines attached to the virtue-based tenets are examined. Of these guidelines, fifteen of the seventeen are attached to only two tenets: Tenet 3 (“Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships”) and Tenet 12. Tenet 12 and its attached guidelines are quite illustrative of the limitations of aspirational, virtue-based ethics codes. The tenet itself instructs members to “believe that personal aggrandizement or profit secured by confidential information or by misuse of public time is dishon- est.” However, seven guidelines are required to clarify what this would mean in terms of specific conduct.

It is little wonder that a code that aspires to proclaim what the association “be- lieves” will encounter difficulty doing so without setting down rules of compliance corresponding to what those in power believe is proper conduct. In fact, it is only through such rules that those in authority can consistently judge, for example, whether a member actually meets the expectations of “the highest ideals of honor and integrity” required in Tenet 3 of the code. This may lead to the criticism that all virtue-based tenets are transformed into deontological tenets through rule-based guidelines. However, it should be noted that not all virtue-based tenets have guide- lines. As noted above, fifteen of the seventeen guidelines are attached to only two virtue-based tenets. On the deontological side, six of the eleven guidelines are at- tached to Tenet 7 (related to political activity), which is also the only deontological item listed as the primary tenet violated in this study of ethics cases.

134 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

t a

b l

e 1

c

la ss

ifi ca

ti on

o f

e th

ic s

c od

e te

ne ts

Vi rt

ue -b

as ed

D eo

nt ol

og ic

al /A

ct -b

as ed

Te ne

t 1

2 3

4 12

5 6

7 8

9 10

11 N

o. o

f gu

id el

in es

0 1

8 1

7 1

0 6

2 0

1 1

N o.

o f

pr im

ar y

ca se

s 0

0 55

14 12

0 0

28 0

0 0

0

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 135

enforcement of the code

The fact that ICMA does indeed enforce its code to some extent is evident. The code is enforced by the Committee on Professional Conduct, which is responsible for determining whether the code has been violated and, if so, what sanction is appro- priate. There are four sanctions that may be imposed for violations: private censure (a private letter to the respondent), public censure (notification to the news media), expulsion (revocation of membership privileges), and membership bar (prohibition of future reinstatement). Any sanction beyond a private censure requires full board confirmation. To explore the nature and scope of this enforcement, the authors ex- amined once again the cases that resulted in some disciplinary action by the ICMA board over the research study period (see Table 2). During this time-frame, a total of 189 ethics cases were reviewed by the Committee on Professional Conduct. From these 189 cases, eighty cases (42 percent) were closed without sanction, fifty- seven resulted in private censures (30 percent), twenty-three in public censures (12 percent), 8 resulted in membership expulsions (4 percent), and twenty-one cases (11 percent) in membership bars.3 Almost all expulsions and membership bars also included a public censure.

Tenets 3 and 12 were cited in 67 percent of the cases as primary tenets violated. Both are virtue-based. Tenet 7, a deontological tenet, was cited in 28 percent of the cases. Member activities brought before the Committee on Professional Con- duct regarding violation of Tenet 3 (“Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships”) included driving under the influence, illegal conduct involving children/minors, felony/misdemeanor charges, inappropriate behavior while under the influence of alcohol, and shortened tenure. Other violations of Tenet 3 included viewing inappropriate material, relationships with subordinate employees, sexual harassment, ethnic insensitivity, misuse of funds/ credit card, misuse of public resources, conflict of interest, and self-bonuses. Miscel- laneous unethical conduct and falsifying credentials were also violations of Tenet 3 that resulted in sanctions against ICMA members. Violations of Tenet 7 (“Refrain from all political activities . . .”) included endorsing/contributing to a candidate for office, political activity for or against a governing body, and running for an elective position while still employed in a local government position. Cases brought before the committee regarding violation of Tenet 12 (“seek no favor; believe that personal aggrandizement . . .”) involved embezzlement of public funds, miscellaneous unethi- cal conduct, credit card misuse, and conflict of interest.

The data in Table 3 classify the 154 violations that occurred within the 109 cases that resulted in disciplinary action.4 Tenets 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 11 were not mentioned in the cases. Using the typology and information developed in the preceding dis- cussion, the authors venture to explain why some ICMA tenets are seen in a large number of violation cases and other tenets are rarely if ever seen.

Virtue-based Tenets 3, 4, and 12 were cited as primary points in 72 percent of the cases, while deontological Tenet 7 was cited as primary in 28 percent of the cases. A possible explanation for this observation is that tenets based on rules of conduct (deontological) rather than character traits (virtue) are easier to understand and therefore easier to comply with. Professionals today express concerns about ethical conduct. They believe that codes of ethics play a crucial role in fostering integrity and that there is a clear need for ethical conduct in government (Bowman and Knox 2008; Bowman and Williams 1997).

136 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

t a

b l

e 2

c

as e

V io

la ti

on s

an d

sa nc

ti on

s

Vi ol

at io

n N

um be

r of

ca

se s

A ct

iv it

y Sa

nc ti

on b

y co

m m

it te

e

Il le

ga l a

ct iv

ity (

Te ne

t 3 )

18 D

ri vi

ng u

nd er

th e

in flu

en ce

2

pu bl

ic c

en su

re , 2

p ri

va te

c en

su re

Il le

ga l c

on du

ct in

vo lv

in g

ch ild

re n/

m in

or s

3 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

a nd

e xp

ul si

on V

oy eu

ri sm

1 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

, 1 p

ub lic

c en

su re

a nd

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r

Fe lo

ny /m

is de

m ea

no r

ch ar

ge s

2 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

w ith

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

1 pu

bl ic

ce

ns ur

e w

ith e

xp ul

si on

, 2 p

ub lic

c en

su re

, 1 p

ri va

te

ce ns

ur e

w ith

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

2 w

ith n

o re

co rd

av

ai la

bl e

In ap

pr op

ri at

e be

ha vi

or w

hi le

u nd

er in

flu en

ce o

f al

co ho

l 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

Sh or

t t en

ur e

(T en

et s

3 an

d 4)

14 1

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

2 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

, 9 p

ri va

te

ce ns

ur e,

2 n

o re

co rd

a va

ila bl

e Po

lit ic

al a

ct iv

ity (

Te ne

t 7 )

12 E

nd or

si ng

c an

di da

te f

or o

ffi ce

1 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

, 4 p

ri va

te c

en su

re , 1

n o

re co

rd C

am pa

ig ni

ng /c

on tr

ib ut

io ns

/e nd

or se

m en

ts 5

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e,

1 n

o re

co rd

a va

ila bl

e Po

lit ic

al a

ct iv

ity g

ov er

ni ng

b od

y (T

en t 7

) 10

3 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

, 6 p

ri va

te c

en su

re , 1

n o

re co

rd

av ai

la bl

e Pe

rs on

al r

el at

io ns

hi ps

, i na

pp ro

pr ia

te /in

se ns

i- tiv

e be

ha vi

or (

Te ne

t 3 )

9 V

ie w

in g

in ap

pr op

ri at

e m

at er

ia l

1 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

a nd

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

1 pu

bl ic

ce

ns ur

e R

el at

io ns

hi p

w ith

s ub

or di

na te

e m

pl oy

ee 2

pu bl

ic c

en su

re , 2

p ri

va te

c en

su re

Se xu

al h

ar as

sm en

t 1

pu bl

ic c

en su

re E

th ni

c in

se ns

iti vi

ty 2

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

A pp

oi nt

m en

t c om

m itm

en t (

Te ne

t 3 )

8 2

pu bl

ic c

en su

re , 6

p ri

va te

c en

su re

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 137

M is

us e

of p

ub lic

r es

ou rc

es (

Te ne

t 3 )

7 M

is us

e fu

nd s

an d

ga in

1 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

M is

us e

of p

ub lic

r es

ou rc

es a

nd c

on fli

ct o

f in

te re

st 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

A w

ar de

d se

lf b

on us

es w

ith ou

t c ou

nc il

ov er

si gh

t 2

pu bl

ic c

en su

re a

nd e

xp ul

si on

, 1 p

ub lic

c en

su re

, 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

In ap

pr op

ri at

e bu

si ne

ss r

el at

io ns

hi p

w ith

e m

pl oy

ee s

1 pr

iv at

e ce

ns ur

e E

m be

zz le

m en

t o f

pu bl

ic f

un ds

( Te

ne ts

2 , 3

, 12

) 6

5 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

a nd

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

1 no

r ec

or d

av ai

la bl

e

Po lit

ic al

a ct

iv ity

: r un

ni ng

f or

o ffi

ce (

Te ne

t 7 )

6 1

pu bl

ic c

en su

re a

nd I

C M

A c

re de

nt ia

l r ev

oc at

io n,

1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

an d

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

1 pu

bl ic

ce

ns ur

e, 2

p ri

va te

c en

su re

, 1 n

o re

co rd

a va

ila bl

e C

re de

nt ia

ls (

Te ne

t 3 )

6 1

ex pu

ls io

n an

d m

em be

rs hi

p ba

r, 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

an d

m em

be rs

hi p

ba r,

2 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

, 1 p

ri va

te

ce ns

ur e,

1 n

o re

co rd

a va

ila bl

e M

is ce

lla ne

ou s

un et

hi ca

l c on

du ct

4

Fa ls

ifi ed

a p

ub lic

d oc

um en

t 1

pu bl

ic c

en su

re U

se o

f ci

ty r

es ou

rc es

f or

u nl

aw fu

l p ur

po se

s 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e

Pe rs

on al

in ve

st m

en t i

n ci

ty v

en do

r 1

pu bl

ic c

en su

re Fa

ile d

to d

is cl

os e

re qu

ir ed

in fo

rm at

io n

1 pu

bl ic

c en

su re

C re

di t c

ar d

m is

us e

4 1

pu bl

ic c

en su

re a

nd e

xp ul

si on

, 1 p

ub lic

c en

su re

an

d m

em be

rs hi

p ba

r, 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e,

1 n

o re

co rd

av

ai la

bl e

Pr of

es si

on al

r es

pe ct

( Te

ne t 3

) 3

2 pr

iv at

e ce

ns ur

e, 1

p ub

lic c

en su

re C

on fli

ct o

f in

te re

st (

Te ne

t 1 2)

2 1

pr iv

at e

ce ns

ur e,

1 n

o re

co rd

a va

ila bl

e

So ur

ce :

A ut

ho r

an al

ys is

o f

IC M

A E

th ic

s R

ep or

ts , 1

99 8–

20 08

.

138 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

te ne

t 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11

12

T yp

ol og

y V

V V

V D

D D

D D

D D

V

D ri

vi ng

u nd

er th

e in

flu en

ce 3

4

Il le

ga l c

on du

ct / m

in or

s 2

3

1

V oy

eu ri

sm 1

2

Fe lo

ny c

ha rg

es 2

9

Sh or

t t en

ur e

3 14

Po lit

ic al

a ct

iv ity

12

Po lit

ic al

a ct

iv ity

f or

o r

ag ai

ns t

go ve

rn in

g bo

dy 3

1

10 1

1

V ie

w in

g in

ap pr

op ri

at e

m at

er ia

l 1

2

R el

at io

ns hi

p w

ith s

ub or

di na

te e

m pl

oy ee

4

1

Se xu

al h

ar ra

ss m

en t

1 1

E th

ni c

in se

ns tit

iv ity

2

A pp

oi nt

m en

t c om

m itm

en t

8

t a

b l

e 3

e

th ic

s c

as es

R es

ul ti

ng in

s an

ct io

ns , 1

99 8–

20 08

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 139

So ur

ce :

A ut

ho r’

s an

al ys

is o

f M

. P er

eg o,

p er

so na

l c om

m un

ic at

io n,

N ov

em be

r 6,

2 00

8.

N ot

e: V

= V

io la

tio n;

D =

D is

ci pl

in ar

y ac

tio n.

M is

us e

of p

ub lic

r es

ou rc

es 6

5

M is

us e

of p

ub lic

r es

ou rc

es a

nd c

on fli

ct

of in

te re

st 1

In ap

pr op

ri at

e bu

si ne

ss r

el at

io ns

hi p

w ith

em

pl oy

ee s

1

1

C re

de nt

ia ls

6

E m

be zz

le m

en t o

f pu

bl ic

f un

ds 3

6 6

R un

ni ng

f or

o ffi

ce 6

C re

di t c

ar d

m is

us e

4 4

M is

ce lla

ne ou

s un

et hi

ca l c

on du

ct 2

4 2

Pr of

es si

on al

r es

pe ct

2 3

C on

fli ct

o f

in te

re st

is su

es

2

To ta

l v io

la tio

ns 1

56 0

20 70

14 0

0 28

0 0

1 0

23 15

6

% o

f V io

la tio

ns 0%

13 %

45 %

9% 0%

0% 18

% 0%

0% 1%

0% 15

%

Pr im

ar y

Te ne

t i n

10 9

C as

es 55

14 28

12 10

9

% o

f C

as es

0% 0%

50 %

13 %

0% 0%

26 %

0% 0%

0% 0%

11 %

140 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

ICMA members are required to agree to adhere to the code to remain in good standing. In Rowe and Hug’s (1998) survey, the code was cited by managers as second only to their own personal values in a ranking of ethical influences upon them. When the managers were asked to rank the importance of the individual tenets, Tenets 12, 3, and 7 emerged as the top three choices. The same items were the primary tenets invoked in the majority of the 109 cases. Members believe in the importance of the code and want to adhere to the tenets; thus it stands to reason that a clear under- standing of the specific conduct required is essential for them. Clearly stated rules are easier to comprehend and follow than complex, ambiguous principles of belief;

and violations of the same prescriptions for conduct are more perceptible and less subject to question.

The multiyear assessment conducted by the authors concurs that those tenets which address the most ambiguous conduct seem to provoke the most violations. This fact is particularly true for Tenet 3. Its ambiguity is most reflected in the fact that it has eight

guidelines attached to it, more than any other item. Also of note is that Tenet 3 ranks just below Tenet 12, perceived by ICMA members as the most important tenet, according to Rowe and Hug (1998). Clearly, both the members and the board take these tenets seriously. Virtue-based tenets signal the group ethos to the public and depict the traits to which group members should aspire. However, as indicated, ICMA treats its virtue-based tenets as more than aspirational mission statements. Violations of virtue-based tenets have led to almost three times as many ethics cases as violations of deontological tenets. The words “honor” and “integrity” can have different meanings depending on the individual’s philosophical perspective. While running for office is clearly a violation of Tenet 7 (“refrain from all political activi- ties . . .”), a member’s withdrawal later the same day from an accepted position for personal reasons (Tenet 4) might be less clear-cut. Therefore, tenets that rely on a “virtue” ethical perspective must still invoke rules to clarify the types of conduct that are deemed acceptable.

conclusion

In the end, how officials serve the public may only be judged by their actions. President Jimmy Carter (1976, 132) once wrote:

Nowhere in the Constitution of the United States, or the Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights or the Emancipation Proclamation, or the Old Testament or the New Testament, do you find the words “economy” or “efficiency.” Not that these words are unimportant. But you do discover other words like honesty, integrity, fair- ness, liberty, justice, patriotism, compassion, love—and many others which describe what human beings ought to be. These are the same words which describe what a government of human beings ought to be.

The conscience and moral judgment of a public servant can be derived from many sources, including personal integrity, commitment to family and community, edu-

Members believe in the importance of the code and want to adhere to the tenets; thus it stands to reason that a clear understanding of specific conduct required is essential for them.

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 141

cational background, and membership in professional organizations that formulate guidelines, prescriptions, or codes of conduct. Responsive government should be responsible because it embraces the public trust, and leaders in government should exhibit a keen sensitivity to the ethical dimensions of their policies and actions.

Codes and the accompanying scrutiny of professional governing boards and peers can be quite useful in sharpening this awareness; however, scholars and practitioners will continue to contemplate whether and how the ICMA Code of Ethics and other prescriptions/guidelines for public administrators can be comprehensively enforced. The authors have found the answer to be yes in several cases, but not in the universal sense. Codes are utilized for several purposes. They define proper conduct for the members of a group, and they reveal the philosophical standpoint from which the or- ganization conceives condoned behavior. In the case of ICMA, a mix of virtue-based and deontological ethical viewpoints is evident. Somewhat surprisingly, there were no tenets based on teleological ethics (consequentialism). As a result, the focus was not on results, but on the actions and the actors (the tenets may have been crafted, as noted earlier, with intended consequences in mind). However, as both the code and the disciplinary cases indicate, the ICMA code appears to be more concerned with character and conduct than with consequences. Equally surprising is the enforce- ment of aspirational, virtue-based tenets. Far from an esoteric mission statement of shared beliefs, the code holds members accountable to these character-forming directives. This counters criticisms that codes of ethics are merely rule-based forms of oversight and provides an example of a code that addresses both conduct and character. However, it also serves as an example of why tenets based on character and virtue are so hard to enumerate and ultimately enforce.

According to William Hansell (1994), a former executive director of ICMA, the code specifically details the organization’s beliefs. Difficulty emerges, however, in enforcing these beliefs, and as a result the association has attached guidelines to many of its twelve tenets to assist in their enforcement. The “highest ideals of honor and integrity” are very subjective. Unless these ideals are put forward in an under- standable and attainable manner, they will be manifested in conduct that is open to interpretation. Organizations creating or revising their codes of ethics should keep this conclusion in mind. Professional organizations such as ICMA may dictate how their members are to conduct themselves in their professional and possibly even private conduct, but personal integrity results from an individual commitment to the values and moral character acquired throughout a lifetime of service.

notes 1. A summary of the 189 cases brought before the ICMA Committee on Professional

Conduct was found in a memorandum to the members of the committee (M. Perego, personal communication, November 6, 2008). Sanctions issued in each case were found in eleven annual reports issued 1998–2008.

2. See also Bowman, West, and Beck (2010, chap. 3) for a similar tripartite division of ethical approaches.

3. The authors requested information from the ICMA ethics director regarding which tenets were involved in the eighty cases that were reviewed and closed by the committee during the study period; however, the director asserted that this information was not readily available and ICMA staff was unable to comply with the request at that time.

4. Of the 189 ethics cases reviewed by the committee, 109 cases resulted in some

142 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

form of sanction. In several cases, more than one tenet violation was cited. Tenet 2 was cited as a secondary tenet violation in nineteen cases; Tenet 3 was cited as a secondary tenet violation in fourteen cases; Tenet 10 was cited as a secondary tenet violation in one case; and Tenet 12 was cited as a secondary tenet violation in eleven cases. Thus, a total of 156 violations is indicated in Table 3.

ReFeRences

American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP). 2010. AICP Code of Ethics and Pro- fessional Conduct. Available at www.planning.org/aicp, accessed May 5, 2010.

Appleby, Paul H. 1947. “Toward Better Public Administration.” Public Administration Review 7, no. 2:93–99.

Aristotle. 350 B.C./1999. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis, and Cambridge, Mass.: Hackett.

Berman, Evan M., and Jonathan P. West. 1998. “Responsible Risk-Taking.” Public Administration Review 58, no. 4:346–352.

Bowman, James S. 1990. “Ethics in Government: A National Survey of Public Admin- istrators.” Public Administration Review 50, no. 3:345–353.

———. 2000. “Towards a Professional Ethos: From Regulatory to Reflective Codes.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 66, no. 4:673–687.

Bowman, James S., and Claire Connolly Knox. 2008. “Ethics in Government: No Matter How Long and Dark the Night.” Public Administration Review 68, no. 4:627–639.

Bowman, James S., and Russell L. Williams. 1997. “Ethics in Government: From a Winter of Despair to a Spring of Hope.” Public Administration Review 57, no. 6:517–526.

Bowman, James S., Jonathan P. West, and Marcia A. Beck. 2010. Achieving Competen- cies in Public Service: The Professional Edge, 2d ed. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

Brady, F. Neil. 2003. “ ‘Public’ Administration and the Ethics of Particularity.” Public Administration Review 63, no. 5:525–534.

Carter, James E. 1976. Why Not the Best? New York: Bantam. Cava, Anita, Jonathan P. West, and Evan M. Berman. 1998. “Ethical Decision-Making

in Business and Government.” In The Ethics Edge, edited by Evan M. Berman, Jona- than P. West, and Stephen J. Bonczek, pp. 109–122. Washington, D.C.: ICMA Press.

Cooper, Terry L. 1987. “Hierarchy, Virtue, and the Practice of Public Administra- tion: A Perspective for Normative Ethics.” Public Administration Review 47, no. 4:320–328.

———. 2004. “Big Questions in Administrative Ethics: A Need for Focused Collab- orative Effort.” Public Administration Review 64, no. 4:395–407.

Denhardt, Kathryn G. 1991. “Unearthing the Moral Foundations of Public Administra- tion: Honor, Benevolence, and Justice.” In Ethical Frontiers in Public Management: Seeking New Strategies for Resolving Ethical Dilemmas, edited by James S. Bow- man, pp. 91–113. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

de Vries, Michiel S. 2002. “Can You Afford Honesty? A Comparative Analysis of Ethos and Ethics.” Administration and Society 34, no. 3:309–334.

Frederickson, H. George. 1982. “The Recovery of Civism in Public Administration.” Public Administration Review 42, no. 6:501–508.

Frederickson, H. George, and David K. Hart. 1985. “The Public Service and the Pa- triotism of Benevolence.” Public Administration Review 45, no. 5:547–553.

Glaser, Mark, and W. Bartley Hildreth. 1999. “Service Delivery Satisfaction and Willing- ness to Pay Taxes.” Public Productivity and Management Review 23, no. 1:48–67.

Golembiewski, Robert T. 1962. “Organization as a Moral Problem.” Public Adminis- tration Review 22, no. 2:51–58.

Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). 2010. Code of Professional Eth-

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 143

ics. Available at www.gfoa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id =98&Itemid=108, accessed May 7, 2010.

Hall, Jeremy L., and Edward T. Jennings, Jr. 2008. “Taking Chances: Evaluating Risk as a Guide to Better Use of Best Practices.” Public Administration Review 68, no. 4:695–708.

Hansell, William H. 1994. “The ICMA Code of Ethics: The Values of a Profession.” Public Management 76, no. 4:24–25.

Hart, David Kirkwood. 1994. “Administration and the Ethics of Virtue: In All Things, Choose First for Good Character and Then for Technical Expertise.” In Handbook of Administrative Ethics, edited by Terry L. Cooper, pp. 107–123. New York: Mar- cel Dekker.

Huddleston, Mark W., and Joseph C. Sands. 1998. “Enforcing Administrative Ethics.” In The Ethics Edge, edited by Evan M. Berman, Jonathan P. West, and Stephen J. Bonczek, pp. 145–156. Washington, D.C.: ICMA Press.

International City/County Management Association. Code of Ethics, 1998. Available at http.//icma.org/main/bc.asp?bcid, accessed April 8, 2011.

International City/County Management Association. Rule of Procedures for Enforce- ment of the Code of Ethics, 2005. Available at http://icma.org/main/bc.asp?bcid=73 &hsid=1&ssid1=2530&ssid2=2714, accessed April 8, 2011.

Kane, John, and Haig Patapan. 2006. “In Search of Prudence: The Hidden Problem of Managerial Reform.” Public Administration Review 66, no. 5:711–724.

Kant, Immanuel. 1785/1994. Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. Indianapolis, and Cambridge, Mass.: Hackett.

Levitan, David M. 1942. “The Neutrality of the Public Service.” Public Administration Review 2, no. 4:317–323.

Lewis, Carol W., and Stuart Gilman. 2005. The Ethics Challenge in Public Service: A Problem Solving Guide, 2d ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Leys, Wayne A. R. 1943. “Ethics and Administrative Discretion.” Public Administra- tion Review 3, no. 1:10–23.

Macaulay, Michael, and Alan Lawton. 2006. “From Virtue to Competence: Changing the Principles of Public Service.” Public Administration Review 66, no. 5:702– 710.

Marlowe, Justin. 2004. “Part of the Solution, or Cogs in the System? The Origins and Consequences of Trust in Public Administrators.” Public Integrity 6, no. 2:93–113.

Menzel, Donald C. 2005. “Research on Ethics and Integrity in Governance: A Review and Assessment.” Public Integrity 7, no. 2:147–168.

Merton, Robert K. 1957. “Bureaucratic Structure and Personality.” In Classics of Pub- lic Organizational Theory, edited by Jay M. Shafritz and J. Steven Ott, pp. 61–72. Orlando, Fla.: Harcourt.

Piotrowski, Suzanne J., and Gregg G. Van Ryzin. 2007. “Citizen Attitudes Toward Transparency in Local Government.” American Review of Public Administration 37, no. 3:306–323.

Pops, Gerald M. 1994. “A Teleological Approach to Administrative Ethics.” In Hand- book of Administrative Ethics, edited by Terry L. Cooper, pp. 157–166. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Richardson, William D., and Lloyd G. Nigro. 1987. “Administrative Ethics and Found- ing Thought: Constitutional Correctives, Honor, and Education.” Public Adminis- tration Review 47, no. 5:367–376.

Rohr, John A. 1978. Ethics for Bureaucrats: An Essay on Law and Values. New York: Marcel Dekker.

———. 1998. Public Service, Ethics and Constitutional Practice. Lawrence: Univer- sity Press of Kansas.

Rowe, Lloyd A., and Richard W. Hug. 1998. “City Manager Perceptions of the ICMA Code of Ethics.” In The Ethics Edge, edited by Evan M. Berman, Jonathan P. West, and Stephen J. Bonczek, pp. 129–144. Washington, D.C.: ICMA Press.

144 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

Ruscio, Kenneth P. 1996. “Trust, Democracy, and Public Management: A Theoretical Argument.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 6, no. 3:461–477.

Scott, William G., and David K. Hart. 1973. “Administrative Crisis: The Neglect of Metaphysical Speculation.” Public Administration Review 33, no. 5:415–422.

Stillman, Richard J., II. 1974. The Rise of the City Managers: A Public Professional in Local Governments. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Streib, Greg, and Mark Rivera. 2009–10. “Assessing the Ethical Knowledge of City Managers.” Public Integrity 12, no. 1:9–23.

Svara, James H. 1999. “Complementarity of Politics and Administration as a Legiti- mate Alternative to the Dichotomy Model.” Administration and Society 30, no. 6:676–705.

———. 2007. The Ethics Primer for Public Administrators in Government and Non- profit Organizations. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones & Bartlett.

Thompson, Dennis F. 1985. “The Possibility of Administrative Ethics.” Public Admin- istrative Review 45, no. 5:555–561.

———. 1992. “Paradoxes of Government Ethics.” Public Administration Review 52, no. 3:254–259.

Thompson, William N., and James E. Leidlein. 2009. Ethics in City Hall: Discussion and Analysis for Public Administration. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones & Bartlett.

Van Wart, Montgomery. 1996. “The Sources of Ethical Decision Making for Individu- als in the Public Sector.” Public Administration Review 56, no. 6:525–533.

Wheeland, Craig M. 2000. “City Management in the 1990’s: Responsibilities, Roles, and Practices.” Administration and Society 32, no. 3:255–281.

about the authoRs Robert D. Eskridge, formerly a local government manager in South Africa and Texas, recently completed his Ph.D. in Public Policy and Administration at Mississippi State University and will be an assistant professor of public administration and political sci- ence at Appalachian State University the fall of 2012. His research interests include local government management, privatization, and ethics.

P. Edward French, Ph.D., is an associate professor and graduate coordinator in the De- partment of Political Science and Public Administration at Mississippi State University. His teaching and research interests encompass local government administration, includ- ing human resource issues, emergency and risk management, and selected management topics. He was formerly a local government manager in Virginia.

Mary McThomas, Ph.D. is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Mississippi State University. Her teaching and research interests include the areas of political theory, constitutional law, and gender politics.

appendix: the international city/county Management association code of ethics

The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering professional local government management worldwide. To further this mission, certain principles, as enforced by the Rules of Procedure, shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA, who shall:

Tenet 1—Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic local government by responsible elected officials and believe that professional general management is essential to the achievement of this objective.

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 145

Tenet 2—Affirm the dignity and worth of the services rendered by govern- ment and maintain a constructive, creative, and practical attitude toward local government affairs and a deep sense of social responsibility as a trusted public servant.

Guideline—

advice to officials of other local governments. When members advise and respond to inquiries from elected or appointed officials of other local governments, they should inform the administrators of those communities.

Tenet 3—Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the respect and confidence of the elected officials, of other officials and employees, and of the public.

Guidelines—

Public confidence. Members should conduct themselves so as to maintain public confidence in their profession, their local government, and in their performance of the public trust.

impression of influence. Members should conduct their official and personal af- fairs in such a manner as to give the clear impression that they cannot be improperly influenced in the performance of their official duties.

appointment commitment. Members who accept an appointment to a position should not fail to report for that position. This does not preclude the possibility of a member considering several offers or seeking several positions at the same time, but once a bona fide offer of a position has been accepted, that commitment should be honored. Oral acceptance of an employment offer is considered binding unless the employer makes fundamental changes in terms of employment.

credentials. An application for employment or for ICMA’s Voluntary Credentialing Program should be complete and accurate as to all pertinent details of education, experience, and personal history. Members should recognize that both omissions and inaccuracies must be avoided.

Professional Respect. Members seeking a management position should show pro- fessional respect for persons formerly holding the position or for others who might be applying for the same position. Professional respect does not preclude honest differences of opinion; it does preclude attacking a person’s motives or integrity in order to be appointed to a position.

Reporting ethics Violations. When becoming aware of a possible violation of the ICMA Code of Ethics, members are encouraged to report the matter to ICMA. In reporting the matter, members may choose to go on record as the complainant or report the matter on a confidential basis.

confidentiality. Members should not discuss or divulge information with anyone about pending or completed ethics cases, except as specifically authorized by the Rules of Procedure for Enforcement of the Code of Ethics.

146 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

seeking employment. Members should not seek employment for a position having an incumbent administrator who has not resigned or been officially informed that his or her services are to be terminated.

Tenet 4—Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to serve the best interests of all people.

Guideline—

length of service. A minimum of two years generally is considered necessary in order to render a professional service to the local government. A short tenure should be the exception rather than a recurring experience. However, under special circum- stances, it may be in the best interests of the local government and the member to separate in a shorter time. Examples of such circumstances would include refusal of the appointing authority to honor commitments concerning conditions of employ- ment, a vote of no confidence in the member, or severe personal problems. It is the responsibility of an applicant for a position to ascertain conditions of employment. Inadequately determining terms of employment prior to arrival does not justify premature termination.

Tenet 5—Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts and advice on matters of policy as a basis for making decisions and setting community goals; and uphold and implement local government policies adopted by elected officials.

Guideline—

conflicting Roles. Members who serve multiple roles—working as both city attorney and city manager for the same community, for example—should avoid participating in matters that create the appearance of a conflict of interest. They should disclose the potential conflict to the governing body so that other opinions may be solicited.

Tenet 6—Recognize that the elected representatives of the people are entitled to the credit for the establishment of local government policies; responsibility for policy execution rests with the members.

Tenet 7—Refrain from all political activities which undermine public con- fidence in professional administrators. Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing legislative body.

Guidelines—

elections of the governing body. Members should maintain a reputation for serv- ing equally and impartially all members of the governing body of the local govern- ment they serve, regardless of party. To this end, they should not engage in active participation in the election campaign on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for the governing body.

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 147

elections of elected executives. Members should not engage in the election cam- paign of any candidate for mayor or elected county executive.

Running for office. Members shall not run for elected office or become involved in political activities related to running for elected office. They shall not seek political endorsements, financial contributions or engage in other campaign activities.

elections. Members share with their fellow citizens the right and responsibility to vote and to voice their opinion on public issues. However, in order not to impair their effectiveness on behalf of the local governments they serve, they shall not participate in political activities to support the candidacy of individuals running for any city, county, special district, school, state or federal offices. Specifically, they shall not endorse candidates, make financial contributions, sign or circulate petitions, or participate in fund-raising activities for individuals seeking or holding elected office.

elections in the council-Manager Plan. Members may assist in preparing and presenting materials that explain the council-manager form of government to the public prior to an election on the use of the plan. If assistance is required by another community, members may respond. All activities regarding ballot issues should be conducted within local regulations and in a professional manner.

Presentation of issues. Members may assist the governing body in presenting issues involved in referenda such as bond issues, annexations, and similar matters.

Tenet 8—Make it a duty continually to improve the member’s professional ability and to develop the competence of associates in the use of manage- ment techniques.

Guidelines—

self-assessment. Each member should assess his or her professional skills and abilities on a periodic basis.

Professional Development. Each member should commit at least 40 hours per year to professional development activities that are based on the practices identified by the members of ICMA.

Tenet 9—Keep the community informed on local government affairs; encourage communication between the citizens and all local government officers; emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public; and seek to improve the quality and image of public service.

Tenet 10—Resist any encroachment on professional responsibilities, believing the member should be free to carry out official policies without interference, and handle each problem without discrimination on the basis of principle and justice.

Guideline—

information sharing. The member should openly share information with the gov- erning body while diligently carrying out the member’s responsibilities as set forth in the charter or enabling legislation.

148 • Public integRity sPRing 2012

Robert D. Eskridge, P. Edward French, and Mary McThomas

Tenet 11—Handle all matters of personnel on the basis of merit so that fairness and impartiality govern a member’s decisions, pertaining to ap- pointments, pay adjustments, promotions, and discipline.

Guideline—

equal opportunity. All decisions pertaining to appointments, pay adjustments, promotions, and discipline should prohibit discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, political affiliation, disability, age, or marital status. It should be the members’ personal and professional responsibility to actively recruit and hire a diverse staff throughout their organizations.

Tenet 12—Seek no favor; believe that personal aggrandizement or profit se- cured by confidential information or by misuse of public time is dishonest.

Guidelines—

gifts. Members should not directly or indirectly solicit any gift or accept or receive any gift—whether it be money, services, loan, travel, entertainment, hospitality, promise, or any other form—under the following circumstances: 1) it could be reasonably inferred or expected that the gift was intended to influence them in the performance of their official duties; or 2) the gift was intended to serve as a reward for any official action on their part.

It is important that the prohibition of unsolicited gifts be limited to circumstances related to improper influence. In de minimus situations, such as meal checks, some modest maximum dollar value should be determined by the member as a guide- line. The guideline is not intended to isolate members from normal social practices where gifts among friends, associates, and relatives are appropriate for certain occasions.

investments in conflict with official Duties. Members should not invest or hold any investment, directly or indirectly, in any financial business, commercial, or other private transaction that creates a conflict with their official duties.

In the case of real estate, the potential use of confidential information and knowl- edge to further a member’s personal interest requires special consideration. This guideline recognizes that members’ official actions and decisions can be influenced if there is a conflict with personal investments. Purchases and sales which might be interpreted as speculation for quick profit ought to be avoided.

Because personal investments may prejudice or may appear to influence official actions and decisions, members may, in concert with their governing body, provide for disclosure of such investments prior to accepting their position as local govern- ment administrator or prior to any official action by the governing body that may affect such investments.

Personal Relationships. Members should disclose any personal relationship to the governing body in any instance where there could be the appearance of a conflict of interest. For example, if the manager’s spouse works for a developer doing business with the local government, that fact should be disclosed.

The International City/County Management Association Code of Ethics

Public integRity sPRing 2012 • 149

confidential information. Members should not disclose to others, or use to further their personal interest, confidential information acquired by them in the course of their official duties.

Private employment. Members should not engage in, solicit, negotiate for, or promise to accept private employment, nor should they render services for private interests or conduct a private business when such employment, service, or business creates a conflict with or impairs the proper discharge of their official duties.

Teaching, lecturing, writing, or consulting are typical activities that may not involve conflict of interest, or impair the proper discharge of their official duties. Prior notification of the appointing authority is appropriate in all cases of outside employment.

Representation. Members should not represent any outside interest before any agency, whether public or private, except with the authorization of or at the direction of the appointing authority they serve.

endorsements. Members should not endorse commercial products or services by agreeing to use their photograph, endorsement, or quotation in paid or other com- mercial advertisements, whether or not for compensation. Members may, however, agree to endorse the following, provided they do not receive any compensation: 1) books or other publications; 2) professional development or educational services provided by nonprofit membership organizations or recognized educational in- stitutions; 3) products and/or services in which the local government has a direct economic interest.

Members’ observations, opinions, and analyses of commercial products used or tested by their local governments are appropriate and useful to the profession when included as part of professional articles and reports.

Source: http://icma.org/main/bc.asp?bcid=72&hsid=1&ssid1=43&ssid2=75&ssid3.

Copyright of Public Integrity is the property of M.E. Sharpe Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed

to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,

users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.