Ethics

Talked about during executive session, trustee reports, and public comment, the Ethics Board has emerged as perhaps the surprise hot topic of village board meetings this fall. Most of the conversation has been between Trustee Scott Hunsinger and Ethics Board Chair Wayne Bennett, or directed at one or both of them, or about one of both of them.

Nearly everyone who has taken part in the discussion has done so with passion for the matter at hand, which centers around the progress—or lack thereof—of the Ethics Board toward becoming a functioning part of the village’s government. Rather than ponder the—in my opinion—unfortunate state of the Ethics Board, from which another member resigned a week ago, I’d prefer to take a look at the bigger picture.

First, it’s worth noting that although Mr. Bennett and Trustee Hunsinger may be at odds lately, the pair have worked just fine together before, serving on the Village Advisory Committee. I know because I was there. In fact, each of us was an inaugural member of that body, appointed December 19, 2005.

Of course, I think highly of Trustee Hunsigner. Having been his running mate, I can tell you that finding a more enthusiastic supporter of Brockport would be a real challenge. Likewise, based on by experience with Mr. Bennett during the time when he and I served on the VAC, I think that he means well. I count him as someone who cares about Brockport.

Second, after last Monday’s resignation, the Ethics Board lacks a quorum. This means that whatever progress had been made will come to a halt. But that may not be such a bad thing. Here’s why.

Adopted as chapter 13 of the village code 38 years ago, the code of ethics was intended to guide Brockport officials and employees in the discharge of their responsibilities as municipal representatives. Chapter 13’s framers recognized that codifying public trust was probably unrealistic. States article I, section 1 of chapter 13: “Standards must rest primarily on personal integrity and on community vigilance; law cannot in itself create moral fiber, not can law quicken the civic conscience.”

Fair enough: as a practical matter, citizens rely to a significant extent on officials and employees to “do the right thing.” Where the code gets dicey is in its description of “Gifts and Favors” under article VI:

“No officer or employee of the Village of Brockport, whether paid or unpaid, shall accept any gift or gratuity, whether in the form of services, loan or any promise of benefit of any kind, from any person, firm, or corporation which is interested indirectly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever in any business or professional transaction or dealing with the village or any agency thereof.”

What’s so troubling about this language is the extent to which the commonplace give and take of social interaction is prohibited by law. For example, I mentioned at the last board meeting how much I enjoyed the Halloween parade and party on October 24. Well, the Brockport Merchants Association annually hosts this event, which was held at the fire hall on Market Street and staffed by college students, among others.

Did I violate the village’s code of ethics by drinking a cup of cider at the party, or by allowing my son to accept candy from the proprietors of Main Street businesses? Certainly merchants individually could benefit from a cozier relationship with a trustee, particularly if they intend to come before the board to, for example, have a sidewalk dining area during the summer. And the merchants association? It benefits from a relationship with the village too. In fact, the village gave the association money for this fantastic holiday gathering. Let’s not forget the fire department, the leadership of which would, I’m sure, not mind if their budget grew. And how about the college students, some of whom may be members of a group that could have an event or project that would need village approval.

My point is that it is beyond the reach of common sense to believe that cider and candy would corrupt any person with even a small amount of integrity. Yet the code of ethics doesn’t recognize this.

Even our mayor, who often mentions having a sarsaparilla, couldn’t drink it if you bought him a glass and proposed a toast. Given that the village seems to be moving closer to a new contract with the Stetson Club, which would be something to celebrate, I don’t know about ethical, but that hardly seems fair.