[Editor’s Note:] The City Council voted unanimously last night to have City Attorney Bob Shannon draft a lobbyist ordinance that will likely be presented in January, and the Council will discuss the ordinance then.
Much has been made recently both here and elsewhere of the recent Napa vacation City Development Services and RDA Director Craig Beck and family took with known hotel lobbyist Mike Murchison and DLBA Chief Kraig Kojian.
It seems that, at least initially, the Becks received either free or discounted accommodations at the Avia Napa resort during the trip. The resort is part of a chain owned by LodgeWorks. LodgeWorks already owns and operates one Avia hotel in Long Beach, at 285 Bay Street, and, it would seem, would very much like to finalize a deal with the City to build a second facility, the Hotel Sierra, on a currently vacant lot also at the Pike at Rainbow Harbor.
Mr. Beck has since dismissed the either discounted or free room and other services he received in Napa as an oversight, claiming that his wife initially paid the bill and that he has since reimbursed the Avia Napa for the full cost of their stay within the required 30 days. Beck also asserts that nothing unlawful occurred.
Unfortunately, e-mails between Beck, Murchison and Kojian have now surfaced that seem to tell a different story and, according to a Press-Telegram story, City Manager Pat West has now suspended Beck pending the outcome of an administrative investigation into the matter.
Mr. Murchison, a lobbyist for LodgeWorks, has thus far been, predictably, unavailable for public comment but in the same P-T article, City Attorney Shannon is quoted as saying: “Mr. Murchison indicated that he had no idea that Kojian or Beck were going to be comped,” Shannon said, “Mr. Murchison sat right there and lied to me.”
Further cryptic – one could say deliberately coded – comments within e-mails sent and received both before and after the Napa trip refer alternately to a “dark chameleon”, visits to “mecca, (aka ‘22’)”, a need to feed one’s soul and a preference for “devil’s food”. The true meaning of these will no doubt also be brought to light by someone with far more talent for and interest in investigative reporting than I possess. My sense, given the context of the references in the emails, is that these comments likely refer to some sort of so-called “gentlemen’s club” and a person affiliated with it.
Since this latest vacation came to light – Beck, Murchison and Kojian have a habit of vacationing and recreating together it seems – many in City Government and throughout the community have renewed their call for a lobbyist ordinance in Long Beach. The City Council made an attempt at such an ordinance at about this time last year but “received and filed” (i.e. dropped) the proposal when they couldn’t agree upon just how it should be crafted and to whom it should apply.
Councilmembers Gerrie Schipske (5th District) and Robert Garcia (1st District) now plan to revisit the lobbyist ordinance issue and see whether the full Council might prove willing and able to craft some workable guidelines in this area for City officials this time around.
Whether or not the Council actually succeeds in enacting a lobbyist ordinance remains to be seen. Several councilmembers seem ambivalent while some others seem staunchly opposed to the whole idea feeling, as Dr. Suja Lowenthal (2nd District) has said; “such ordinances provide false security, and councilmembers and residents must have faith in city officials”.
In my view, however, and with all due respect to Dr. Lowenthal, public faith is something that must be earned, not simply received by virtue of a persons appointed government position. Public faith must be based upon trust and trust must, likewise, be earned by virtue of being, and being perceived as, trustworthy.
Many in Long Beach, rightly or wrongly, simply do not currently perceive some of our appointed City officials as being worthy of trust and a reasonable and effective lobbyist ordinance could assist in correcting that.
In my opinion, however, there’s a much bigger picture to be considered: that of over-arching ethics in government. If we agree that all of our elected and appointed government officials should adhere to the highest ethical standards at all times, then a lobbyist ordinance would be just one small part of assuring that goal is met and the debate should not be over whether or not to enact a lobbyist ordinance but, rather, how restrictive we want to make it.
In crafting such ordinances, it’s always wise to observe other similar laws and attempt to identify some best practices that we might follow for our own ordinance.
California’s own Political Reform Act (Gov. Code Sections 81000-91015) seems an ideal place to start and, in truth, we may very well need look no further for a good solid model upon which to base a reasonable and effective lobbyist ordinance here in Long Beach. Visit the State’s Fair Political Practices Commission website here to learn more about how California chooses to address the issue of lobbyists.
Governmental ethics, while a seemingly oxymoronic concept to many, is crucial in a civil society of self-governed people who are committed to living according to the rule of law. The government that does not consistently operate according to sound, reasonable and widely accepted ethical principles eventually ceases to function with the consent of the governed and must eventually and necessarily fail altogether.
Some in government seem to understand this idea. Our federal executive branch staffs an entire office (the Office of Government Ethics) just for this purpose. It’s stated mission: to “exercise leadership in the executive branch to prevent conflicts of interest on the part of Government employees, and to resolve those conflicts of interest that do occur. In partnership with executive branch agencies and departments, OGE fosters high ethical standards for employees and strengthens the public’s confidence that the Government’s business is conducted with impartiality and integrity”…A lofty mission indeed.
The Senate has its own “select committee” on ethics and, believe it or not, Congress has its own ethics office as well.
The California Attorney General’s Office handles ethics training for State Officials and provides direct access to AB 1234 information that, among other things, mandates two hours of Ethics Training – that’s right, a whopping two hours – for local public officials.
The Institute for Local Government has an excellent site that provides information and resources on many topics including those related to Public Service Ethics.
A key theme throughout the mandatory AB 1234 ethics training for local public officials is that an act or omission in the scope of one’s official duties that might under later scrutiny prove lawful, is not necessarily ethical and that even though an act or omission may not seem or even later prove to be unethical, it’s how the public perceives that act or omission that can be even more important.
In the field of Public Service Ethics there exists the understanding that all elected and appointed public officials have a “basic duty of honesty and loyalty to the public” and that a violation of this basic duty can constitute what’s known as “Honest Services Fraud” which, in turn, can be litigated in Court with penalties upon conviction spanning the entire spectrum from removal from office to fine and incarceration.
Every single decision our public officials make and every act or omission our public officials commit should, indeed must, be accomplished with a clear understanding and a strict adherence to their “basic duty of honesty and loyalty to the public”.
Fully understanding government ethics is not so easy as it might seem at first blush. Related laws can be extremely convoluted and challenging to avoid running afoul of. This is one of the primary reasons we have an elected City Attorney in Long Beach and why that person represents not the “People of Long Beach”, as one might expect but, rather, the “City, City Council and all City commissions, committees, officers and employees”. Whenever there’s any question related to government ethics, our elected and appointed officials should be calling the City Attorney’s office for an opinion on the matter and, believe it or not, many of our officials routinely do just that.
Whenever any public official departs from the “basic duty of honesty and loyalty to the public” standard of official behavior and conduct they must be held accountable and face reasonable consequences for having done so. For any government to be and to remain legitimate and just, it and all of its representatives must be and remain directly and entirely answerable to the people that have, through their informed consent, created it.
The government of the City of Long Beach belongs to the people of the City of Long Beach, not to any one person or group that has been elected or appointed to represent and to serve us. We require that our elected representatives demonstrate leadership, certainly, and to move those policies and principles forward upon which they publicly campaigned before they were elected to the offices they hold.
But this does not absolve them from remaining, at all times, fully and completely answerable to the People of Long Beach, as represented by the majority of the electorate and as otherwise constrained by the rule of law.
Do you reside in Long Beach? If so, do you, truly and collectively, desire, as I do, that our Long Beach City government become more ethical? Then all that is required is that we, collectively, insist that your City government become so and that our collective insistence takes the form of:
- Clearly communicating that desire to our elected officials and then,
- Holding them fully accountable to the standard of ethical conduct that we have set
All that is required is that we, collectively:
- Participate more actively and intelligently in each of our local elections and then,
- Monitor those we elect both closely and continuously to assure that they are, indeed, abiding by our collective will in this critical area of public service
If we, collectively, do not do these few basic things, and do them intelligently and consistently, then we do, indeed, get the government ethics we deserve.
I very much welcome your questions and comments!
Click here to read our policy on covering the Long Beach City Council.