The public has lost a lot of its faith in good government but tends not to think about the issue until a case arises that confirms its worst assumptions. The job of the Ethics Commission — both the panels set up by the city and the state — is to think about it and ultimately to restore some of that faith.
That function is what must continue on those commissions, with the naming of two new replacements for the executive directors’ jobs. These panels have drawn public attention in recent years, a spotlight that often left the public with a dim view of the whole arrangement.
Les Kondo, the former chief of the state commission, took heat from lawmakers when he questioned what gifts they had accepted. Public school teachers also fought back when he criticized their links with the organizers of extracurricular school tours, on which they traveled free.
At the city level, the former commission executive director, Chuck Totto, clashed with the Kirk Caldwell administration. That relationship had soured after Totto’s probe of expenditures for the mayor’s first-term inaugural. There were other flash points over budget requests, which were supervised by the Office of Corporation Counsel.
It’s within this contentious environment that Dan Gluck, formerly an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, and Jan Yamane, formerly the acting state auditor, have been named executive directors of the state and Honolulu ethics commissions, respectively.
Their appointments provide an occasion to reflect on the best course ahead.
The public interest requires commissions that provide clear advocacy, an activist stance that promotes understanding of and adherence to the ethics laws. The mission needs to be preventing ethical misbehavior, rather than simply responding to random actions that rise to the surface.
Both are brand new to their jobs. In an interview with Honolulu Star-Advertiser writer Susan Essoyan, Gluck said he is in listening mode. Some of this sounds
encouraging enough.
For example, Gluck said the state Ethics Commission plans to hold a public hearing to talk about the philosophy behind the Ethics Code and hear proposed improvements to it.
That sounds like a promising idea. It’s one that the city Ethics Commission should replicate. One of the fights over Honolulu Hale ethics concerned Totto’s communications with the media — and, thus, the public awareness of what’s going on.
That commission had sought to constrain what the director could say publicly about its decisions. The panel backed off that stance. Still, it serves as a cautionary tale. Better communications — and more openness with the public, not less — should be the watchwords now.
Gluck also said he will be taking input from people who are subject to the Ethics Code: legislators, state employees and lobbyists.
One element he promises is ensuring that everyone understands what the law says; that would be a step in the right direction.
However, Gluck added that he wants the subjects of the code “to discuss not only what does the law say right now, but what should it say,” giving them “a voice in our process.” There’s a limit to how far that should go.
The Ethics Code needs to remain strong, keeping at bay any entanglements that can lead to corruption. That is how the public is served — regardless of how elected officials or state employees feel about it.
Of course there are cases in which the subject of the ethics charge believes the commission is not applying the code fairly. But the correct arbiter there should be the Judiciary. That was the course of action in the school travel dispute, when teachers challenged the commission’s finding — and the courts sided with them.
As for what behavior Hawaii taxpayers have a right to expect from their officials and employees: The public hearing should be the most instructive course of inquiry. The public supplies the voice that should guide the process, with good government as the ultimate goal.
