ATLANTA — There’s fallout in Atlanta City Hall over a proposal to amend the ethics board selection process that would allow mayoral input on board member selection
and wipe the slate clean, ridding the ethics office of the current board.
While the city’s legal department says the board misinterpreted the proposal language and the change is necessary to ensure the board is constitutional, members of the board of ethics believes the board will be stripped of its current independence and members will be taken off the volunteer board.
And one councilwoman believes the proposal could be retaliation for an issue on the current board’s plate—deciding the legality of Invest Atlanta’s request for premium tickets at Mercedes-Benz Stadium to attract city business.
THE PROPOSAL
Channel 2 Action News obtained a copy of the proposal that was introduced by councilwoman Cleta Winslow, and signed by 14 city council members on Monday night.
The signees include three candidates currently running for mayor: Keisha Lance-Bottoms, Kwanza Hall and Mary Norwood.
According to section 2-804 of the amendment, “The members of the board of ethics shall be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council upon recommendations by the named organizations.”
Those organizations are the seven groups independent of city government—including businesses, universities and law associations. Since the early 2000s, they’ve made direct appointments to the ethics board with the council’s confirmation following a background check. The appointees are on staggered three-year terms.
TRENDING STORIES:
- Police searching for burglar who shot and killed a man's dog
- Teen fights off attempted kidnapper who followed her home, police say
- Hurricane Harvey could bring 'catastrophic' flooding to Texas
The proposal attributes a DeKalb County Superior Court decision made in April requiring that an elected official be in on the selection process.
Section 2 of the amendment states, “That the terms of all currently serving members of the City of Atlanta Board of Ethics will on the date of the approval of this legislation.” It goes on to say the groups may immediately submit recommendations for new appointees.
The ethics board wasn’t notified of the proposal introduction.
“I was surprised. Yes,” said ethics board chair Kate Wasch. “And Ms. (Jabu) Sengova, our ethics officer, was also surprised.”
Wasch said there had been recent discussion over how to ensure and maintain a fair selection process.
“In light of some of the cases that are pending in DeKalb County, we do think that we need to make a change in the way that people are nominated and confirmed by the board of ethics,” said Wasch. “This specific change, however, is a little overboard, perhaps.”
On Tuesday, the board of ethics sent a letter to City Council President Ceasar Mitchell, requesting an independent committee review.
Mitchell told Channel 2’s Nicole Carr he doesn’t need a committee to see the proposal is deeply flawed.
“It’s bad legislation. It’s bad policy and it’s moving us in the wrong direction,” Mitchell said.”This legislation not only attacks but it destroys the independence of the ethics board.”
The city’s legal department argues the decision is about putting out a fire before there are flames.
“We’re not touching their independence whatsoever,” said City Attorney Jeremy Berry.
“All we’re doing is, in fact, making them more constitutional. I think they should appreciate what we’re doing here.“
“We’re making them more constitutional, “ Berry said. “We’re not touching what they do on a day-to-day basis. In fact, I think they should be thanking us rather than chastising us.”
Berry said the same seven groups play the major board in the selection process, while the mayor and council would essentially “bless” the nominees. He said it would ensure the board’s disciplinary and policy decisions hold legal weight.
Mitchell told Carr policy shouldn’t be based on a lower court’s decision, pointing to the DeKalb case used to defend the proposal. He said the case is in the appeals stage. A higher court could overturn the elected official requirement for appointing the independent board.
“I encourage council members to take another look at the legislation that many signed onto,” said Mitchell.
RETALIATION MOVE
At least one city councilwoman believes the sudden proposal is tied to city interest that the board is currently investigating.
“I’m finding that there happened to be, somewhere along the line with these Falcons tickets, a veiled threat,” said Felicia Moore. “That if they didn’t make a decision, they would suffer the fate of the DeKalb County Ethics Board.”
Moore, who is running for council president, is referencing a request made by Invest Atlanta earlier this summer. The city's economic development arm wants premium seating at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in order to attract city contracts, a move previously condemned by the ethics board.
The board has tabled its decision until later this month, in a meeting that’s scheduled after council will take up the ethics board selection legislation.
Moore, who signed onto the proposal Monday, says she didn’t realize the implications of what she quickly signed at the end of the night.
As a council chair, she received the same letter of concern from the ethics board that was sent to Mitchell on Tuesday.
Moore says when she dug deeper into the issue, and spoke with those familiar with the sudden proposal, she found reason for more concern.
“Now I’m seeing the motivation for this legislation may be a retaliation motive,” said Moore.
“When you know better, you do better, and I will not be supporting it in its current form until the ethics board has an opportunity to weigh in on it,“ she said.
Moore said she will immediately have her named removed from the proposal.
MAYORAL CANDIDATE RESPONSE
Carr contacted the mayoral candidates who signed off on the proposal.
Through a spokeswoman, Kwanza Hall did not have time to respond to inquiry Tuesday. Keisha Lance-Bottoms did not return a phone message. Mary Norwood sent the following statement:
“I signed this legislation at the Council meeting to send it to the Committee on Council (CoC) Committee next week where it will be reviewed on the merits of this proposed change.
"As always, I want what is in the best interest of transparent policies and procedures. If not, then I will not support it. My highest priority is to instill as much objectivity and openness into City government as possible. Citizen participation on the Ethics Board needs to continue to be independent from the Mayor’s office, or any other city administrator or department. This is necessary for Atlanta’s Board of Ethics to maintain its credibility and unbiased oversight, ensuring citizens’ confidence that our City government is truly ethical and transparent.”
Cleta Winslow, who introduced the legislation, referred Carr to the city legal department for more on the timing of and reasoning for the proposal. Winslow told Carr she had nothing to say about Moore’s allegations, nor her decision to remove herself from the proposal support.
“I think it’s a beautiful thing,” Winslow said.
INVEST ATLANTA RESPONSE
In a statement to Channel 2, Invest Atlanta’s spokesman said the group had no idea about the proposed legislation.
“However, we support the mission and objectives of upholding the highest standards of ethics and integrity,” the statement read. “Legislation of this nature is outside our scope of activity as the City's economic development agency. We will follow any legislative decisions about this made by the City.”
The Council will take up the proposal during a meeting on Sept. 5.
Cox Media Group
