Broward County staff could have same code ethics as commissioners
Broward County employees could be expected to abide by the exact same ethics code as the county commissioners
—pending the results of the ethics commission. Since Nov. 2008, after voters approved the ethics commission to create a code of ethics for Broward commissioners, a group of Broward residents have met to discuss the contents of the proposed code. The ethics commission, appointed by county commissioners, has until March 2010 to present a code for the county commission to vote on. On Tuesday, asked the county commission to take a philosophical stance on whether or not they felt the same ethics code could apply to county employees.
“I am reluctant to vote for something that I haven’t seen in writing,” said Commissioner Stacy Ritter, who eventually voted for preparing a resolution but expressed concerns that unintended consequences could prevent staff, particularly procurement, from completing their work. “I’ve read their minutes and I vehemently object to some of the things they want to do. I’d be very careful about passing a resolution about a body of which we know not.”
Commissioner Lois Wexler supported the concept philosophically while Commssioner Albert Jones, who was appointed to the commission by Gov. Charlie Crist after former commissioner Josephus Eggelletion was arrested on corruption charges, said he felt the focus of the code was for elected officials, though he eventually supported preparing a resolution.
“I applaud the efforts to try and shape this where it should be going…but we have to do first things first,” said Jones. “The basis for me sitting here is not staff –me sitting here is dealing with elected officials and the (voters) do not feel very good about us, so it seems to me we got the wrong handle of the bat and we need something for elected officials. I feel we are the target.”
Commissioner Kristen Jacobs, who felt members of advisory boards should be held to the same code, cautioned against jumping into a position without seeing the code in writing, saying the ethics commission was mired in discussing unintended consequences and used the ethics code in Deerfield Beach as an example.
“The concern in Deerfield was a tremendous amount of unintended consequences. In Deerfield, two commissioners were taken out and the result was a kneejerk reaction to pass ethics changes,” said Jacobs, who agreed employees should be held to an ethics code, but wanted to see the code before a final decision. “The unintended consequence is that it trips up good people and people in the city have an even more sour view because they think more rules have been broken.”
While several commissioners had concerns approving this without seeing the code, the commission unanimously voted to prepare a resolution for the Jan. 12 meeting that said the commission philosophically agreed with the concept of employees following the same ethics code, but that the commission reserves the right for the final decision once they have a code in writing.
Commissioner John Rodstrom said he agreed in theory, though he added an example of a county that passed an ethics code and four of the seven commissioner went to prison regardless of the code in place.
“This is an olive branch of sorts—telegraphs to us where the majority of the commission is going,” said Mayor Ken Keechl. “Generally speaking, they are asking us if it is the will of the board that is what is good for us, is good for our staff— but quite honestly it might be a good thing.”
The commission, after a lengthy hour-long discussion, unanimously approved to prepare a resolution that says the commission philosophically agrees with the concept of applying the ethics code to county employees, but reserves the right to review the code once presented before deciding to apply the code to staff. The commission will discuss the resolution again on Jan. 12. Once the ethics commission presents a code in March, the commission has 180 days to approve the code, or it will go on the November 2010 ballot for the voters to approve.
Related posts:
- Broward officials seeking judgment on constitutionality of ethics code
- County Residents Encouraged to Participate in Ethics Commission Meeting Sept. 9
- Broward commission to consider inspector general position
- Citizens closest to school board speak to Broward schools ethics panel
- Broward commissioners look to increase security at government buildings
Short URL: http://browardnetonline.com/?p=5686








The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code was NOT repealed, in fact it is in effect. There is an Ethics Committee reviewing it to see if any changes should be made, so far they have not made any except to suggest perhaps a small amount instead of zero for gifts. Read the following and let me know which one you disagree with. I don’t think you will find any.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that:
Commissioners May not use their office for personal financial benefit.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that:
Commissioners May not use their office to influence compensation or benefits such as pension.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Shall not have any interest or business which is in conflict with duties.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Shall not solicit or accept anything of value from anyone coming before or doing business with the city.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Shall not use their position to gain privileges, advantages or exemptions not generally available to the public.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Shall not sexually harass, date, have sexual relations, or a romantic relationship with an employee of the city.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: They or a partner shall not represent any other person or entity before the city, except without compensation or for themselves.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners When appearing before any public body, must disclose if as a private citizen or an officer of the city.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Shall not promise an appointment as a reward for political support etc.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners For 2 years after serving shall not represent others before the city except as a volunteer.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Commissioners Must file a form if there is a conflict of interest, even if not voting.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Applicants seeking a City contract or currently doing business with the city include a listing of all campaign contributions to sitting City Commissioners.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: All regulated offices (City manager and Commissioners) shall file an Annual General Disclosure.
The Deerfield Beach Ethics Code states that: Before any item or action is considered by the
Commission at a meeting, the City Clerk shall announce the disclosures made on that particular item by the Regulated Officer and Applicant.
I stand corrected after going back to a review of the minutes from the Sept. 1 meeting. The actual motion made and passed was for an ad hoc committee to review the code for any potential issues. That said, I don’t disagree with an ethics code – but was reporting on our elected officials’ discussion of the topic!