ETHICS COMMISSION HAS HAD LITTLE TO DO

In the year-and-a-half since it formed, the Cape Girardeau Ethics Commission hasn't had much to do.

To be precise, it hasn't had anything to do.

Since the City Council appointed the seven-member panel in June 1997, the commission has met only a couple of times to establish by-laws and elect officers.

As no ethical complaints have been filed in that time, it has conducted no investigations.

"If no one brings any complaint before us, we are not required to meet," said commission member Bo Shantz. "Other than to say 'hi' to each other, what would we have to do?"

City Attorney Eric Cunningham said the fact that the Ethics Commission hasn't done any work is a positive statement for the city.

"If (the ethics commission) were meeting all the time, what do you think that would tell you about the city's government?," Cunningham said. "I think that is not the sort of organization you want to meet all the time."

The Ethics Commission was created under an amendment to the City Charter approved by voters in April 1996.

Of the 12 proposed charter amendments on the ballot, the Ethics Commission measure was the most controversial.

Opponents of the amendment felt it was unneeded since the Missouri Ethics Commission could investigate complaints against city officials.

Dr. Keith Russell served on the Charter Revision Committee, which developed the amendments.

He feels the lack of commission activity shows that concerns it would be a politically motivated body used to target officeholders and city staff were unfounded.

"A lot of people felt it would become a partisan witch hunt," Russell said. "In fact, it has been any but that."

The lack of action, he added, does not denote lack of need.

"It's analogous to a good life insurance policy. You hope you don't have to have it, but it's comforting to know it's there is the need arises."

Commission Chairman Dennis Dobson agreed and said it is better to try to handle problems locally than to involve the state.

"If the citizens of Cape Girardeau decide there is a problem they have and avenue to be heard," Dobson said. "There is nothing worse than if you have a problem ad there is no one to go to."

The commission is empowered, at its own discretion, to act on any valid complaint made concerning the official conduct of the mayor, city council, city manager, chief purchasing officer, city judge and advisory board members.

Any person may file a complaint, which must be written and signed under oath, with the city clerk. The complaint must specifically state the facts of the alleged violation, wrongdoing or conflict of interest.

The commission may refuse to investigate conduct that is the subject of civil or criminal litigation.

In conducting an investigation, the commission has access to all relevant city records and may call witnesses to testify under oath.

Commission proceedings remain confidential until it issues a report on a specific investigation to the City Council.

Within 30 days of receiving a report, the council must take action on the commission's recommendation.

"The council can follow the recommendations, deny them or make amendments, but it has to act," Cunningham said.

While he doesn't believe there are any major ethical problems in city government, Shantz isn't sure citizens are aware of the complaint process, and that there might be more complaints if they did.

"I doubt the man on the street knows we exist," he said.

Dobson feels any substantiated wrongdoing would have been addressed.

"Were there something that had validity, I'm sure it would've been brought up," he said.