Alleged Conflict of Interest - Yonkers Board of Education - Assignment Example

Alleged Conflict of Interest - Yonkers Board of Education 1. Statement of the Relevant Facts The case is about an alleged conflict of interest that appeared on July13, 1998. It is suspected that the president of the Yonkers Board of Education, Mr. Ellis Cousens, had personal dealings with the executive search firm of Heidrick and Struggles, therefore, prohibiting conflict of interest. Heidrick and Struggles search firm herein stated by the initials ‘H & S,' is one of the popular firms having 47 offices all over the world. It has conducted managerial search for clients from both the public and private sectors. The Inspector General was asked to render an ethics opinion regarding the allegations. The Inspector General has jurisdictions and, therefore, empowered to make factual findings of questions regarding conflicts of interest within the municipal government of Yonkers city which includes Yonkers Board of Education. The board had retained the firm to carry out a search for a new superintendent of Public schools in the city of Yonkers. Mr. Cousens is said not to have any prior involvement the H & S. The Board of Education authorized execution of a contract with H & S. On advice of the Board’s legal counsel Mr. Cousens who was the vice president of the Board signed a contract on 25th February, 1998. Thereafter the whole information leaked to Cablevision Channel 12 that broadcasted a story that questioned Mr. Cousen’s personal dealings with H & S. This brought about mistrust among the parties involved. 2. Ethics Perspective The societal values that were violated by the parties were honesty and integrity, among others. Although all the trustees denied leaking the fax cover letter, it is clear that one of them was responsible for the leakage. This brought about mistrust. The officials and employees including members of school boards were supposed to disclose their direct or indirect interests in the legislation. Although it is not evident that the actions that Mr. Cousens undertook on behalf of the Board were meant to influence him for his official actions. General ethic laws discourage gifts to official or employees that could influence performance of their official duties (Public Officers Law Section 73[5]-gift to state employees). The stated obligations were not evident in this case and, therefore, there were no violations of state or ethics laws. It is clear; Mr. Cousens did not receive any material benefit from the said firm. That clearly indicates the fact that an official has connections or dealings with a company does not create a conflict of interest as in the case of Mr. Cousens and H & S. This conflict on raises concern in the government’s integrity. 3. Accountability The bureaucrats of Yonkers Board of Education were answerable since there was no policy manual to give clear guidance on what may be termed as a prohibited gift under the policy of Public Officers Law Section 73[5] about gift to state employers. Its ethical provision did not comply with the General Municipal Law Section 806. The Board should go through and give a clear definition of a gift because it was noted that Mr. Cousens never received any gift from H & S. He did not get any material benefit or monetary from the contract. The trustees were also accountable for the misinformation about Mr. Cousens’ dealings with H & S. The minority of the trustees, Mr. Beane and Mr. Lannacone stated that they were not informed about Mr. Cousens involvement with the search firm. However, it was noted that Mr. Lannacone recalled conversing with Mr. Cousens about the possibility of him being considered for a position in the University of Michigan. This brushed off the claim of not being informed. The Board members are held accountable for the leaked information since one of the must have leaked to the Cablevision channel 12 which in turn aired it to the public. This made the public raise concern about the government integrity. 4. Prevention It is possible that the lack of clear definition of the ethics laws by the Yonkers Board of Education resulted to misunderstandings and stated violations. In order to prevent this violation from happening in the future, the Board should harmonize their laws to be in line with the General Municipal Law 806. This will help control allegations of unlawful interest and protect innocent public officers like Mr. Consens. The board should adopt a policy of putting any important disclosure down in writing. Lack of written minutes made some trustees say that they were not aware of important issues regarding the board. The board should set goals of closely monitoring the events of their day to day activities, it is crucial for them to have a diary to indicate, manage and supervise and check whether whatever managerial activities are implemented. It appeared that was no proof provided in support to whether Ms.Tsu, the President of the Board, refused to sign a contract as authorized by the board. The Board should conduct legal seminars for its employees in aid of better understanding of the set laws. All these recommendations provide a sufficient alert and prevention similar violation in the future. 5. Incentives and justifications Failure to have the clear policy that would guide state employees as seen made accepting gifts and other benefits from the public or private sector possible. However, the said employee never benefitted from the signed contract. The leakage of information was of magnitude advantageous to the public for the reason that it acted as an eye opener to the loop holes that surrounded the management. The trustees had no right to question Mr. Consens involvement with H & S since the law was not clear on whom to be involved. It was not the duty of a state employee to remind the minority of trustees of his involvement with any search firm, instead the board was to keep records. This case has acted as an eye opener; nothing would have been achieved were it not for the alleged offence committed by an employee. 6. Economics, Consequences and Outcomes All the parties involved were subjected to constrain as the aftermath results of this allegation of conflict of interest. Each party was to spend much time being interrogated. It was revealed that the President of Board of Education did not prohibit conflict of interest in Board’s contract with H & S. They were also supposed to work together to harmonize the laws and implement any changes to make them comply with the General Municipal Laws Section 806. The Board was to clearly define gift under section 3-8.1 of its policy. The approximate cost of investigation and executive mediation was 3,000,000 including administrative fees. The benefit and the cost can be reconciled if all the trustees come to terms with these findings. Reference Zisman, P. (1998, July 13). DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTOR GENERAL CITY O YONKERS. http://www.cityofyonkers.com. Retrieved April 25, 2014, from http://www.cityofyonkers.com/home/showdocument?id=74. Read More