The Nevada legislative immunity appellate briefs have been filed, and
they are worth reading for those interested in the intersection between government ethics enforcement and legislative
immunity, an intersection where, in the last year, there have been a few collisions harmful to the cause of government ethics. Although this case involves a state legislator, it is in some ways applicable to local government legislators.<br>
<br>

An important issue in local government ethics is how far jurisdiction
should go. Recently, I did <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/696&quot; target="”_blank”">a
blog entry</a> on jurisdiction over those doing government-approved
work. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/nyregion/11stadium.html&quot; target="”_blank”">An

One of the biggest problems people have with government ethics is
acknowledging the difference between ethics enforcement and ethics
practice. Ethics enforcement is legal. You cannot enforce rules that
are not in the law. But when it comes to ethics practice, the law
represents only the minimum requirement. The law is what you <span>have</span> to do, but an official can be
more ethical, more open, more responsible than what is required.
Officials have fiduciary duties that go far beyond the provisions of ethics codes.<br>

The saying goes that nice guys finish last. People who act ethically,
especially in politics, are rarely remembered.<br>
<br>
But there are, occasionally, exceptions. One of them, former Argentine
president Raúl Alfonsín, died last week, and he is being
memorialized all over the world for his decency.<br>
<br>

Individuals and companies doing the work of government or work approved by government, even when
they do not have a direct financial relationship with government, should be within the jurisdiction of a
government's ethics code. This controversial position is strengthened
by what happened to many Tennessee local governments, according to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/us/08bond.html&quot; target="”_blank”">a front-page

According to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/us/politics/07stevens.html&quot; target="”_blank”">an
article in today's New York </a><span><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/us/politics/07stevens.html&quot; target="”_blank”">Times</a>,</span>

<b>Updates below</b><br>
According to <a href="http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_ethics06.3a1…; target="”_blank”">an

State or local ethics laws, state or local ethics training, state or local disclosure forms, state or local ethics enforcement? This is
probably the biggest issue in local government ethics. And it's a very
complicated one, which I have only rarely dealt with. There are
good (and bad) arguments on both sides, as well as practical, political,
constitutional, and funding considerations to take into account.<br>
<br>
I raise this matter not to deal with all its aspects, but due to

The <a href="http://www.cogel.org/">Council on Governmental
Ethics Laws </a>has great instincts for meeting where the ethics problems are greatest. Last
year it met in Chicago. This year it will be Maricopa County, AZ (the
Phoenix area).<br>
<br>
<b>See update below</b><br>

According to <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/mayor_ray_nagins_ownership_o…; target="”_blank”">an
article yesterday in the New Orleans <span>Times-Picayune</span></a>,
there's a battle going on in New Orleans, but this time it involves a
flood of public documents, as well as a trickle of financial disclosure
forms. The battle is between the mayor and the city council, on one side, and a civil rights