This is the place to discuss the establishment and the role of an Ethics Commission. The most important issue here is an Ethics Commission's independence: how important it is and how best a municipality can achieve it. With respect to EC independence and competence, please share your thoughts or experiences regarding regional and state Ethics Commissions vs. municipal ECs.

This is the place to discuss the Ethics Commission's jurisdiction, powers, and duties. The most controversial matter here is over whom an Ethics Commission should have jurisdiction: elected officials, unionized employees, consultants, candidates, people and entities that do business with the city or apply for something from the city, former officials and employees (and if so, for how long?)?

Often referred to as "Financial Disclosure," a term that makes it seem more invasive than it actually is, annual disclosure is an important, but controversial way to get officials and employees to consider their potential conflicts of interest on an annual basis, and to let the public know about such potential conflicts.

Applicant disclosure is the form of disclosure that least often appears in municipal ethics codes, not because it is controversial, but because it is not even discussed (although forms of it might appear in other laws and regulations).

Please share your experiences with applicant disclosure that appears in or outside of ethics codes, and your thoughts about its importance, and form, in ethics codes.

Like penalties, the topic of advisory opinions appears in both the ethics provision and administration sections of the Model Code.

Advisory opinions are the most important of an Ethics Commission's responsibilities, and often the most underutilized. Regular use of this option, and the creation of a body of opinions, can go far to providing concrete guidance to municipal officials and employees. It can also prevent many violations of the ethics code.

This is the place to share opinions about and experiences with waivers and exclusions (or "exemptions"). Waivers can be a controversial topic, so arguments for and against, and especially good and bad experiences with waivers will be helpful to communities considering them. Another important topic is the standards that are set for obtaining waivers.

<h2>102. Exclusions from the Code of Ethics and from Transactional Disclosure.</h2>

The provisions of 100 and 101 of this code do not require recusal or transactional disclosure as a result of:

This is the place to provide opinions and recommendations regarding ethics education. Please suggest alternative language to what is below, and please share your experiences with ethics education, and how such experiences can be included in an ethics code, as well as other means to ensure that effective ethics training is provided. Other issues to discuss include who should receive ethics education, who should provide or be reponsible for the provision of ethics education, and how this education should be funded.

This is the place to discuss the usefulness of annual reports, as well as whether an Ethics Commission should periodically review the code and its rules, regulations, and administrative procedures. Please share your experiences with annual reports and reviews.

This is the place to raise and discuss issues involving the filing of a complaint regarding an alleged violation of the Code, and the ensuing investigation.

This is the place to comment on and discuss the hearing process for proceedings before the Ethics Commission. The assumption here is that such proceedings are public after a finding of probable cause. The discussion of whether or not they should be public is elsewhere.