Ethics 60-70

Public servants are only expected to uphold the law and be ethical.

The appearance standard in public service is clearly defined.

Public service must avoid looking right, smelling right, and feeling right.

The people have a right to public officials who are partial and do not use independent judgment.

A public employee can intentionally use the prestige of office for private gain.

Performing constituent services for additional compensation is allowed under the ethics code.

The federal Hatch acts aim to protect the public interest by allowing partisan political activities by federal employees.

State and local jurisdictions did not follow the example set by the Hatch acts in forbidding partisan political activities.

The impartiality standard allows bias in action or decision making based on political party affiliation or preference.

Senior managers widely recognize the challenge of maintaining impartiality in public service.

The City's Conflicts of Interest Law allows public servants to use their City positions for personal gain.

Public servants are allowed to accept valuable gifts from individuals doing business with any City agency.

The appearance of impropriety is not an important standard in evaluating public officials.

Appearance standards only apply to public administrators, not legislators and judges.

The English Common Law Standard of the Common Man Rule is also known as the Prudent Person Rule.

The Prudent Person Rule requires individuals to possess exceptional investment skills.

Recent appearance of impropriety concerns have been limited to public-sector companies only.

Appearance standards are derived from the Modern Person Rule.

Conflicts of interest, loss of impartiality, and impropriety are always distinct concepts.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police's Oath of Honor emphasizes the importance of purity and holiness in public service.

According to Andrew Stark, appearance of impropriety can only take a factual caste.

The ICMA's ethics code obligates members to maintain honor and integrity only in public relationships, not in personal ones.

In civil matters, standards of legal fairness are excessive because they assume protections inherent in criminal prosecutions.

The Washington State Supreme Court standard applies only to elected officials, not appointees and employees.

According to the compelling interest justification, the right of privacy is considered more fundamental than the right of the electorate to know.

The vast majority of appearance issues lead to criminal prosecutions.

People feel there should have been a law against an action when it looks like the official did something wrong.

When the people's right to be informed does not involve personal matters unrelated to fitness for office, candidates may argue that their privacy supersedes public interest.

Judgments about appearance issues are never prejudiced according to the passage.

The Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the disclosure of a teacher's sick leave records, setting a precedent for privacy rights over public interest.