Council members regularly missing mandated ethics training

Philadelphia law requires City Council members to receive ethics training annually, but a review of five years of records shows far from perfect attendance.

That is in part because the Ethics Board has neglected its responsibilities, skipping the refreshers in 2015 and holding just one session in 2013, attended by a single, newly hired staff member. But Council members have also failed to attend in years when the training was offered.

For example, the ethics board held four training sessions in 2016, but only the five newly elected Council members attended, according to sign-in sheets.

Neither Council nor the board seems to be keeping tally.

"We haven't felt it's necessary to go back and pick out individuals who may not have attended in a given year," said Shane Creamer, the board's executive director.

The annual classes have been a requirement for all elected officials, city cabinet members, department heads, and board and commission members since the Ethics Board was created in 2006. The sessions, which Creamer said typically last an hour or two depending on the number of questions, cover the materials found in the city's ethics law, including policies on conflicts of interest, gifts, financial disclosure, and disclosure of confidential information.

One Council member was unaware of the annual training requirement.

Councilman Kenyatta Johnson last week introduced a bill that would require Council members to receive ethics training every four years. His staff — after being told that would make the law less stringent, not more — within a few hours said the bill would be amended.

It would now double down on the annual requirement for Council members but also extend the requirement to Council staff, who often attend training but are not currently mandated to go every year.

When he introduced the legislation, Johnson said he did not recall attending ethics training since an initial session when  he joined Council in 2012.

"I only remember taking ethics training when I first came here," Johnson said. "And so I want to make sure we do it mandatory. Every time we get reelected, we should take a class."

Records show Johnson did not actually attend training when he was first elected. His name first shows up on the sign-in sheets on Oct. 23, 2014, one of four sessions held that year.

Of the 12 Council members who have been in their posts at least five years, none has attended more than twice, records show. Eight, including President Darrell L. Clarke, attended only in 2012 and 2014, according to the sign-in sheets.

Records show that Councilwoman Jannie L. Blackwell has not been since 2012 and that  Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sánchez has not gone in the last five years.

The five new Council members, who took office in 2016, started off on the right foot. All signed into training on March 17, 2016.

Clarke, through his spokeswoman, Jane Roh, declined to comment on the spotty attendance. Roh said Council does not track attendance of its members, noting that the Ethics Board is the "enforcing body." Several Council members also did not return Wednesday-morning requests for comment about their attendance, including Blackwell and Quiñones-Sánchez.

Councilman Brian O'Neill, who in his 37th year on Council is the body's longest-serving member, said he thinks attending every two years is probably sufficient. He went to training sessions in 2012 and 2014, and said he doesn't recall being notified of any training in 2016. Given that the sessions are "not cumbersome," he said, he wouldn't mind going more often.

"A lot of it is reminder, or somebody comes up with a question you didn't think of," he said. "And sometimes you think intuitively the rule is this, but actually the rule is something else. So it's helpful. I've picked up something each time I've gone."

Councilwoman Cindy Bass, who records show attended training in 2012 and 2014, said she also would be fine going more often.

"I certainly recognize that training should be a part of this job," she said. "And the more information and up-to-date information we can receive, I welcome it."

Councilman William K. Greenlee, who attended sessions in 2012 and 2014, said he has gone whenever the Ethics Board told him he had to.

"I think the Ethics Board should let us know when it's time to go, and I think we'll go," he said. "I don't think anybody is trying to avoid it."

Creamer said the board prefers to "promote cooperation" rather than "punish people for not attending," and does not track Council attendance or knock Council members for missing years. The city's ethics code considers nonannual attendance to be a violation of law but does not mandate a specific penalty.

"We make them aware of the opportunity to attend the training, and it's up to them to choose which training to attend," he said. "We don't clock people in and out."

Punishment, of course, would also seem unfair, given that the board hasn't always held up its part of the deal.

Creamer said resources have been an issue. His 11-member staff has just one person dedicated to do training for hundreds of city officials and employees. He said the sessions are "scheduled organically," at times initiated by Council and at others by the Ethics Board.

David Thornburgh, president of the government watchdog group Committee of Seventy, said the approach was "more haphazard than it ought to be."

"I'm not sure if this was a resource problem. Lord knows they have plenty to keep them busy," he said of the Ethics Board. "But the idea that you need to pass a law to remind people there's already a law on the books that covers the same territory suggests that this isn't sort of as top of mind as it ought to be."

He added that Council members who skip sessions when they are offered are  potentially only hurting themselves.

"You should then know you're leaving yourself vulnerable," he said. "That's the sanction. You do something you should have known was illegal but you didn't know because you didn't participate."