Chapter 2. Administration

The following oath shall be taken by the elected officers of the city before they enter upon the respective duties of their offices, unless an oath for such officers is otherwise prescribed by law:

OATH OF OFFICE

I, ___________, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the duties of the office of ___________ of the City of Bellaire, Texas, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State and the Charter and ordinances of this City; and I furthermore solemnly swear that I have not directly nor indirectly paid, offered or promised to pay, contributed nor promised to contribute any money or valuable thing, or promised any public office or employment as a reward for the giving or withholding a vote at the election at which I was elected. So help me God. Subscribed and sworn to before me this ___ day of ________, A.D. 20___.

(Ord. No. 333, § I, 6-10-1942)

The following oath shall be taken by the appointed officers of the city before they enter upon the respective duties of their offices, unless an oath for such officers is otherwise prescribed by law:

OATH OF OFFICE

I, ___________, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the duties of the office of ___________ of the City of Bellaire, Texas, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State and the Charter and ordinances of this City; and I furthermore solemnly swear that I have not directly nor indirectly paid, offered, or promised to pay, contributed nor promised to contribute any money, or valuable thing, or promised any public office or employment as a reward for receiving the appointment to the office to which I was appointed. So help me God. Subscribed and sworn to before me this ___ day of ________ A.D. 20___.

(Ord. No. 333, § II, 6-10-1942)

No officer or employee of the city shall have authority to waive any of the provisions of section 4 of article I of the Charter of the city as to notice of claims for personal injury and property loss or damage against the city, but same may be waived only by a resolution of the city council made and passed before the expiration of the times therein mentioned, and evidenced by the minutes of said city council.

(Ord. No. 1915, § 1, 4-16-1973)

(a) Departments; duties; heads. Every employee is assigned to a department. The departments of the city are:

(1) City manager's office. The city manager's office is responsible for the effective and efficient administration of all city departments, city council support, records management, city budget, technology integration, public communications and human resource management. The department consists of the city manager, assistant city manager, director of human resources, director of information technology (IT), city clerk and such staff designated by the city manager and not designated to other departments. The department head is the city manager.

(2) Police. The police department is responsible for emergency communications, traffic enforcement, crime prevention, criminal apprehension and investigation, law enforcement records/computer operations, limited code enforcement, animal control, warrant management, community information and education services, and municipal jail operations. The department head is the chief of police.

(3) Fire. The fire department is responsible for fire prevention through education, fire code enforcement, fire investigation, training and record analysis, emergency management, emergency medical services, and fire suppression. The department head is the fire chief.

(4) Development services. The development services department is responsible for coordinating city planning, implementation of the subdivision and zoning ordinances, code compliance and enforcement, zoning administration, and development services (registration, plan review, permitting and inspection). The department head is the director of development services.

(5) Public works. The public works department is responsible for maintaining and improving the city's civil infrastructure (street paving, drainage, traffic control devices, vehicle and equipment fleets, water and wastewater infrastructure), city engineering, solid waste collection and disposal, water and wastewater services, and surface water management. The department head is the director of public works.

(6) Finance. The finance department is responsible for accounting, utility billing, purchasing, municipal court administration, payroll, revenue and expenditure activities and the city's cash, investment and debt management. The department head is the chief financial officer.

(7) Parks, recreation and facilities. The parks, recreation and facilities department is responsible for enhancing and maintaining parks, green spaces, providing recreation programs for the city's residents, administering senior services programs, managing city-sponsored special events, providing sports leagues, camps and aquatics programs, and maintaining the city's public swimming pools, for management and maintenance of all city facilities, and parks related capital improvement projects. The department head is the director of parks, recreation and facilities.

(8) Library. The library department is responsible for operations of the city library which include materials circulation management, cataloging, adult and children's programming, reference materials management and information services, integration of public computer information systems, inter-library loan operations and city archives. The department head is the library director.

(9) Legal. The legal department is the legal advisor of the council and of all offices and departments, and of all officers and employees in matters relating to their official powers and duties. Additionally, the legal department shall perform such other duties as may be specified by the council. The department head shall be the city attorney, who shall be retained by the city council.

(b) Additional duties, assistance. The city manager may assign the assistant city manager and/or department heads the additional duties to manage and/or assist any department and may require departments to assist each other.

(Ord. No. 13-024, § 1(App. A), 4-15-2013; Ord. No. 14-066, § 1, 12-1-2014; Ord. No. 15-074, 12-7-2015)

The director of finance, with the concurrence of the city manager, shall provide from time to time the procedure for purchasing of services and personal property used by the city. The policies and procedures established shall be in accord with the requirements of law relating to purchasing and, further, shall be in accordance with the requirements of the laws of the state relating to payment to vendors of services, supplies, materials or equipment.

(Ord. No. 93-080, 12-20-1993)

Nothing contained in this Code or in the ordinance adopting this Code shall be construed in any way as repealing Ordinance Number 2157, enacted on September, 25, 1975, providing for authorizing the merger of the city employees' pension plan with the Texas Municipal Retirement System, and such ordinance is hereby specifically saved from repeal. In addition, Ordinance Number 2087, enacted on February, 17, 1975, providing for the execution of the International City Management Association Retirement Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan agreement, as an alternative deferred compensation plan, is hereby specifically saved from repeal.

The following newspapers are designated as official newspapers of the City of Bellaire: The Houston Chronicle, The Daily Court Review and Southwest News.

The city clerk shall be authorized from time to time to designate a newspaper for appropriate legal advertisement.

(Ord. No. 90-034, § 1, 6-4-1990)

(a) Personal property initially purchased by the city. Personal property of the city may be sold at public auction conducted by a licensed auctioneer or auction house as may from time to time be directed by the city manager or the city council. A sale at a public auction conducted by a licensed state auctioneer with such notice as shall be given by the auctioneer to any interested party shall be deemed in full compliance with the requirements of article VII, section 10 of the Charter of the city, entitled "Sale of City Property; Procedure," under the procedures therein provided.

(b) Property acquired by the city through abandonment, criminal seizure, criminal investigation or inquiry. Personal property of the city acquired through seizure, criminal investigation or inquiry may be disposed of as follows:

(1) If the property has a fair market value of $500.00 or more and the owner is unknown, the city manager shall cause to be published once in an official newspaper of the city a notice containing the description of the property held, the name of the owner, if known, the name and address of the officer in the city holding such property and a statement that if the owner does not claim such property within 90 days from the date of publication, such property will be sold and the proceeds of such sale after deducting reasonable expenses of keeping the property and the cost of sale, placed in the treasury of the city. The notices herein required shall be published once at least three weeks prior to the date of such proposed sale in an official newspaper of the city stating where the sale is to take place, the description of the property, the names of the owners, if known, and the date and place such sale will occur.

(2) If the property has a fair market value of less than $500.00 and the owner or address of the owner is unknown, the city manager of the city or the city council may authorize the sale or donation of the property. The proceeds of the sale shall be deposited in the treasury of the city after deducting reasonable expenses of keeping the property and the cost of sale.

(Ord. No. 91-102, § 2, 12-16-1991; Ord. No. 93-082, § 1, 12-20-1993)

(a) Policy statement. It is the policy of the city to invest public funds in a manner that will ensure the preservation of capital, meet the daily cash flow needs of the city, conform to all applicable state statutes and city ordinances governing the investment of public funds, and provide reasonable investment returns.

The Texas Public Funds Investment Act, V.T.C.A., Government Code Ch. 2256 as amended (the "Act") prescribes that each city shall adopt rules to govern its investment practices and to define the authority of the investment officers. This policy addresses the methods, procedures, and practices established to ensure effective and judicious fiscal management of the city's funds worthy of the public trust.

(b) Scope. This investment policy shall apply to all financial assets and funds under control of the city, other than those expressly excluded herein or by applicable law or valid agreement. The city commingles its funds into one pooled investment fund for efficiency and maximum investment opportunity, except for monies held in demand and time deposits as provided under Chapter 105 of the Local Government Code or as stipulated by applicable laws, bond covenants or contracts. The funds are defined in the city's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report ("ACFR") and include the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, Capital Project Funds, Enterprise Funds, and any new funds created by the city unless specifically exempted by the city council and this policy.

This policy shall not supersede the restrictions on investment and use applicable to any specific fund and, in the event of any conflict between this policy and the requirements of any fund subject hereto, the specific requirement applicable to such fund shall be followed as well as all other provisions of this policy other than those in conflict.

The overall investment program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of the public trust. The investment officers and city staff shall recognize that the investment activities of the city are a matter of public record.

(c) Objectives and strategy. The city strives to invest funds in a manner where the rate of return is secondary to safety and liquidity. To accomplish this, the city's principal investment objectives in order of priority are as follows: 1) suitability, 2) preservation and safety of principal, 3) liquidity, 4) marketability, 5) diversification, and 6) yield.

(1) Suitability. Each investment must be in conformance with all federal regulations, state statutes, and other legal requirements —including the city charter, city ordinances, and this investment policy.

(2) Preservation and safety of principal. Investments shall be handled in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal in the overall portfolio. All participants in the investment process shall act responsibly as custodians of the public trust.

(3) Liquidity. The city's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the city to meet operating requirements that might be reasonably anticipated. Liquidity shall be achieved by matching investment maturities with forecasted cash flow requirements and by investing in securities with active secondary markets.

(4) Marketability. The city's policy is to buy and hold investments until maturity; however, marketability is of great importance should the need arise to liquidate an investment before maturity.

(5) Diversification. Investments shall be diversified by type and maturity to eliminate the risk of loss resulting from the concentration of assets in a specific maturity, a specific issuer or a specific class of securities. Portfolio maturities should be laddered in a way that protects interest income from the volatility of market and avoids the concentration of assets in a specific maturity sector. The majority of the city's funds will be invested in maturities of 12 months or less targeted to the projected cash flow needs of the city. Investments with maturities in excess of 12 months can be made to match specific cash flow requirements (e.g., funds held for future capital projects may be invested to meet anticipated cash flow requirements). The stated maturity of any investment in the city's portfolio will not exceed 36 months and the weighted average maturity of the city's portfolio will not exceed 365 days.

(6) Yield. The city's investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the city's risk constraints and the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio. Given this strategy, the basis used to determine whether reasonable yields are being achieved shall be the average yield of the current three-month U.S. Treasury Bill or such other index that most closely matches the average maturity of the portfolio.

(d) Authorization. Authority to manage the investment program is derived from the Act, specifically; section 2256.005(f)—(h). Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to the chief financial officer including responsibility for all investment transactions and the related system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials. The chief financial officer and the assistant director of finance shall serve as the investment officers of the city and shall invest city funds in legally authorized and adequately secured investments in accordance with this policy and the Act. In the event the position of chief financial officer becomes vacant, the city manager shall serve as an investment officer during such vacancy. The city investment officers shall be bonded.

(e) Responsibility and control. Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under prevailing circumstances that a person of prudence, discretion, and intelligence would exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the safety of capital and the income to be derived.

In determining whether investment decisions were made exercising prudence, consideration shall be given to the following: the investment of all funds, or funds under the city's control, taken as a whole, rather than the prudence of a single investment; and whether the investment decision is consistent with the written investment policy of the city at that time.

The chief financial officer shall establish written procedures for the operation of the investment program consistent with this investment policy. Procedures shall address safekeeping, repurchase agreements, wire transfer agreements, collateral/depository agreements, banking services contracts, and explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this policy and the procedures established by the chief financial officer.

(f) Ethics and conflicts of interest. In addition to any other requirements of law, investment officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. An investment officer who has a personal business relationship with a business organization offering to engage in an investment transaction with the city or who is related within the second degree by affinity or consanguinity to an individual seeking to sell an investment to the city shall file a statement disclosing that relationship with the city and the Texas Ethics Commission. An investment officer has a personal business relationship with a business organization if the investment officer owns ten percent or more of the voting stock or shares of the business organization or owns $5,000.00 or more of the fair market value of the business organization, the investment officer receives funds from the business organization exceeding ten percent of the investment officer's gross income for the previous year, or the investment officer has acquired from the business organization during the previous year investments with a book value of $2,500.00 or more for the personal account of the investment officer.

(g) Investment training. The city shall provide periodic training in investments for the investment officers through courses and seminars offered by professional organizations and associations in order to ensure the quality and capability of the city's investment officers making investment decisions in compliance with the Act. The investment officers shall attend at least one training session relating to the investment officer's responsibilities under the Act within 12 months after taking office or assuming the duties of investment officer. Further, the investment officers shall attend an investment training session not less than once in a two-year period that begins on the first day of the city's fiscal year and consists of the two consecutive fiscal years after that date, and receive not less than eight hours of instruction relating to investment responsibilities under the Act from an independent source approved by the governing body of the city. Training must include education in investment controls, security risks, strategy risks, market risks, diversification of the investment portfolio, and compliance with the Act. The designated training may be offered or sponsored by any of the following organizations:

(1) Government Finance Officers Association,

(2) Government Finance Officers Association of Texas,

(3) Government Treasurers' Organization of Texas,

(4) Texas Municipal League,

(5) University of North Texas,

(6) Texas State University,

(7) University of Texas,

(8) Harris County Department of Education,

(9) Education Service Center,

(10) Virtual Learning Concepts,

(11) TexPool,

(12) Federated Investors,

(13) PFM Asset Management,

(14) First Public, or

(15) Public Trust Advisors.

(h) Authorized investments. Authorized investments include the following:

(1) Obligations of the United States or its agencies and instrumentalities;

(2) Direct obligations of the state or its agencies and instrumentalities;

(3) Other obligations, the principal of and interest on which are unconditionally guaranteed or insured by, or backed by the full faith and credit of, the state or the United States or their respective agencies and instrumentalities, including obligations that are fully guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or by the explicit full faith and credit of the United States;

(4) Certificates of deposit issued by a depository institution that has its main office or branch office in the state that are for the full amount of the principal and accrued interest that are guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or its successor or the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund or its successor, secured by an obligation issued directly by a federal agency or instrumentality, including any mortgage backed securities not disallowed by the Act, having a market value of not less than the principal and accrued interest of the certificates, or secured in any other manner and amount provided by the Act;

(5) Fully collateralized repurchase agreements with a defined termination date of 90 days or less, secured by a combination of cash and an authorized investment, pledged to the city, held in the city's name and deposited at the time the investment is made with the city or with a third party selected and approved by the city. A repurchase agreement is a simultaneous agreement to buy, hold for a specified time, and sell back at a future date at a market value at the time the funds are disbursed of not less than the principal amount of the funds disbursed. The repurchase agreement shall be placed through a primary government securities dealer, as defined by the Federal Reserve, or a financial institution doing business in the state only after a master repurchase agreement has been executed between the city and the securities dealer or the financial institution;

(6) An investment pool to the extent and manner provided by law if the city by rule, ordinance, order or resolution authorizes investment in the particular pool and if the investment pool has furnished to the chief financial officer an offering circular or similar disclosure document conforming to the requirements of the Act. To maintain eligibility, an investment pool must furnish to the city a confirmation of all investment transactions and a monthly report conforming to the requirements of the Act. Further, the investment pool must be continuously rated no lower than AAA or AAA-m or its equivalent by at least one nationally recognized rating service; and

(7) Such other investments as permitted by the Act and not specifically prohibited by this policy.

All investment transactions will be completed on a delivery versus payment ("DVP") basis. The investment officers are authorized to solicit bids for investments orally, in writing, electronically, or in any combination of these methods. No investment of city funds shall be authorized unless it conforms to this investment policy and the seller of the investment has executed a certification form in favor of the city as set forth in this policy.

When the city invests in an investment that requires a minimum rating, it must establish at the time of the investment procedures to monitor rating changes. If an investment's rating falls below the required minimum rating, it is no longer an authorized investment. The city shall take all prudent measures consistent with this policy to liquidate any investment that does not have the minimum rating.

The city shall verify prior to participation in an investment pool, that the pool's investment policy has established, satisfactory procedures for monitoring investment rating changes sufficient for the city to determine whether investments in the pool have the required minimum rating.

(i) Prohibited investments. The following are not authorized investments under this policy:

(1) Obligations for which the payment represents the coupon payments on the outstanding principal balance of the underlying mortgage-backed security collateral and which pays no principal;

(2) Obligations for which the payment represents the principal stream of cash flow from the underlying mortgage-backed security collateral and bears no interest;

(3) Collateralized mortgage obligations that have a stated final maturity greater than ten years; and

(4) Collateralized mortgage obligations the interest rate of which is determined by an index that adjusts opposite to changes in a market index.

Further, the city will not invest in derivatives including instruments with embedded features that alter their character or income stream or allow holders to hedge or speculate on a market or spreads between markets that are external to the issuer, or are not correlated on a one-to-one basis to the associated index or market. Prohibited derivatives include arrangements in which an investor has swapped the natural cash flows or some portion of the natural cash flows of an instrument for a different set of cash flows. (e.g., interest rate swaps), over-the-counter exchange traded options or futures (e.g., option contracts or future contracts), inverse floating rate notes, range index notes, non-money market index based notes, dual index notes, index amortizing notes, inverse multi-index bonds, inverse index bonds, and stepped inverse index bonds.

(j) Investment limits and diversification. The asset allocation in the portfolio should be flexible and responsive to the outlook for the economy and the securities markets. Risk shall be controlled through portfolio diversification achieved by:

(1) Limiting investments to avoid over concentration in securities from a specific issuer or business sector, U.S. Treasury securities being the only exception;

(2) Limiting investment in securities that have higher credit risks;

(3) Investing in securities with varying maturities; and

(4) Maintaining the liquidity necessary to meet ongoing obligations.

The following standards shall be applied: the city shall maintain at least ten percent of the total portfolio in investments maturing in 90-days or less; the city shall invest no more than 50 percent of the portfolio in federal agencies or instrumentalities or in certificates of deposit; and the city may invest any amount of funds in U.S. Treasury securities or in repurchase agreements backed by U.S. Treasury securities.

(k) Authorized broker/dealers. The chief financial officer shall maintain a list of security broker/dealers authorized by the investment policy. All broker/dealers shall maintain complete records of all transactions conducted on behalf of the city and shall make those records available for inspection at the city's request. At least annually, the investment officers shall review the list of broker/dealers authorized to engage in investment transactions with the city and shall make a recommendation as part of the annual review of the investment policy. As part of this process, the chief financial officer shall review the quality of service and financial stability of each broker/dealer. The chief financial officer may remove an authorized broker/dealer from the list, if in the opinion of the chief financial officer, the firm has not performed adequately or its financial condition has become unacceptable. Currently, the following broker/dealers are authorized to engage in investment transactions with the city: FTN Financial; Duncan-Williams, Inc.; Hilltop Securities; SAMCO Capital Markets; and Vining Sparks.

Nothing in this section relieves the city of the responsibility for monitoring the investments made by the city to determine that they are in compliance with this investment policy.

(l) Investment management. The investment officers shall exhibit prudence and discretion in the selection and management of securities in order that no individual or group of transactions undertaken shall jeopardize the total capital of the portfolio. The city will not allow speculation (e.g., anticipating an appreciation of capital through changes in market interest rates) in the selection of any investments. The chief financial officer shall monitor financial market indicators, study financial trends, and utilize available educational tools in order to maintain appropriate managerial expertise.

Each investment transaction — exclusive of investment pool transactions — must be based upon competitive quotations received from at least three broker/dealers authorized by this policy. An exception is a new issue debenture or discount note still in the primary market. In this case, the competitive offering process is not possible because competing broker/dealers do not have access to the security or all broker/dealers have access to the security at par. For these types of securities only, investment officers are authorized to purchase the security without seeking competitive offerings if the investment is deemed to be in the best interest of the city.

While the city utilizes a buy and hold strategy, active portfolio management may from time to time dictate the sale of securities to better position the overall portfolio. The chief financial officer must approve the sale of any security prior to maturity. Any sale of a security for less than the book value of the security must be approved by the chief financial officer.

(m) Reporting. The investment officers shall submit to each member of the city council an investment report no less than on a quarterly basis signed by each investment officer. The report shall contain sufficient information to provide a comprehensive review of investment activity and current investments and shall address any variations noted from the investment strategy of the city. The report must contain a summary statement of each pooled fund group that states the beginning and ending market value and accrued interest for the period. It must state the maturity date, book value, and market value of each separately invested asset at the end of the reporting period by type of asset and fund type invested and the fund or pooled group which acquired the investment. The chief financial officer may use any generally accepted method to monitor the market price of investments, including, but not limited to, periodic reports from any of the approved broker/dealers (whether or not that broker/dealer actually sold the security to the City) or nationally recognized business publications that provide daily market valuations on individual securities. Each report shall include a statement of compliance with the city's investment policy and the Act. The annual audit shall include a review of the quarterly reports and a compliance audit of management controls on investments and adherence to the city's established investment policies.

(n) Internal controls. A system of internal controls shall be documented in writing and shall be designed to prevent losses of public funds arising from fraud, employee error, misrepresentation by third parties, unanticipated changes in financial markets, or imprudent actions by employees and management of the city. Controls deemed most important shall include:

(1) Control of collusion;

(2) Separation of duties;

(3) Separation of transaction authority from accounting and recordkeeping;

(4) Custodial safekeeping;

(5) Avoidance of bearer-form securities;

(6) Clear delegation of authority;

(7) Specific limitations regarding securities losses;

(8) Written confirmation of telephone transactions; and

(9) Limiting the number of authorized investment officials.

These controls shall be reviewed periodically by the city's independent audit firm.

(o) Depositories. Consistent with the requirements of the Texas Public Funds Collateral Act, V.T.C.A., Government Code Ch. 2257 as amended ("Public Funds Collateral Act"), the city shall require all depository institution deposits to be federally insured or collateralized with eligible securities. Any financial institution serving the city as a depository institution will be required to sign a depository agreement and a tri-party safekeeping agreement. The safekeeping agreement shall define the city's rights to collateral in case of default, bankruptcy, or closing and shall establish a perfected security interest in compliance with federal and state regulations.

(p) Collateral. Eligible securities for collateralization of deposits are defined by the Public Funds Collateral Act and must meet the constraints of this policy. The market value of the principal portion of collateral pledged for deposits must at all times be equal to or greater than 105 percent of the total amount of deposits plus any accrued interest, less the insurance amount provided by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC").

Depository institutions with which the city maintains collateralized deposits shall provide a monthly report of market values for the pledged securities. The chief financial officer shall monitor collateralization levels to verify market values and total collateral positions. If the value of the securities pledged falls below the required collateral level, the depository institution holding the deposit must pledge additional securities no later than the end of the next succeeding business day.

Collateralized deposits may require substitution of securities. Any depository institution requesting substitution of collateral must contact the chief financial officer for approval. Written approval is required before any pledged security is released. The value of the substituted security will be calculated and substitution approved if the substitution maintains the required collateral level.

(q) Custody and safekeeping. Investment securities purchased for the city, except investment pool funds and mutual funds, will be on a delivery versus payment basis. To protect against fraud, the cash and investments of the city shall be secured in accordance with third-party custody and safekeeping procedures approved by the city. Securities shall be held in a third-party safekeeping account at a custodian bank. A written safekeeping agreement shall be executed with each custodian bank, such bank being a permitted institution under the Public Funds Collateral Act. Upon receipt of purchased or pledged securities, the custodian bank shall promptly issue and deliver to the city a safekeeping receipt identifying and evidencing receipt of the security. The chief financial officer or their designee shall maintain the original safekeeping receipts. All securities shall be confirmed in the name of the city and shall be held in an account naming the city as the customer. The market value of purchased or pledged securities shall be independently monitored by the custodian bank on a monthly basis and reported directly to the city. At least quarterly, the chief financial officer shall verify that all securities owned by or pledged to the city are documented and held in safekeeping in the city's account. These records shall also be subject to an annual compliance audit of management controls on investments and adherence to the city's established investment policies.

(r) Certification form. A written copy of the investment policy shall be provided to any person or organization offering to engage in an investment transaction with the city. Every seller of investments to the city must execute a certificate in favor of the city substantially in the form set out herein below, and the investment officers may not acquire or otherwise obtain any authorized investment from any seller until a signed certification form has been delivered to the city.

(s) Other policy considerations. The city is not required to liquidate investments that were authorized investments at the time of purchase.

(t) Annual review. The city council shall review this investment policy and investment strategies not less than annually. The city council shall adopt a written instrument by ordinance or resolution stating that it has reviewed the investment policy and investment strategies and the written instrument so adopted shall record any changes made to either the investment policy or investment strategies.

CERTIFICATION FORM
As required by V.T.C.A., Government Code § 2256.005(k)
CITY OF BELLAIRE, TEXAS (the "City")

The undersigned hereby acknowledges and certifies as follows:

1. The undersigned is a qualified representative of ___________, a business organization (the "Organization"), offering to engage in an investment transaction with the City.

2. The Organization has received and reviewed the investment policy of the City.

3. The Organization has implemented reasonable procedures and controls in an effort to preclude investment transactions conducted between the City and the Organization that are not authorized by the City's investment policy, except to the extent that this authorization is dependent on an analysis of the makeup of the entity's entire portfolio or requires an interpretation of subjective investment standards.

___________
Signature

Name: ___________

Title: ___________

Date: ___________

(Ord. No. 96-020, 3-18-1996; amended by Ord. No. 98-008; Ord. No. 08-008, § 3(App. A), 2-18-2008; Ord. No. 09-009, § 3(App. A), 2-16-2009; Ord. No. 12-014, § 3(App. A), 4-2-2012; Ord. No. 15-012, § 3, 3-2-2015; Ord. No. 19-015, § 3 (App. A), 3-18-2019; Ord. No. 22-021, § 3(App. A), 3-21-2022)

(a) The following are official holidays of the city:

(1) New Year's Day, January 1.

(2) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., the third Monday in January.

(3) Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.

(4) Juneteenth, June 19.

(5) Independence Day, July 4.

(6) Labor Day, the first Monday in September.

(7) Veterans Day, November 11.

(8) Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November.

(9) Christmas Day, December 25.

(b) The following are special holidays of the city:

(1) The Friday following the official holiday of Thanksgiving.

(2) The day before the official holiday of Christmas, December 24.

(c) In the event an official or special holiday falls on a Saturday, the holiday will be observed on the preceding Friday. In the event an official or special holiday falls on a Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the following Monday.

(d) Most employees will be eligible to receive five floating holidays per year to be taken at any time during the calendar year. Eligibility requirements for the floating holidays are set forth in the city employee handbook and are incorporated herein by reference. The eligibility requirements may be subject to change at the discretion of the city manager.

(e) Rules regarding holiday pay for full-time employees who work Monday through Friday, as well as part-time employees and full-time employees who have been assigned an alternate work schedule, are set forth in the city employee handbook and are incorporated herein by reference. The rules regarding holiday pay may be subject to change at the discretion of the city manager.

(Ord. No. 13-054, § 1, 11-4-2013; Ord. No. 23-045, § 1(App. A), 7-10-2023; Ord. No. 25-002, § 1(Exh. A), 1-6-2025)

The city clerk and/or the chief of police of the city are hereby authorized and directed to cause the microfilming of original public records, as hereinafter provided, for the purpose of accurately and permanently maintaining copies. Upon the completion of such process, said records may be destroyed.

The city clerk and/or the chief of police are authorized and directed to cause the recording, on microfilm, of the following described types of records:

Municipal court documents, including copies of all citations issued, complaints, summonses, judgments of the court, as well as all supporting documents relating thereto;

All reports prepared in conjunction with an offense that has occurred;

All records relating to traffic accidents and documents relating to the investigation of such accidents;

All records relating to criminal offense reports;

All records relating to accident reports;

All records relating to criminal arrest files;

All officer work cards for the city police department;

All motor vehicle wrecker driver permits;

All radio logs for the city police department;

All contracts and agreements maintained in the office of the city clerk;

All records relating to the issuance of alcoholic beverage licenses for the city;

All records relating to the issuance of solicitors licenses for the city; provided that said documents shall have been on file in the records of the city clerk or the police department of the city for a period of not less than five years.

The electronic storage herein authorized shall meet the requirements of the United States of America Standards Institute for archival quality, density, resolution and definition.

The city clerk and/or the chief of police shall designate a person to check and certify that such electronic record is a true and correct duplication of the original public record; and the city clerk and/or the chief of police shall further make provision guaranteeing the public free access to the information in the electronic records to which they are entitled under the provisions of law.

After all records as herein provided have been electronically stored in compliance with this section, said records may be destroyed, provided that the following additional requirements are met:

(1) The city attorney has given his consent to the destruction of such records, which consent shall be given unless said records are the subject matter of litigation, whether actually pending or threatened; and

(2) The city clerk and/or the chief of police have prepared a list of public records to be destroyed, in categories, and have filed the same with the city clerk, the city clerk has transmitted a copy thereof to the city council, and no objection is made by the city council; and

(3) The city clerk has further given notice of the proposed destruction or disposition of such original records to the state librarian or state archivist in accordance with state law, and no determination has been made by said state librarian or state archivist that said records are needed for the state library; and

(4) Thirty days have elapsed following the giving of notice as herein set out.

The city clerk and/or the chief of police are further authorized to designate public records which are worthless by preparing a list of the same, in categories, and filing the same with the city clerk of the city, who shall transmit a copy thereof to the city council, and shall further give notice of the proposed destruction or disposition of such original records to the state librarian or state archivist in accordance with state law. If no objection is made by the city council and if the state librarian or state archivist does not determine that said records are needed for the state library, the records may be destroyed. In such case, notice shall be given, as provided for herewith, by the city clerk and/or the chief of police at least 30 days prior to any intended destruction.

(Ord. No. 84-011, § 1, 2-6-1984)

The City of Bellaire shall indemnify and hold harmless all elected and appointed officers, including volunteers appointed by the city and employees of the city whether said city employees be regular salaried employees or compensated on an hourly or per diem basis, from any and all claims, demands, causes of action and judgments that may be brought or rendered against them in the performance of their duties, including the taking of any action or the failure to take any action in the capacity in which they serve the City of Bellaire.

In addition, the City of Bellaire shall indemnify and hold harmless said individuals from any cost that may be incurred in the defense of any such claim or lawsuit that may be filed. The City of Bellaire shall, however, have the right to designate legal counsel for the purpose of providing representation for said persons under the terms and provisions of this section. Nothing shall prevent such person or persons from employing outside legal counsel or securing legal advice from attorneys other than the attorneys that the city may provide. However, in doing so, such person shall not have an absolute right to the benefits of this section, and the same may be reviewed by the city council of the City of Bellaire as to the reasonableness of the expenses incurred, the appropriateness and adequacy of any defense offered, as well as all other factors relating to the handling of any such claim or cause of action.

The City of Bellaire shall have no obligation for payment of any damages or expenses incurred by reason of willful and intentional acts and conduct which are designed to be injurious to the city or other officers or employees of the city nor for any actions taken by such officials or employees which are illegal or unlawful.

(Ord. No. 85-016, § 1, 4-1-1985)

Every officer, agent or employee of the city, while responding to emergency calls or reacting to emergency situations, is hereby authorized to take such action as is deemed necessary by him to most effectively deal with the emergency. This provision shall prevail over every other ordinance of the city and, to the extent to which the city has the authority to so authorize, over any other law establishing a standard of care in conflict with this section. Neither the city nor the officer, agent or employee shall be liable for any failure to use a nonemergency standard of care in such emergency.

(Ord. No. 85-080, § 1, 11-18-1985)

The city manager of the City of Bellaire is hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the City of Bellaire, to enter into such leases as are deemed necessary and desirable by the city for certain motorcycles to be used by the police department of the city, being more specifically motorcycles which are personally owned by the several police officers employed by the city and used by them in the course of the performance of their duties as police officers of the city. All such leases shall be structured and shall contain such terms and provisions as are approved by the city manager.

(Ord. No. 87-032, § 1, 7-6-1987)

(a) The City of Bellaire shall never be liable for any claim for property damage or for personal injury, whether such personal injury results in death or not, unless the person damaged or injured, or someone in his behalf, or in the event the injury results in death, the person or persons who may have a cause of action under the law by reason of such death or injury, shall within six months, from the date the damage or injury was received, give notice in writing to the mayor and city council of the following facts:

(1) The date and time when the injury occurred and the place where the injured person or property was at the time when the injury was received;

(2) The nature of the damage or injury sustained;

(3) The apparent extent of the damage or injury sustained;

(4) A specific and detailed statement of how and under what circumstances the damage or injury occurred;

(5) The amount for which each claimant will settle;

(6) The actual place of residence of each claimant by street, number, city and state on the date the claim is presented;

(7) In the case of personal injury or death, the names and addresses of all persons who, according to the knowledge or information of the claimant, witnessed the happening of the injury or any part thereof and the names of the doctors, if any, to whose care the injured person is committed;

(8) In the case of property damage, the location of the damaged property at the time the claim was submitted along with the names and addresses of all persons who witnessed the happening of the damage or any part thereof.

(b) No suit of any nature whatsoever shall be instituted or maintained against the City of Bellaire unless the plaintiff therein shall aver and prove that previous to the filing of the original petition, the plaintiff applied to the city council for redress, satisfaction, compensation or relief, as the case may be, and that the same was, by vote of the city council, refused.

(c) All notices required by this section shall be given by serving the same upon the city clerk of the City of Bellaire at 7008 South Rice Avenue, Bellaire, Texas 77401; and all such notices shall be effective only when actually received in the office of the city clerk.

(d) Neither the mayor, a member of city council or any other officer or employee of the city shall have the authority to waive any of the provisions of this section.

(e) The written notice required herein shall be sworn to by the person claiming the damage or injuries or by someone authorized by him to do so on his behalf. Failure to swear to the notice as required herein shall not render the notice fatally defective, but failure to so verify the notice may be considered by the city council as a factor relating to the truth of the allegations and to the weight to be given to the allegations contained therein.

(Ord. No. 87-065, § 1, 11-16-1987)

Notwithstanding other provisions in this Code or the Charter of the City of Bellaire which might otherwise be deemed or interpreted to provide limitations or restrictions relating to purchases and procurements, the City of Bellaire, as provided for by law, shall have the right to procure or purchase properties and services meeting the following classifications without the necessity of competitive public bidding as otherwise required by law.

Such purchasing and procurements that are exempt from the requirements for competitive bidding shall be as follows:

(a) Purchasing or procurement of products or services where, because of circumstances and conditions, urgent necessity and calamity exist;

(b) Purchasing or procurement of property and services necessary to preserve the health or safety of the municipality's residents;

(c) Purchasing or procurement of services necessary to repair unforeseen damage of public machinery, equipment or property;

(d) Purchasing or procurement of personal or professional services;

(e) Purchasing or procurement of public work or services which, because of its small size, is performed and paid for on the date in which it is performed or progresses if not fully completed on that day;

(f) Purchasing of public right-of-way;

(g) Purchasing or procurement of specialized items of personal property that are available from only one source, including:

(1) Items available from only one source because of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies, where the purchase order or evidence of purchase specifies the item or property interest which is subject to a patent, copyright, secret process or monopoly;

(2) Films, manuscripts or books;

(3) Costs incurred for electricity, gas, water or other utility services;

(4) Captive replacement parts or components for equipment that are manufactured or distributed only by the manufacturer or other entity servicing such equipment;

(5) Books, papers and other library materials for a public library that are available only from the persons holding exclusive distribution rights to the materials;

(6) Rare books, papers or other library materials for a public library;

(7) Services necessary to install paving drainage, street widening or other public improvements or related matters, if at least one-third of the cost is to be paid by or through special assessments levied on property that will benefit from the improvements;

(8) Payment under a contract by which a developer participates in the construction of public improvements as in the case of improvements provided for as a part of a subdivision development as specified and provided for under V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 212 and subdivision A thereof, "Regulation of Subdivisions."

(h) Services performed by blind or severely disabled persons.

(Ord. No. 91-102, § 1, 12-16-1991; Ord. No. 93-081, § 1, 12-20-1993)

Any person who is the owner of real property and receives notice of a violation of a statute, rule, regulation or ordinance of the State of Texas or the City of Bellaire concerning the use or condition of real property shall receive a notice which contains the following language: According to the real property records of Harris County, you own real property described in this notice. If you no longer own the property, you must execute an affidavit stating that you no longer own the property and state the address of the last known person who acquired the property from you. The affidavit must be delivered in person or by certified mail, return receipt requested, to this office not later than the 20th day after the date you receive the notice. If you do not send the affidavit, it will be presumed that you own property described in this notice, even if you do not.

The City of Bellaire shall provide an affidavit form which states that the record owner no longer owns the real property and the name and last known address of the person who acquired the property from the record owner. The record owner shall deliver the affidavit in person or by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City of Bellaire not later than the 20th day after the date the record owner received the notice.

If the City of Bellaire receives an affidavit as provided for herein, appropriate notice shall be sent to the person named in the affidavit who has acquired the property, in the same form as initially received. The city shall maintain the affidavit on file for at least two years and shall deliver a copy of the affidavit to the chief appraiser of the Harris County Appraisal District.

If the city does not receive an affidavit as specified herein, the record owner of the real property is presumed for all purposes to be the owner of the property subject of the notice herein specified.

(Ord. No. 91-099, § 1, 12-16-1991)

Any and all additions and amendments to this Code, when passed in such form as to indicate the intention of the city council to make the same a part hereof, shall be deemed to be incorporated in this Code so that reference to the "Code of Ordinances of the City of Bellaire, Texas," shall be understood and intended to include such additions and amendments.

All ordinances passed subsequent to the adoption of this Code, which amend or in any way affect this Code, may be numbered in accordance with the numbering system hereof and printed for inclusion herein. In the event that subsequent ordinances repeal chapters, sections, subsections or any part thereof, such repealed portions may be excluded from the Code by omission from reprinted pages affected thereby. Subsequent ordinances, which amend, repeal or in any way affect this Code, shall be prima facie evidence of the laws of the city, until such time as this Code and such subsequent ordinances are readopted by the city council as a new code of ordinances.

Amendments to any of the provisions of this Code should be made by amending such provisions by specific reference to the section of this Code in substantially the following language: "That section ________ of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Bellaire, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows:…." The new provisions shall then be set out in full as desired.

(a) For amendments to the Code, the following language may be used: "That the Code of Ordinances of the City of Bellaire, Texas, is hereby amended by adding a section (or article, chapter or other designation as the case may be), to be numbered ________, which reads as follows:…." The new provisions shall then be set out in full as desired.

(b) In lieu of subsection (a) above, when the city council desires to enact and incorporate into the Code, an ordinance of a general and permanent nature embracing a subject not previously included herein, the following language may be made part of such ordinance: "It is the intention of the city council, and it is hereby ordained, that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Bellaire, Texas, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered to accomplish such intention."

All sections, articles, chapters or other provisions of this Code desired to be repealed should be specifically repealed by section number, article number, chapter or other number, as the case may be.

The city shall conduct, manage and administer elections in accordance with the Texas Election Code.

The city council of the City of Bellaire is authorized to appoint, for a term as specified in the instrument of appointment, such assistant city attorneys as shall from time to time be deemed necessary and advisable, for the purpose of acting as prosecutors in the municipal court of the City of Bellaire.

Any appointment made by the city council pursuant to this section may be revoked or canceled at any time by the city council of the City of Bellaire.

An appointment under this section shall be deemed effective upon filing of a notice of such appointment with the city clerk of the City of Bellaire.

(Ord. No. 78-084, 12-18-1978)

The city attorney, with the concurrence of the city manager is automatically granted permission to commence such litigation to enforce the laws of the State of Texas or the ordinances of the City of Bellaire, as shall be deemed appropriate by the city attorney concerning businesses which sell or offer to sell books, tapes, periodicals, or any other product, or services relating either directly or indirectly which are intended to provide sexual stimulation or sexual gratification or which are characterized by an emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas.

(Ord. No. 90-039, § 1, 6-25-1990)

All documents, papers, letters, books, maps, photographs, sound or video recordings, electronic media, or other information-recording media, regardless of physical form or characteristic and regardless of whether public access to it is open or restricted under the laws of the state, created or received by the city or any of its officials or employees pursuant to law or in the transaction of public business, are declared to be the records of the city and shall be created, maintained, and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance or procedures authorized by it and in no other manner.

(Ord. No. 25-101, § 1(App. A), 11-3-2025)

All records as defined in section 2-70 are declared to be the property of the city. No official or employee of the city has, by virtue of his or her position, any personal or property right to such records even though he or she may have developed or compiled them. The unauthorized destruction, removal from files, or use of such records is prohibited.

(Ord. No. 25-101, § 1(App. A), 11-3-2025)

It is declared to be the policy of the city to provide for efficient, economical, and effective controls over the creation, distribution, organization, maintenance, use, and disposition of all records of the city through a comprehensive system of integrated procedures for the management of records from their creation to their ultimate disposition, consistent with the requirements of the Local Government Records Act. This policy shall apply to all officials and employees of the city.

(Ord. No. 25-101, § 1(App. A), 11-3-2025)

The city clerk will serve as records management officer for the city as provided by law and will develop policies and procedures to ensure that the maintenance, preservation, security, destruction, electronic storage, and other disposition of the records of this office are carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Records Act.

(Ord. No. 25-101, § 1(App. A), 11-3-2025)

The city has adopted records control schedules issued by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission for use in the city as provided by law. The records management officer shall prepare amendments to the schedules as needed to reflect new records created or received by this office, or revisions to retention periods established in a records retention schedule issued by the commission. Any destruction of records of the city will be in accordance with these schedules and the Local Government Records Act.

(Ord. No. 25-101, § 1(App. A), 11-3-2025)

Public servants should treat their office as a public trust, only using the powers and resources of public office to advance public interests, and not to attain personal benefits or pursue any other private interest incompatible with the public good.

(a) Pursuit of public interest. In treating their office as a public trust, public servants, whatever their role, should diligently and in good faith pursue the public interest to the best of their ability and subordinate self-interest to the public good.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Primacy of the public interest. An accepted principle of governmental ethics is that public office is a public trust. As trustees, public servants are obligated to administer their trust solely for the benefit of the public and they should not permit the use of their office for the benefit of any private interest.

2) Importance of public respect. An essential condition of representative democratic government is public for the processes and people that make up the government. This requires faith and confidence in the commitment of government servants to use delegated public power only for the common good. If that confidence is undermined by the reality, or even the appearance that public officers are serving their own self-interest or narrow special interests incompatible with the overall public good, the citizenry will neither participate in self-governance nor cooperate with government policies to the extent necessary.

(b) Ensuring public respect. In treating their office as a public trust, public servants should act so as to ensure the reality and perception that government is conducted according to the highest principles of democracy with honesty, integrity and a concern for justice and, therefore, is worthy of respect, trust and support.

(1) Avoiding impropriety. Public servants should maintain public trust in government by avoiding acts which place personal or private interests above pursuit of the public interest.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Improper acts are doubly wrong. Official acts by public servants which reflect dishonesty, bias, insensitivity, unaccountability, lawlessness, greed or selfishness are not only wrong in themselves, they are also wrong because they violate the trust inherent in public office and thereby undermine public confidence and respect for government.

(2) Avoiding appearances of impropriety. Public servants should avoid conduct which tends to undermine public trust by creating in the minds of reasonable impartial observers the perception that government office has been used improperly.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) The impropriety of creating the appearance of impropriety. The concept of trust is as much a creature of perceptions and beliefs as it is of reality. Therefore, public servants have a special responsibility to avoid conduct which is likely to generate cynical attitudes and suspicions about government and the people who administer it. Conduct which creates in the minds of reasonable observers the perception that government office has been used improperly may violate the public servant's obligation to safeguard public trust even if the conduct does not actually misuse public office.

2) Reasonable person test. The standard to determine whether something is improper should not be set by the most suspicious and cynical members of society, but by reasonable persons with no predisposition to assume bad faith or corrupt motives.

3) Responsibility to act. It is not always right to avoid an act simply because it will look wrong. The ethical obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety should not be used as an excuse for inaction or bureaucratic intransigence. Excess timidity in the face of possible criticism is no more justifiable than callous disregard for improper appearances. In some cases, public servants should be willing to confront criticisms and endure unfair denunciations, choosing to explain and justify their behavior rather than alter their conduct to suit the cynical perceptions of a misinformed press or public.

4) Avoiding bad decisions. A balance must be found between the need to preserve public confidence and the responsibility to make sound decisions on the merits. The requirement that public servants avoid even the appearance of impropriety can undermine the public interest and cause bad decision. For example, it may force government decision makers to discriminate against friends or political supporters just because it may look bad to the public. Yet if a friend or political supporter is clearly the best qualified person available to perform a needed public task, it is unfair and unwise to automatically disqualify them.

5) Accountability. If a public servant conscientiously decides to override the appearance of impropriety test, it is important to reduce the harm to public trust by taking steps to assure that all facts relevant to the choice are made public and that the process of decision making is open and can withstand close scrutiny.

(c) Formulation of public policy. Persons with the responsibility for making public policy and laws should place the public interest over all other considerations.

(1) Elected officials should make policy. In a representative democracy, public interest should be determined and translated into policies and programs by or under the direction of elected officials who are ultimately accountable to the public.

(2) Dealing with conflicting loyalties. In pursuing the public interest, public servants should put loyalty to democratic principles and to the broadest public good above loyalty to political party, their constituencies and individuals.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Greatest good for greatest number. Though decisions have to be made on a case-by-case basis, the principle of public service generally requires public servants to pursue the greatest long term good for the greatest number by placing larger, broader interests over smaller, narrower ones: country over state, state over community, community over individuals, and principle over party.

2) Competing loyalties. Persons in public service are often accountable to a complex network of competing loyalty obligations to country, state, community, constituency groups, political supporters, governmental departments, colleagues, superiors, subordinates, family and self. In many political situations, these loyalties conflict. What is best for the country or state may not be good for a particular community; what is good for an individual constituent or interest group may not be in the best interest of other constituents or interest groups; and the highest public interest may conflict with personal career ambitions. Inevitably, public servants, especially elected officials, must resolve conflicting interests by ranking their loyalty obligations.

(3) Ranking loyalty obligations. When allocating public funds and formulating general public policies, elected officials should evaluate information objectively and decide what is best for the public as a whole, not just for a narrow constituency.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Representative duties of elected officials. One duty of elected officials is to represent the views and advocate the interests of their constituencies. As an aspect of this responsibility they often perform an ombudsman function by assisting constituents in their dealings with government to assure that they are treated fairly and efficiently. Elected representatives are also expected to advocate the views of their constituents and pursue legislation and policies which improve the social and economic conditions of their districts.

2) Administrative and adjudicatory duties of elected officials. In addition to their representative responsibilities, elected officials also have policy and law-making obligations which carry the responsibility of using independent objective judgment to pursue the broadest vision of the public good. In exercising these responsibilities allocating public funds and formulating public policies relating to pressing social issues such as the environment, education, health and safety they should transcend their role as an advocate of narrow constituent interests. They should perform a role closer to that of a neutral administrator or judge, evaluating information objectively and deciding what is best for the public as a whole.

3) Conflicts in constituent and public interests. Representation of specific constituent interests usually raises no substantial conflict with public interests. But when it does, the dilemma generally should be resolved in favor of the wider public interest in spite of political risks. For example, the public interest may require taxes that individuals do not want to pay, especially for programs with low constituency support but high public importance (e.g., the provision of infrastructure or waste disposal sites). Similarly, the public interest may require budget cuts and the elimination of government facilities, public works projects or jobs though the cost of such measures will be felt disproportionately in the districts most directly affected.

3a) Cost of subordinating the public interest. When decisions about programs and expenditures are controlled by the desire to steer money and jobs to particular districts, the quality and efficiency of government programs inevitably are compromised. This type of decision making is especially dangerous when public safety or national security are involved. It also contributes to the cynical impression that political decision makers are more concerned about their political careers than the public good.

3b) Long term perspective. It is said that a politician thinks of the next election, a statesman thinks of the next generation. Politicians who consider staying in office a moral imperative will be unwilling or unable to take such risks. Those who view their role more broadly, however, will see it as their obligation to do so.

3c) Need for integrity and political courage. Unfortunately, the political risks entailed in subordinating parochial constituent interests to the long term broader public interest are substantial. Years of conditioning through pork barrel campaigns legitimizing the primacy of voter self-interests, have caused many to expect their representatives to pursue local interests without regard to the overall picture. The costs of this failure of civic virtue are high because, as political philosopher Joel Fleishman points out, "many of our contemporary governments are best by paralysis of policy created by the unwillingness of contending interests to sacrifice for the common good." A politician who acts against the short term interests of constituents, even for a compelling public purpose, risks criticism especially from potential politician must be willing even to lose office if necessary. This demands exceptional courage but also a perspective that recognizes the vital role of integrity in American politics. Alexis de Toqueville put it this way:

While natural instincts of democracy induce the people to reject distinguished citizens as their rulers, an instinct no less strong induces able men to retire from the political area, in which it is difficult to retain their independence or to advance without becoming service.

John Culver, a former U.S. Senator adds another dimension to the de Toqueville observation:

If one casts each vote on the basis of reelection prospects and thereby steadily erodes his own convictions out of fear of defeat, then he has forfeited his conscience and ignored his own best judgment which should be the only reason he or she — rather than someone else — is in office.

3d) Duty to educate. It is not healthy for the republic that persons of integrity, committed to serving the public interest, must sacrifice their political careers on the alter of short term voter self-interest. Thus, a corollary ethical obligation requires committed public servants to make efforts to educate voters and nurture in them more unselfish notions of community and a longer range view of self-interest. In recent times, this was well illustrated by President John Kennedy's inaugural invocation to all Americans: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

(4) Organizational vs. personal loyalties. Public servants with supervisorial authority should safeguard and protect the public interest, the reputation of government and the integrity and efficiency of their department, even at the cost of injuring a superior, colleague or friend.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Loyalty conflicts. A common loyalty conflict arises where the interests of an organization are inconsistent with those of individuals within the organization. The problem gets even more complicated when loyalty to a particular person within the organization conflicts with loyalty obligations to others. To whom did Lt. Col. Oliver North owe his greatest duty of loyalty in the Iran-Contra matter? Vice Admiral Poindexter, CIA Director William Casey, President Reagan, Congress, or the Constitution? How should a supervisor resolve the conflict between the needs of an individual and the organization when a public employee (and the father of five school-age children with a long history of government service) has a serious and recurring alcohol problem that has affected his work and employee morale? In each case, the responsibility of office generally demands the placing of institutional interests above individual loyalties.

2) Clarifying loyalty expectations. It helps to make such decisions if the public servant is at all times clear and open about the primacy of institutional loyalty so that inappropriate expectations are not held by individuals. Still, decisions which advance the institution at the cost of individuals should be made and executed with compassion, sensitivity and respect.

(5) Protection of minority rights. It is in the overall public interest that the will of the majority is tempered by a commitment to consider and protect the rights and advance the interests of minorities, especially those that are not sufficiently represented in the normal decision making process.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Social Justice. American constitutional democracy neither requires nor permits unfettered dominance of the majority will. The protection of minority rights is an explicit doctrine which imposes ethical responsibilities on public servants where fundamental notions of social justice require advocacy of minority interests which might otherwise suffer or be ignored at the hands of the majority.

(d) Implementation of policy. Public administrators and executive should interpret and implement policies and laws in good faith and energetically pursue the goals of policy and lawmakers.

(1) Subordination of personal views. Public servants charged with the administration of policies and laws should do so as equitably, efficiently and economically as possible, regardless of their personal views.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Practical power. The effectiveness of laws and policies is directly affected by both what administrators do and how they do it. Consequently, agency officials, bureaucrats and line officers can determine the efficacy of legislation by the way they allocate resources and carry out their duties. And, where the purposes underlying a law, regulation or policy are not clearly discernible due to ambiguities or inconsistencies, public administrators have wide discretion. As a practical matter, this discretion translates into a type of policy-making power. Such power should be used carefully, openly and with a good faith attempt to honor the will of the former policy-makers.

2) Tension between legislative and executive branches. In some cases, the exercise by public administrators of the practical power to nullify or modify a policy through administrative strategies can be most frustrating to legislators who feel helpless in the face of an all-powerful, unresponsive bureaucracy. At the same time, career executives can be equally frustrated by the passage of laws which have not sufficiently drawn on the expertise of administrators and are thus, impractical, underfunded or ineffective. This common tension between the executive and legislative branches should be eased by closer collaboration and more open communication.

3) Separation of powers. In a democracy, policy disagreements should be resolved by democratic processes consistent with the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches of government. Thus, it is improper for public servants to nullify legislatures and senior executive policy-makers to impose their own views of the public interest.

4) Dealing with ambiguity. It is especially difficult, but no less critical, for public administrators to implement policies with energy and commitment when the intent or goals of a law are unclear or the legislative language is ambiguous. Ambiguity is so prevalent that it is important that it not be used as an excuse to avoid complex, arduous, or ideologically offensive tasks. The fundamental duty of government executives is to act. Refusing to do so invariably obstructs the purposes of policy-makers and denies the intended benefits of a new law or policy. In many cases, the ambiguities can be resolved with reasonable confidence simply by examining the legislative history and the legislation as a whole. In others, further clarification must be sought by whatever mechanisms are available.

5) Role of personal convictions. Government employees, at all levels, usually have personal convictions which affect the way they interpret and implement policies. This is proper so long as their values and attitudes do not impede or nullify the will of law and policy-makers.

6) Administrator should defer to legislators. As a result of superior information and special expertise, those who implement policies and laws often have, and almost always think they have, a great understanding of the issues than the legislative bodies that formulate policies. Administrators should, of course, seek to bring their information and expertise to bear on the policy-making process by testimony, reports and any other means available. Superior knowledge or wisdom, however, does not alter the obligation inherent in representative democracy to defer to lawful processes which invest primary decision making authority with elected officials. Fidelity to democratic principles and our Constitutional form of government makes it improper for administrators to undermine or nullify the will of the legislature in pursuit of their own views of public interest. For example, the recent clash between Congress and top administration officials with regard to the issue of military aid to the Nicaraguan Contras (part of the infamous Iran-Contra scandal) demonstrated a dangerous tendency of highly committed, patriotic administrators to substitute their policy judgments for those of the legislature even supplying false information to congressional committees.

(2) Dealing with policy disagreements. Public servants who find that their personal convictions are irreconcilably incompatible with lawful policies should openly state their conflict and, in some cases, withdraw from the administration of such policies.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Professional duty vs. personal conscience. Ethical government cannot exist without people of principle and conscience. Sometimes, personal convictions of public administrators sharply conflict with the legitimately established policies set by others, so much so that they raise issues of personal integrity. Conflicts most commonly arise when major changes in direction are dictated by a new law or policy. Often such changes are personally and professionally distasteful to public servants committed to existing programs and former policies. Strong beliefs that a new policy is irrational, impractical, unduly political or ideologically offensive present a serious ethical dilemma professional duty vs. personal conscience.

2) Internal conflicts of interest. The existence of strong disagreements with lawful policies by those assigned to interpret or implement them may create unacceptable conflicts of interest between the dictates of conscience and the requirements of law and public service. The public is entitled to vigorous good faith implementation of policies and laws established by or under the direction of its elected representatives. Thus, those who have strong personal beliefs about the government's proper role and the value of specific programs must decide among the following options: a) subordinate their personal views and do their duty; b) confront the issue directly and refuse to perform; c) in extreme cases, resign or request a transfer. If government is to work, however, the professional obligation to do one's job should prevail most of the time. It is, therefore, ethically proper for conscience-driven public servants to subordinate even the most strongly held personal views and abide by organizational policies so long as they believe they can do so effectively. At the same time, where they find the duties of office irreconcilable with the dictates of conscience, it is also proper that they remove themselves from the dilemma by resigning or seeking a transfer. It is not proper, however, to covertly seek to sabotage or hinder government policies.

(3) Whistle blowing: Disclosure of unlawful or improper policies or actions. Public servants who have a good faith belief that the public interest requires the disclosure of governmental policies or actions thought to be unlawful or improper should reveal their information to appropriate authorities.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Combating improper conduct. Whistle blowing is most often justified when it is the only practical way to reveal illegal conduct or major abuses of public authority. The decision to whistle blow, however, must be regarded with the utmost seriousness. Although whistle blowing can represent the highest form of loyalty to an institution and to democratic processes, it often requires breaching traditional notions of loyalty to colleagues and organization. In addition, it may involve the violation of professional obligations of confidentiality. Thus, the act of whistle blowing invariably incurs hostility and resentment and tends to undermine trust and create an atmosphere of suspicion. Yet, in spite of the personal and institutional costs, whistle blowing is sometimes essential to the public interest and morally justified as a means of preventing or correcting serious wrongs.

2) Protection of whistle blowers. Without the risk that conscientious public servants will, when necessary, disclose unlawful or improper governmental activities, the likelihood of illegal secret policies and unaccountable and arrogant decision making increases. Hence, persons who whistle blow in good faith act in the public interest. It is, therefore, improper for a public servant to harass, punish or seek other reprisals against public servants who seek to hold government accountable through conscientious whistle blowing.

(4) Leaking. Except in matters of great public importance where identifying oneself as the source of information would involve unreasonable personal risks, public servants should not secretly reveal confidential governmental matters or allege improprieties.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Difference between leaking and whistle blowing. While both leaking and whistle blowing may be acts of conscience, whistle blowers act overtly and hence take greater risks and subject themselves to significant personal abuse including reprisals. In contrast, leakers act covertly and are essentially unaccountable for the consequences of their actions. Since it is fairer that criticisms and charges be made on the record, whistle blowing is preferable to leaking. In fact, in most cases, leaking is an improper violation of confidentiality and fairness.

2) Need for compelling public interest. Although leaking is presumptively improper, there are rare circumstances where it is justified as a means of holding the government accountable for improper covert actions. Many issues of great public importance (e.g., Watergate, Pentagon Papers, CIA assassination policies) came to light only because of leakers who acted in the public interest but sought to protect themselves and their families from the ramifications of their revelations. Because of general principles of trust, honor and professional discretion, however, disclosure of confidential information or documents through secret leaking is justified only to advance a compelling public interest. In the absence of a clear and compelling interest in disclosure, public servants should honor their confidences and legal obligations to maintain the secrecy of specified information (e.g., classified documents, grand jury testimony, medical or psychiatric records, reports about juvenile abuse, etc). It is not proper, for example, to leak information simply to give one news organization a competitive advantage over another about matters that will be made public in due time (e.g., revealing the contents of a report a few days before it is to be formally issued). Nor is it proper to leak information simply as means of affording the leaker some personal or political advantage.

3) Leaks concerning the rights of others. An especially troublesome category of leaks concerns information that could unjustifiably damage reputations, improperly prejudice court proceedings, unfairly affect elections, or unreasonably endanger the safety of others. It is almost always improper, for example, to leak information about undercover operations, criminal investigations, unsubstantiated charges or secret grand jury testimony. Supervisors in departments which possess potentially damaging information should take steps to protect the rights of those who would be injured by leaks and to hold leakers accountable for their actions.

(e) Personal gain from the performance of public duties. Except for official compensation, public servants should neither seek nor accept any form of payment, gratuity or other personal benefit relating to the performance of their responsibilities.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Benefit need not affect or appear to affect judgment. The essence of this principle is that public office should only be used to advance public interests and not to attain personal benefits. It is related to but different than Principle II, which mandates the exercise of independent objective judgment and forbids conflicts of interest which tend to impede such judgment. Thus, it is no defense to a charge that public office was used for private gain that the public servant in fact did exercise independent judgment and that official actions were in no way influenced by the benefit conferred or sought. It is not even a defense that, under the circumstances, the benefit did not create the appearance of undue influence. It is enough that the personal gain was sought or received.

(1) Performance of duty. Public servants should neither seek nor accept any form of personal benefit for the performance of their duty to deal with a matter promptly, efficiently or fairly or for the exercise of appropriate but discretionary representational authority.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Appreciation gifts and contributions. Public servants have an obligation to perform their duties promptly, efficiently and fairly. In addition, some have oversight and representational duties which involve inquiry and intervention on behalf of constituents. Even if the benefit has no affect on the decisions or actions of the public servant, it is improper to seek or accept unofficial compensation or benefits of any sort for the performance of a public duty.

2) Campaign contributions. Perhaps the most difficult problem arises with respect to the solicitation and acceptance of substantial campaign contributions. As is stated in the Ethics Manual for Members and Employees of the U.S. House of Representatives, "caution should be exercised... to avoid the appearance that solicitations of campaign contributions or the receipt of gifts or entertainment from constituents are connected in any way, as a quid pro quo, with a legislator's intervention in the administrative process on behalf of the constituent." This warning operates with equal force regarding any official act which benefits a political contributor.

(2) Accessibility of elected officials. Elected officials should assure that constituents and others who may be affected by public policies have a fair and equal opportunity to express their concerns, grievances and ideas without regard to their willingness or ability to provide personal benefits or political support to the official.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Avoiding the appearance of selling access. The ability of a citizen to confer directly with a public official is frequently referred to as access. It is often impossible for an official to personally talk with everyone who seeks an audience. It is important, however, that access is not determined by the willingness or ability of the person to provide any benefit to the official whether it be in the form of a gratuity, an honorarium or a campaign contribution.

(3) Personal benefits should never appear to be necessary. Public servants should not engage in any conduct which could create in the mind of a reasonable observer the belief that persons will receive better or different service if they provide personal benefits or political support to a government official.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Gifts given after an act. Gifts and favors given after an official action raise special and subtle ethical problems. Although the recipient may not have anticipated the gift and, therefore, could not have been influenced by its prospect, it may well appear to a reasonable outsider as a payment for services rendered. Such gifts also create future expectations that positive actions will be rewarded. In all but the most exceptional cases, such gifts ought to be returned with a polite but firm message that the gesture was unnecessary and could be construed as improper. If this is not feasible, they ought to be given to charity or otherwise handled in a way which makes it clear that the public servant has not accepted and does not want any personal benefit for official actions.

(f) Use of public employees for personal benefit. Public servants should not use public employees on government time for private benefit.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Public time is public property. A public employee's time is public property which should not be misappropriated to personal use. In addition to improperly using public office for private gain, the supervisor who asks subordinates to perform personal services demeans the importance of the employee's official duties.

2) Need for flexibility. A public executive should be permitted to make moderate use of staff to help organize and schedule the executive's calendar, including some events of a private nature. Emphasis, however, must be placed on the word "moderate" and both the aide and the official must be vigilant to avoid actual abuse as well as the creation of the appearance of unreasonable use of public personnel. Though this limitation should be interpreted in a reasonable manner given the responsibilities of the public official, purely personal errands such as dropping off laundry, picking up children, and purchasing private gifts are justifiable only in extraordinary circumstances where the task is suddenly necessary to help the public executive perform professional duties.

3) Employee's own time. Generally, employees do not voluntarily contribute their personal time to benefit their employers. Yet public officials sometimes claim that employees willingly perform personal services "on their own time" during lunch hour, after normal working hours. Such claims should be examined with skepticism as there is a high risk that the employees believed that they were required to perform personal work as part of their jobs. In such cases, there is at least an appearance of improper exploitation and such use of public personnel should be avoided. If a public employee is asked to perform any personal service, it is best if the employee is paid for his time out of the official's private funds.

(1) Subordinate's responsibility to say no. Public employees should refuse to perform improper personal tasks on governmental time.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Independent obligation. While it is improper for a superior to ask a subordinate to perform personal services, it also is improper for a subordinate, as a public servant, to accede to such requests. While tact is imperative as a practical matter, employees still have the obligation to assure that their services are not converted to nongovernmental uses. It is improper for the supervisor to harass, pressure, embarrass, intimidate or punish an employee who properly refuses to perform personal services.

(g) Use of government property for personal benefit. A public servant should not use government property or facilities for private benefit.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) General rule. Public facilities, equipment and services (office space, typewriters, word processors, telephones, postage, stationery, mailing facilities, photocopying, etc.) should not be appropriated for personal benefit.

2) Limited personal uses should be permitted. Though government facilities should certainly not be used for personal purposes on a substantial, regular or ongoing basis, occasional limited usage should be permitted so long as: 1) it does not interfere with the performance of public duties; 2) the cost is so nominal that reimbursement procedures would not be worth the effort; and 3) the use does not raise an unreasonable appearance of impropriety or undue political advantage. For example, interpretation of these limitations should take into account the reasonable needs and expectations of employees and permit them to make and receive occasional personal phone calls of short duration.

(h) Use of title or prestige for personal benefit. Public servants should not use, nor allow others to use, the authority, title, or prestige of public office for the attainment of private financial, social or political benefits in any manner that is inconsistent with public interests.

(1) Use for commercial purposes. Public servants should not permit their names or official titles to be used by a nonpublic enterprise in any manner which would lead reasonable observers to believe that those who deal with the enterprise may receive special treatment or advantages as a result of a formal association with the public servant.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Board membership and consulting. Nonpublic enterprises of all sorts, including nonprofit associations, charitable organizations, corporations and firms involved in lobbying, public relations, law practice and consulting often seek out persons serving in government to serve on boards, advisory committees or as consultants. The most serious problems arise when the public servant is compensated by the enterprise. All such associations raise ethical problems because of the possibility that public office is used by the public employee, the enterprise that retains him, or both, for private benefit.

a) Premium compensation. The problem is most acute when, because of the public servant's title and position, the compensation is more than the normal market value of the services rendered. It is especially important when public servants receive outside income that the compensation is commensurate with the actual personal services rendered. If any premium is being paid due to the public servant's position, or no significant services are being rendered, the enterprise is, in effect, improperly buying, and the public servant is, in effect, improperly buying, and the public servant is, in effect, improperly selling the prestige associated with the office.

b) Normal compensation. Where the compensation paid for services is proportional to the services performed by normal market standards, or the service is uncompensated, the impropriety is less severe. But even such relationships may improperly use public office. For example, clients or customers may seek representation by a firm employing a public servant because they think that they will have some special advantage in dealing with government as a result of the association with the public employee. Generally, the public servant should avoid associations which create a reasonable possibility that private economic interests will be significantly enhanced because the employee also holds public office.

c) Duty to reduce appearance of impropriety. Public servants who associate with private enterprises have a special duty to assure that these enterprises do not suggest or imply special influence with government and that the clients and customers of the enterprise are not led to expect or encouraged to think that the fact that public officials work with or have loaned their names to the enterprise will provide any economic advantage.

(2) Selling connections, stature or prestige. The present or former holder of a high public office which carries with it substantial prestige should not appear to sell the stature of the office by accepting sums that create a general perception that the office has been exploited for private gain.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Cashing in. Regardless of legality, it is unseemly when present or former government officials appear to be blatantly "cashing in" on their government service by acting as consultants, lobbyists, board members or spokespersons for private interests in circumstances where it appears that they are peddling influence or selling the prestige and stature of their prior office.

2) Consider all the circumstances. The problem becomes especially serious when former public servants are paid a premium an amount above the normal market value for the services rendered because of their political connections or the inherent prestige they bring to a private enterprise. This is not to say that former government officials who have important experiences cannot serve on boards, make speeches for substantial fees or engage in consulting or lobbying. The circumstances including how, when at what price they sell their services are of critical importance. If political connections are used to unduly influence former colleagues or subordinates it is improper. If the services of a present or former government official are used in close proximity to actions taken by the official or he or she receives significant gift or benefits shortly after leaving government service, it is likely to be improper. And, if the fee paid for phone calls or meetings or for appearances are in no way commensurate with the work performed or the normal fee for similar services, it is improper.

(3) Use for private advantage. Public servants should not use official letterhead or refer to their public position as a means of inducing or intimidating persons to resolve disputes more favorably, provide preferential treatment, or give free tickets, discounts, favors or other advantages.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Rationale. There are several reasons why official name dropping to obtain special treatment is improper. First, those who give favors to public servants because of their positions often expect favors in return. In such cases, the transaction too closely resembles bribery favor for favor. Second, some persons who accede to requests for preferential treatment or favors to public servants do so out of fear that if they do not, the official may seek reprisal. In those cases, the transaction looks too much like extortion.

(i) Use of public powers for political advantage. A public servant should not use the resources, prerogatives and powers of office primarily to advance political interests.

(1) Use of public employees. A public servant should not use or seek to use public employees, on government time, to assist in political party activities, campaigning, fund raising, or other partisan or personal political activities.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Substantial public purpose. It is often difficult to distinguish legitimate political work within the scope of official duties from campaign activities (e.g., a speech, article or op/ed piece communicating the official's opinions). In such cases, the use of public employees is justified so long as there is a substantial and bona fide public purpose to the activity and there is no personal profit.

2) Political aides. Many elected officials are assisted by at least one senior aide who also serves as a major campaign adviser. It is unrealistic to expect that such persons will not be involved intimately in the full political life of their employer. So long as the senior aide "does a full day's work for a full day's pay" to justify the government salary, party and campaign activities above and beyond public duties should be tolerated. In some cases, portions of the aide's salary ought to be paid out of campaign funds.

(2) Use of public facilities. A public servant should not conduct nor allow campaign and fund raising activities on government premises nor use government resources for these purposes.

(3) Use of public authority. A public servant should not use public authority primarily to achieve personal political advantage or favorable press coverage.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Conduct should be justified on the merits. Public powers associated with public office should not be used primarily for political purposes. Thus, it is improper to engage in any discretionary action not justified on the merits but designed to achieve political goals. This includes commencing or dropping an investigation, inspection, audit, lawsuit, criminal charge or public hearing; supporting or opposing a project or nominee; selecting or recommending commissioners, judges and other public officers; and offering, sponsoring or opposing a bill. This standard should be interpreted realistically but in good faith, recognizing that there is a political dimension to almost all uses of public power. It is not inherently wrong to do things at a particular time or in a particular manner that increases the likelihood of positive public reaction and press coverage so long as the act is one that is justified on its merits, exclusive of political motivations.

2) Mixed motives. Since motives are usually mixed and difficult to determine, it is often not possible to know whether an official act is improper under this test. Still, it is important to remind public officials of their obligations and to invoke them to resist the temptations to misuse their office.

(j) Use of campaign funds for private benefit. Public servants who run for office should use campaign funds only for expenses directly relating to campaigning (e.g., salaries, consultant fees, travel, printing, media, polling, communication with voters and constituents) and not for personal or other political purposes.

(1) Improper expenditures. Campaign funds should not be used to supplement personal income or enhance a personal life style.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Purpose of campaign funds. A candidate who solicits donations for the purpose of conducting a campaign should accept such funds on the assumption that they are only given for the limited purpose of financing campaign activities for an immediate election. Campaign funds look like personal gifts, or worse, attempted bribes, when they are converted to the candidate's personal use. Conversion of campaign funds to personal use permits private gain from public office, creating blatant appearances of impropriety. Thus, it is improper to use campaign funds to: purchase personal items such as clothes, gifts, art; defray normal living costs such as auto leasing or maintenance, gas, or dry cleaning; pay for the travel of spouses or other relatives not clearly relevant to a campaign; or decorate political offices.

(2) Loans. Candidates should not borrow from campaign funds nor loan them to any other person, whether or not interest is paid.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Problems with loans. Loans of campaign funds to the candidate or others has the effect of converting the funds to personal use. Such loans, which are only possible, if the amounts are not presently needed for the campaign, create a serious appearance of impropriety, whether or not interest is paid and whether or not the loan is paid back in a timely manner. Persons needing loans should resort to normal commercial channels.

(3) Disclosure about the use of funds. Public servants who raise campaign funds with the intent or known possibility that they will be used for a purpose other than direct campaign expenses relating to a current election should disclose their intent to the donor in order to avoid any possibility of raising money under false pretenses.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Surplus campaign funds. Where candidates have raised more funds than they need for an immediate election, continued efforts to raise campaign funds is proper only if the donors are clearly informed about the likely use and lack of immediate need for their contributions.

2) Amassing war chests. The increasing ability of incumbents to amass large "war chests" well before an election raises serious ethical issues. The practice often intimidates potential opponents and deters contested elections, thereby limiting public choice. Responsible public officials committed to the public interest ought to restrain themselves from such actions and, where necessary, support legislation to regulate such behavior in a manner consistent with the spirit of representative democracy.

Public servants should employ independent objective judgment performing their duties, deciding all matters on the merits, free from conflicts of interest and both real and apparent improper influences.

(a) Conflicts of interest. Public servants should safeguard their ability to make independent, objective, fair and impartial judgments by scrupulously avoiding financial, social and political relationships and transactions which may compromise or give the appearance of compromising their objectivity, independence or honesty.

(1) Disclosure of financial conflicts of interest. Public servants subject to disclosure of financial interest requirements should comply with both the letter and spirit of the regulations and not seek to circumvent them by evasion strategies or legalisms.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Financial conflicts of interest. By far, the most highly regulated area of public service ethics concerns financial conflicts of interest. The dominant method of regulation takes the form of disclosure requirements, these requirements avoid outright prohibition of conflicting interests, allowing public servants to accept a wide variety of benefits as gratuities and earned income so long as the transaction is reported to a designated government agency. The theory is that discourse permits the public to decide the propriety of the relationship or transaction and holds the official accountable. Such requirements, however, often involve elaborate bureaucratic mechanisms to assure that restricted transactions are properly reported. Usually, these bureaucracies are understaffed and underfunded and they are unable to provide comprehensive and timely audit assurances of the completeness or accuracy of reports. As a result, many public servants are tempted to circumvent the spirit of the regulations by adopting evasion strategies which raise little risk of sanction late filings, incomplete answers, technical justifications to resist disclosure, etc. The principled public servant should conscientiously overcome these temptations and make full, open, forthright and timely reports, resolving doubts in favor of disclosure.

(2) Avoidance of financial conflicts. Despite laws that permit financial conflicts, public servants should make all reasonable efforts to avoid transactions which may compromise or give the appearance of compromising their objectivity, independence or honesty.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Disclosure of often not enough. Disclosure requirements too often are ineffective halfway measures of dealing with financial conflicts of interest. In addition to the problems of overseeing and administering compliance, they create a whole new layer of ethical obligations which are more technical than substantive. Disclosure laws, whether general or detailed, tend to incur resentment from those who have to comply they resent the invasion of privacy and the time it takes to fill out elaborate forms. They also seem to trivialize the notion of government ethics by obscuring the underlying conflicts of interest and their ethical implications. Moreover, disclosure laws tend to invite unseemly excuses based on ignorance of the rules or an inability to deal with their complexities. Finally, it is clear that they are often unsuccessful in deterring conduct that tends to undermine general public trust. For example, history has shown that voters have been willing to re-elect public officials in spite of substantial evidence of financial impropriety, largely because the officials have been successful in "bringing home the bacon" to their particular districts. Because serious conflicts of interest compromise the entire political structure and prejudice all the public, it is not always sufficient to leave the issue to narrow constituencies.

2) Public servants should be willing to do less than the law allows. Laws that permit questionable conflict transactions, provided that they are disclosed, tend to convey the false impression that the disclosure legitimizes the underlying transaction and removes the conflict of interest problem. Similarly, regulations which suggest bright lines of propriety by establishing restrictions as to value and source of outside earned income and gratuities implicitly encourage the erroneous belief that earned income and gratuities within the legal limits raise no ethical problems. Ethical public servants do not view their duties to preserve the reality and appearance of independent objective judgment strictly in terms of statutory provisions. In order to avoid actual and apparent improprieties, they will not treat the legal lines of permissibility as the standards of propriety. For example, in accepting gratuities and engaging in income generating transactions, ethically scrupulous public servants will often voluntarily refrain doing all they are allowed to do by law.

3) Prohibitions and restrictions. Policy-makers should consider more effective measures of protecting the public trust in the form of specific prohibitions of particularly dangerous conflicts such as honoraria, gratuities and specific sources of outside income. The trend in this area is toward more restrictions and prohibitions. Although legislators have been reluctant to impose on themselves the same stringent standards they establish for administrative officials, individual legislators, should voluntarily comply with higher standards.

(3) Benefits intended to influence. Public servants should not accept benefits of any sort under circumstances in which it could be reasonably inferred that the benefit was intended to influence them in the performance of their public responsibilities.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Ethical requirements more stringent than bribery laws. In most jurisdictions, a person commits the crime of bribery if the person provides or offers to provide a benefit to a public servant with the intent to influence the public servant's vote, opinion, judgment, action, decision, or exercise of discretion. The procedural safeguards of a criminal trial, however, including the high standard of proof, make it difficult to establish the crime. It is critical to recognize, therefore, that the acceptance by public servants of benefits of any sort from persons who wish to influence official actions raises ethical problems even when the transaction does not rise to the level of bribery, the ethical obligation to avoid transactions which cast doubt on the integrity of government is much more stringent.

2) Attempts to influence public action. Many citizens seek to influence government actions. Some do so by seeking to form relationships with public servants based on personal benefits jobs, special investment opportunities, loans, travel, lodging, entertainment, gifts, favors, discounts, etc., which are intended to appeal to self-interest and distract public servants from their commitment to use public powers only to advance public interests. The offer and acceptance of private benefits intended to influence public actions creates real and apparent conflicts of interest which should be avoided scrupulously.

3) Actual influence is unnecessary. Public servants are obligated to protect the public trust by avoiding both the appearance and the reality of impropriety. Therefore, in accepting any benefit, whether in the form of compensation for services or a gratuity, it is not enough that the public servant has no intent to do anything improper or, in fact, that nothing improper is far too strong to permit acceptance of any benefit arising from a corrupt motive.

(4) Duty to report improper offers. When the possibility of improper motive requires refusal of a gratuity, the official should firmly warn the person about bribery laws and improper influence; if the attempt to unduly influence is clear, the matter should be reported to law enforcement authorities.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Education and enforcement. It is not always sufficient to turn down an improper offer of gifts or other benefits. Any attempt to unduly influence a public official warrants some action that at least educates the offeror of the impropriety and risk of such conduct.

2) Obligation to prevent corruption. Occasionally, an improper offer is made by an unsophisticated individual who should have, but did not know any better. A polite but firm warning may be sufficient. On the other hand, improperly motivated gratuities are attempted bribes and when the source is politically experienced, the matter should be handled with great seriousness. In some cases, the failure to react with indignation or report improper offers to the authorities can be viewed as wrong in itself. (Consider the possibility of a "sting" operation where a "wired" informant makes an illegal offer. How would it look on the nightly news to learn that the public official merely said, "No thank you"?)

(5) Appearance of undue influence. Regardless of the actual intent of the provider or recipient, public servants should not accept benefits of any sort under circumstances which would create in the mind of a reasonable observer the belief the benefit may influence them in the performance of their public responsibilities.

i. Earned income from persons directly affected by actions or decisions. Public servants should avoid engaging in financial relationships that might reasonably be construed to affect their judgment or actions, especially from lobbyists or other persons who are likely to be affected directly by their actions or decisions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Outside income. One of the most difficult areas of conflicts of interest concerns outside earned income. The simplest solution is to ban such income altogether. In fact, this method is becoming more common, at least with regard to full time employees in the executive branch. But for the vast majority of elected officials and appointed commissioners who serve government part time, prohibition of all outside earned income would be both unfair and impractical. Public servants who do not receive an adequate full time salary must have legitimate ways of earning a decent living. Still, certain financial relationships are so fraught with the potential to undermine independent judgment that they are simply inconsistent with the duties of public office. It is in this context that the public servant should realize the importance of avoiding financial relationships with lobbyists or other persons who are likely to be affected directly by their actions or decisions. Only in the most exceptional of cases and with the fullest disclosure, should such relationships be permitted.

2) Honoraria and fees for appearances. Because of the great potential for abuse, public servants should not accept payments for giving speeches or writing about matters concerned with their public duties. Such payments, often called honoraria, may be proper in exceptional cases where the source has no significant interest in the public servant's governmental decisions and where the nature and amount of the payment is clearly reasonable and proportional to the effort required to earn it. A public official should not accept compensation for merely appearing at a function or attending a breakfast, lunch or dinner meeting and discussing a matter of interest to other participants.

ii. Gratuities from persons directly affected by actions or decisions. Public servants should refuse to accept any gratuities which may reasonably be construed to affect their judgment or actions, especially from lobbyists or other persons who are likely to be affected directly by their actions or decisions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Does not impugn personal integrity. Some public officials take personal offense at the implication that they would allow their integrity to be compromised by a gift or favor. Most feel immune to the temptations and unconscious tendencies to give something in return, whether out of natural gratitude or the desire to encourage further gifts. "My decisions can't be influenced by a free lunch" is a common refrain from those who resent rules and ethical standards requiring rejection of gratuities and favors, especially those who view such gratuities as innocent and proper perks of public office. These reactions unduly personalize the ethical theories and sound public policy which seeks to insulate public officials from the corrupting influences of gratuities. In spite of the confidence of public servants who accept gratuities that their judgment remains unimpeded, the people who provide gratuities and favors seem to believe that it is to their advantage to do so. Often the cost is viewed as a "business" expense.

2) Subtle effect of favors. Senator Paul Douglas of Illinois, speaking of the much smaller favors prevalent in the years after World War II observed in 1951 that:

What happens is a gradual shifting of a man's loyalty from the community to those who have been doing him favors. His final decisions, therefore, are made in response to his private friendship and loyalties rather than to the public good. Throughout this whole process an official will claim — and may indeed believe — that there is no causal connection between the favors he has received and the decisions which he makes... [The whole process may be so subtle as to not be detected by the official himself.]

3) Factors to consider. While it is not necessarily proper to accept a gift simply because its donor has a pure motive, if the purpose is improper, the benefit should invariably be refused, firmly and unequivocally, regardless of the private intent of the government official. A public servant who is considering accepting a lawful gratuity should carefully, realistically and objectively evaluate the likely motive of the person offering it. Why am I being offered this gift or favor? Would I be offered the benefit if I did not wield public influence? Who is paying for it? Is it likely to be written off as a business expense? If I accept the benefit will reasonable outsiders think that the donor has some hold on me or that I owe something in return? Since there is no offsetting public good to justify the appearance of impropriety created by the acceptance of gratuities, all close cases should be resolved against any action which raises reasonable suspicions regarding the integrity of the public servant or government in general.

4) Courtesy gifts of modest value. Although the Government Ethics Center standards suggest that all gifts and gratuities from persons who seek to influence government action should be refused, a plausible case can be made that it is not improper to accept modest gifts or gratuities such as a box of candy, a fruit basket, tickets to sports events or plays, or an unpretentious meal. In 1951, Senator Paul Douglas observed that some gratuities are not harmful because they are simply courtesy gestures, "an expression of good will or a simply convenience, symbolic rather than intrinsically significant." Since such gifts are not taken seriously by the giver nor do they mean very much to the receiver, they do not present unacceptable conflicts of interest. The line between proper and improper gratuities starts at the point where the gift begins to mean something though even small gratuities can be significant if they are repeated and come to be expected. Senator Douglas, however, firmly disapproved accepting valuable gratuities, regardless of their legality or source because "expensive gifts, lavish or frequent entertainment, paying hotel or travel costs, valuable services, inside advice as to investments, discounts and allowances in purchasing are clearly improper."

iii. Campaign contributions from persons directly affected by decisions. Public servants should be cautious about accepting campaign contributions which may reasonably be construed to affect their judgment or actions, especially from lobbyists or other persons who are likely to be affected directly by their decisions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Campaign contributions. Persons who make significant campaign contributions often have direct interest in official action. It not only is improper to make any decisions differently as a result of a contribution, it also is improper to exercise any informal influence on behalf of the contributor that would not be employed for the average citizen. Since this is an area of close press scrutiny, it is especially important that public officials avoid acts which appear to be affected by contributions.

iv. Personal relationships with persons directly affected by decisions. Public servants should be cautious about accepting campaign contributions which may reasonably be construed to affect their judgment or actions, especially from lobbyists or other persons who are likely to be affected directly by their decisions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Personal relationships. In some cases, the existence of close personal relationships (i.e., family member, intimate significant other) provide a basis for a conflict of interest. If a relative or intimate friend of a public servant is a lawyer, lobbyist, or a party directly involved in an official action, the public official is subject to overt and unconscious influences that could affect judgment. Whenever possible, public servants should avoid such conflicts by recusing themselves from the decision making process. In all other cases, the relationship ought to be disclosed and parties who are likely to be affected should be explicitly assured that the relationship will not affect the professional judgments of the public servant.

(b) Recusal and disqualification. Public servants should not take any public action under circumstances where, due to a conflict in interest, they are not certain that they can do so fairly and objectively.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Unavoidable conflicts. In some cases, conflicts caused by business, occupational or social relationships are unavoidable. In these situations, public servants and the entities they serve, have independent ethical obligations to safeguard the integrity and image of the decision making process. Thus, the ethical sensitivity of the public servant should be reinforced by clear and reasonable rules requiring disclosure and, in some cases, voluntary recusal (withdrawal) or involuntary disqualification.

2) Consent. In all cases, the facts creating a conflict of interest should be disclosed to concerned parties to seek their consent. If any of the parties reasonably believe that the conflicting interest might affect official conduct, disqualification or withdrawal is required and substitute decision making processes must be implemented.

3) Resolving doubts. Since close cases inevitably will create at least the appearance of impropriety, doubts should be resolved in favor of disqualification or voluntary refusal.

(c) Bias or favoritism. Public servants should exercise the powers and prerogatives of office fairly and without prejudice or favoritism. It is improper to use public authority to reward relatives, friends or political supporters or to hinder or punish enemies and opponents.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Qualifications. Public servants should make all employment decisions on the merits, only choosing those who are well qualified. Subjective matters like personality, temperament and compatibility are relevant and it is not always necessary to pick the person with the highest qualifications. And, politicians employing staff to help advance political and policy goals will naturally and appropriately consider other factors as vital qualifications. These factors, however, do not diminish the fact that a responsible employment decision seeks out those who are more than barely qualified.

2) Ideological views. Though ideology and history of support are valid considerations in clearly political positions, they are inappropriate in the vast majority of government jobs. In spite of the long tradition of patronage, public jobs should not be treated as the spoils of victory.

(d) Intervening on behalf of constituents and friends. Public officials should be extremely cautious about directly or indirectly intervening with normal decision making, investigatory or adjudicative processes of governmental bodies on behalf of constituents or friends since such intervention can threaten the ability of government administrators to exercise independent objective judgment on the merits.

(1) General rule. Generally, intervention on behalf of constituents or friends is proper only if it is strictly limited to assuring fairness of the procedures and the intervener consciously avoids seeking to unduly influence the decision making process. Those who intervene should firmly, explicitly and unambiguously convey their limited purposes to reduce the possibility of direct or indirect pressure on administrators which could reasonably appear to influence the substantive decision.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Preserving the independence of administrators. All public servants should avoid using or appearing to use political influence in any way that is likely to cause another public servant to consider inappropriate factors in exercising public authority. Acts either intended to or likely to be construed as enticement, trade-offs, ingratiation, intimidation, or coercion are improper.

2) Intervention on behalf of constituents. Elected politicians are frequently asked by constituents and other supporters to intervene with other government agencies or departments. In fact, "case work" comprises a major part of the service provided by elected officials at all levels of government. Constituents bidding on government contracts often seek the help of "their" representatives; those who are subject to investigations may expect their legislator to provide protection from what they view to be unfair procedures, and persons seeking government approvals or licenses sometimes ask politicians to facilitate the process. In the ombudsman function, seeking to remedy clear injustices or otherwise assure fair determination of rights is appropriate. Still, efforts to intervene on behalf of constituents are fraught with potential appearances of impropriety and the possibility that the intervention will prevent other public officials from exercising independent objective judgment on the merits.

3) Is intervention in the public interest? An initial problem with intervention is that the interests of a particular constituent are not necessarily parallel with the interests of other constituents or the public as a whole. The primary obligation to advance the overall public good may require public servants to refuse requests for assistance in some cases.

4) Does the intervening official know enough? Another problem associated with intervention is that the public official may not know or understand all the facts that are relevant to a fair regulatory determination or a wise contracting decision.

5) Perception of pressure. Even where the intervening politician has no intent to influence improperly the normal process of decision making, it is not unlikely that the public servants involved this otherwise. Unless the intervening politicians are explicit and credible in stating the limited purposes of their involvement, administrators whose budgets are controlled by legislators are likely to feel pressure to make decisions differently than they otherwise would. Sometimes, regardless of the intervener's intent, administrators see the intervention as an opportunity to do a favor for the politician.

Public servants should assure that government is conducted openly, efficiently, equitably and honorably in a manner that permits the citizenry to make informed judgments and hold government officials accountable.

(a) Oversight. Public servants should assure that those to whom they have delegated public power, including their staffs and administrative agencies, carry out their responsibilities efficiently, equitably and ethically.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Auditing and reporting procedures. It is the duty of public servants with agency oversight responsibilities to develop effective auditing and reporting procedures which permit the exercise of vigilant oversight.

2) Staff training. Persons in supervisory authority should assure that their staff know and understand the legal and ethical obligations applicable to their duties.

(b) Openness. Public servants should exercise the authority of their offices openly so that the public is informed about governmental decisions and the citizenry can hold them accountable for their actions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Meetings. Secret or closed meetings and back room deals which conceal from the public facts that bear on its ability to exercise responsible citizenship are improper, even when made in the name of the "public good" or "national security." Public servants should be especially scrupulous about maintaining maximum openness in dealing with issues of compensation and benefits for public employees.

2) Exceptions. Although secrecy or confidentiality occasionally is in the public interest (as with police undercover and foreign intelligence operations and military plans), exceptions to the general rule of openness should be rare and the principles and procedures for determining those exceptions should be subject to scrutiny, debate and oversight.

3) Evasion of openness rules. Public servants should honor the spirit and intent of open government rules and not engage in subterfuges or legalistic schemes to avoid them. While public servants should abide by the letter and spirit of all rules, open meeting, freedom of information, and "sunshine" laws are especially important because they reinforce accountability by requiring public business to be conducted in a way that assures citizen access to political processes. Although these rules tend to be unpopular with many public servants who believe they unreasonably invade privacy and encumber government operations, it is improper to engage in tactics which evade their spirit.

(c) Duty to improve the system. Public servants who believe that a law or policy is not achieving its intended purpose, is creating unintended harms, or is wasteful or inefficient, should take affirmative steps to improve procedures in a way that will increase the fairness and quality of government services and assure that policies are implemented equitably, efficiently and economically.

(1) Making changes. Public servants should take whatever actions they can to correct problems, streamline procedures and improve services. Where desirable changes exceed authority, public servants should promptly and forcefully recommend reform to the appropriate person or body.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Overcoming the "it's-not-my-job" attitude. There is a tendency in all organizations to define one's responsibilities narrowly, fostering an "it's-not-my-job" mentality with respect to defects in policy or implementation. It is every public servant's job to see that the government serves the people well by assuring that it is responsive, respectful, efficient, economical and fair.

(2) Supervisor's duty. In order to encourage a broad sense of responsibility for both the results and methods of government action, supervisors should develop a working environment that fosters constructive criticism and creative problem solving.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Negative bureaucratic culture. Establishing a healthy atmosphere where everyone is willing to be accountable for the end product is difficult because many government organizations are overworked and understaffed. There is a tendency to view criticisms, and even constructive suggestions for change, as more things to do or worry about which interfere with the performance of existing duties. Consequently, a negative bureaucratic culture often develops which can deter and discourage the questioning of methods and the evaluation of results.

2) Avoid kill-the-messenger tendencies. Responsible public servants should be aware of this tendency and resist unthinking bureaucratic tendencies to "kill-the-messenger."

(d) Self-policing. Public servants should maintain the integrity and trustworthiness of government by taking whatever steps are necessary, including reporting improper conduct to appropriate authorities, to prevent the unlawful or unethical use of public position, authority or resources.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Principles of public trust and accountability. Public servants are often in the best position to observe and take actions against unlawful and unethical uses of public position, authority and resources. In fact, many such uses could not occur without the active involvement or, at least, the acquiescence of colleagues and subordinates. The principles of public trust and accountability combine to place a special obligation on persons in public office to refuse to cooperate, to actively discourage, and if necessary to prevent improper conduct, to report violations of both law and ethical standards.

2) Establishing an ethical atmosphere that deters wrongdoing. It is important to establish an atmosphere in government where potential wrongdoers undertake very high risk in seeking to misuse government office. This occurs when it becomes known that the pride and ethical commitment of all public servants impels them to police their own profession. The person who violates the public trust, not the one who prevents or reports such violations ought to bear the brunt of disapproval from the public and government colleagues.

3) Overcoming practical and emotional impediments. Unfortunately, there are powerful practical and psychological impediments which make self-policing risky and unrewarding. On a practical level, saying no to a colleague, superior or a powerful political figure who has influence with the public servant's superiors or over the budget of a particular department can easily result in reprisals, and, there is no assurance that the action taken to prevent improper conduct will be successful. On the emotional level, the inherent desire to be liked and an aversion to being considered a "goody two-shoes," someone who's "not on the team," or worse, a "stoolie," tends to deter active pursuit of ethical principles in contexts where the prevalent policy seems to be, "don't rock the boat," "to get along, go along." It is especially important, therefore, that those who wield power do so to encourage and protect the conscientious employee who cares about doing what is right.

4) Establishing reporting policies. In some cases, reporting structures, such as policies requiring administrators to report the nature and substance of contracts from those who seek to influence their decision making, can make it harder for those who seek to use their influence improperly and easier for those who wish to be insulated from political pressures and financial temptations. For example, administrators of state programs might be required to report and describe contacts from politicians who are intervening on behalf of constituents or friends.

Public servants should honor and respect the principles and spirit of representative democracy and set a positive example of good citizenship by scrupulously observing the letter and spirit of laws and rules.

(a) Obeying all laws. Public servants have a special obligation to obey all laws and regulations.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) All citizens are obliged to obey the law and to abide by regulations applicable to them. Public servants, however, have an additional burden to do so because their illegal acts take on a public dimension that goes beyond the violation itself. Laws seeking to govern their public duties are especially important. Yet even the violation of a law in the public servant's private life (drunk driving, tax evasion, drug possession) carries an additional stigma.

(b) Artifices and schemes. Public servants should not engage in artifices and schemes to exploit loopholes or ambiguities in the law in a way that undermines their spirit and purpose.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Undermining public confidence. When public servants seek to circumvent the spirit or purpose of laws they tend to undermine the public's confidence in government and diminish the public's commitment to civic responsibility by legitimizing self-interested evasions of public policy.

(c) Integrity of the process. In using procedural rules, public servants should maintain the integrity, fairness and efficiency of the process by honoring the substance and spirit of the rules and by refraining from conduct which undermines the principles of representative democracy.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Improper manipulation of procedures. The importance of technical procedures in the legislative and administrative process encourages legalistic manipulation to achieve political goals. While this is not inherently improper, there is a tendency to adopt an "ends-justifies-the-means" philosophy which can elevate process over substance and power over principle in a way that undermines fundamental assumptions of democratic government.

2) Loss of public respect. The public interest is not served when public servants engage in trickery or procedural extortion to achieve their ends. Generally, the public views parliamentary machinations with cynicism. Responsible public servants recognize that no specific political victory is worth damaging the delicate structure of democratic government. Legalistic maneuvering which creates unfair or anti-democratic results inevitably spawns ill will and countermeasures. Sometimes Machiavellian scheming can become so prevalent that it reduces the political process to competitive gamesmanship.

3) Need for leadership. The principle that public servants have an obligation to the integrity of the democratic system to exercise voluntary self-restraint in the legal but ethically dubious use of procedures is difficult to adhere to in some political situations where expediency is more highly regarded than principle if it is permissible, it's proper; if it works, it's justified. And, refraining from improper procedural manipulation is especially difficult in legislative contexts where opponents use such tactics and where there are important immediate rewards for winning. It is, therefore, the obligation of leaders to set a good example.

4) Tests of propriety. There is no single litmus test to know exactly when the use of a procedural maneuver crosses the line of propriety. Still, whether something is a clever but legitimate tactic or a sleazy, unfair ploy must depend on more than the perspective of winners and losers. A valuable test is: would it be good for the system if everyone used the rules in this way? A pervasive factor in evaluating the propriety of the use of rules is the appearance of fairness. An alternative approach is found in the Ethics Manual for Members and Employees of the House of Representatives (construing Clause 2 of the Code of Official Conduct, House rule XIII) which states that it is wrong for public servants to do indirectly what they cannot do directly. If the use of procedures creates a substantive result that clearly could not have been achieved without the technical tactic, it is likely to be regarded as improper.

5) Notice. If the procedure does not provide adequate notice or opportunity to opponents, it often will be regarded by many as improper. For example, it is improper to suspend the rules or force a vote in a way that violates customary practices and expectations of fair notice and, therefore, prevents legitimate opposition from having its say.

(d) Use of leadership power. Legislative leaders and committee chairs should use their leadership powers only in a manner consistent with representative democracy.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Limitations on leadership power. It is typical of government processes that administrative, screening and information gathering tasks are delegated to agencies, committees and individuals. The purpose of such delegation invariably should be to improve the process so that the organization's general will can be carried out more effectively. The purpose of such delegation never should be to grant individual leaders increased power to subvert or make public policy in a manner that derogates the prerogatives of the policy-making body as a whole.

2) Arbitrary use of power. If a technique is possible only because the person who invokes the rule controls the process, it is likely to be considered an abuse of power (e.g., strained interpretations of fact or law as a basis for a parliamentary ruling, refusal to recognize a person, arbitrarily delaying or shelving an issue otherwise ripe for consideration).

3) Abuse of power. Skilled politicians can properly use leadership power to bring factions together, to fashion compromises and to break unhealthy gridlock situations. On the other hand, Lord Action's admonition about the corrupting tendencies of power can apply to legislative leaders who use their position in inappropriate ways to block consideration of important issues, to bully, bribe or intimidate fellow legislators to support positions and programs favored by the leader. A public servant who controls the parliamentary process or is otherwise in a position to facilitate or prevent the consideration of an issue, has an ethical obligation to avoid any use that effectively undermines representative democracy. For example, it is improper for legislative leaders, including committee chairs to unilaterally prevent measures from receiving appropriate consideration either on the floor or before the committee.

(e) Civil disobedience. In rare cases, a public servant may exercise the prerogative of conscientious objection by disobeying the law. In such cases, the illegal behavior should be open and the official should be willing to bear the appropriate legal and political consequences.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Tradition. There is a long and revered history in this country of civil disobedience—the open and public refusal to abide by a law as a means of protest and as an impetus to change the law.

Public servants should safeguard public confidence in the integrity of government by being honest, fair, caring and respectful and by avoiding conduct creating the appearance of impropriety or which is otherwise unbefitting a public official.

(a) Fitness for public office. Public servants should conduct their professional and personal lives so as to reveal character traits, attitudes, and judgments that are worthy of honor and respect and demonstrate fitness for public office.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Need for positive attitudes. In a democracy, positive attitudes about government and the people who exercise its powers are essential to participatory citizenship. Since public servants are representatives of government, even unofficial conduct often has significant symbolic value that bears upon the public's pride, trust and confidence in government. Any conduct which damages public confidence injures the political system.

2) High standards of probity. Public servants should be held to the high standards of personal probity. Acts which demean or discredit government or demonstrate defects in their character and judgment are improper.

(1) Honesty. Public servants should be scrupulously honest, avoiding any form of lying, deception, deviousness, hypocrisy and cheating in their professional and personal lives.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Dishonesty. Dishonesty by a public servant is wrong in itself but it also violated the principle of public service ethics by seriously undermining the credibility of government. A public servant who is dishonest in any significant way, even in private life, does not inspire trust and confidence in government.

2) Deception. Technical or literal truthfulness is not all that is required; honesty precludes any deliberate deception including the raising of false inferences.

(2) Integrity. A public servant should reflect personal integrity in all matters, placing principle over expediency and demonstrating courage of convictions.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Principled leadership. Although it is necessary and proper for elected officials to represent the view of their constituencies, it also is necessary that they have pronounced and strong personal convictions—things they stand for. A public servant should offer principled leadership, be a compass rather than a weather vane.

(3) Private personal conduct. Public servants should avoid engaging in any conduct which is likely to bring discredit on themselves and the governmental bodies in which they serve.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Professional and private behavior. Although there has been much discussion in recent years about a new intrusiveness of the press into the private lives of politicians, there is little doubt that virtually any behavior that would raise the moral eyebrows of a significant portion of the citizenry is subject to public disclosure in the press. Thus, public servants who choose to engage in morally challengeable conduct should do so knowing they risk exposure and personal and institutional embarrassment.

2) Public trust as a matter of perception. Since public trust is a matter of perception, and since the disclosure of dubious conduct increases cynicism about the kind of people serving government, the public servant has an extra burden to avoid such conduct.

3) Private morality. An especially troublesome group of behaviors concern activities, drug or alcohol abuse, adultery, exploitative or promiscuous relationships, sex with minors or prostitutes, and gambling raising issues about private morality. Whether or not these behaviors are morally "wrong," many claim they represent lifestyle choices which are not relevant to public service ethics.

3a) Illegal and dishonest conduct. Activities which are illegal (e.g., drunk driving, hiring prostitutes) are clearly wrong because they violate the lawfulness mandate of public service ethics. And, private conduct revealing hypocrisy (e.g., a public official who claims to be anti-abortion recently paid for one for a girlfriend) shows a lack of integrity. The most serious questions pitting personal privacy against public duty arise when the conduct is neither illegal nor hypocritical.

3b) Lawful conduct raising moral issues. Many believe that lawful private acts which do not bear in any direct way on the responsibilities of public office are within a zone of personal privacy that should be insulated from public scrutiny or criticism. Under this theory, adultery, homosexuality and similar private behaviors should almost never be appropriate concerns of the press or public. The trend, however, is clearly against this view. Based on the argument that all personal behavior which reveals judgment and character is, by that fact alone, relevant to the public's right to know about the character of its public servants.

3c) Role of the press. As a practical matter, the press tends to determine the pertinence of private conduct, and whether it raises issues of fitness to serve or appearances of impropriety. If morally controversial actions are reported, the public exposure tends to diminish public respect. This puts public servants who might otherwise choose to engage in some of these activities in a difficult position. They could insist righteously that it is not the public's business. But they must realize that if journalists disagree, the matter still will be treated as an impropriety and it will be made public. Thus, the individual must decide whether it is worth the personal and political risk, bearing in mind that exposure may undermine public trust in both the politician and the institution.

(b) Campaigning. Those seeking public office should conduct their campaigns in a way that aids the citizenry to make an informed choice on appropriate criteria and which casts credit on government and the election process.

Guidelines and Commentary

1) Discussion of important issues. Campaigns should be based primarily on the discussion of issues of importance that are within the scope of authority of the position sought. The citizenry is entitled to know where a candidate stands on the major issues that are likely to be confronted in office. It is improper to deliberately conceal or obfuscate beliefs and attitudes on such issues or deliberately focus the campaign on collateral or trivial matters of comparatively little consequence.

2) Consequences of negative campaigning. A candidate's prior record and character with respect to honesty, integrity and leadership is relevant in all campaigns. When one candidate chooses to stress a negative perspective on the record or character of an opponent, however, great caution must be taken to avoid low level "mud slinging" that brings the entire political process into disrepute. When the public forms a "plague-on-both-your-houses" attitude, the entire system is injured.

3) Honesty and fairness. All statements and claims should be technically and inferentially honest. The controlling test is not merely accuracy but fairness. Literal truthfulness is not sufficient; it is improper to engage in any form of dishonesty, deception, or exaggeration.

4) Dignified discourse. Candidates should strive to establish and maintain a tone of respectful discourse and debate consistent with the dignity of the public trust reposed in public office.

(Ord. No. 97-030)

The requirements contained in this division shall apply to all boards of the city unless there is any statutory provision to the contrary, or unless otherwise stated in this Code or the City Charter.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

The term "board" is defined to include every agency, authority, advisory board, regulatory board, quasi-judicial board, commission, committee, task force or any other citizens' ad hoc group created and funded in whole or in part by the city. The foregoing notwithstanding, this division shall not apply to citizens' ad hoc groups created for specific advisory purposes where such group's existence is limited to a period of less than one year. Except as otherwise provided herein or in the City Charter, city boards, and citizens' ad hoc advisory groups shall only be created by action of the city council. The boards governed by state law and contained in division 2 of this article may be referred to collectively as the "statutory boards." The boards governed by City Charter, ordinance or resolution and contained in division 3 of this article may be referred to collectively as the "advisory boards."

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) All city boards created after the effective date of this division shall be created only by ordinance. Such ordinance shall set forth the board's purpose, function, power, responsibility, jurisdiction, membership requirements and restrictions, terms and conditions of appointment to or removal from the board, and the specific staff support, if any, to be provided to the board. The ordinance shall also provide for an annual report, either oral or written, to the city council.

(b) Prior to adoption of an ordinance creating and establishing any new board, and each five years thereafter, city council shall specifically review and consider the following:

(1) For boards other than ad hoc advisory boards, whether the establishment of the board will create sufficient betterment to the community to justify the city's delegation of a portion of its authority;

(2) Whether another board or agency, either public or private, which is already in existence could serve the same purpose;

(3) The costs, both direct and indirect, of establishing and maintaining the board;

(4) Whether the board is necessary to enable the city to obtain state or federal grants or other financing; and

(5) Whether the creation of a new board is the best method of achieving the benefit desired.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

Each board member shall be at the time of appointment a permanent resident of the city for a minimum of six months, and at all times while serving as a member of such board, a qualified elector of the city, except as follows:

(a) The city council may appoint a person or persons to a board who does not meet current State of Texas voter registration regulations to become a qualified elector; and/or

(b) The city council may appoint a non-voting ex-officio member or members who may contribute special consultative information to a board.

The members of each board shall be appointed by and, for the advisory boards, shall serve at the pleasure of the city council. The primary consideration in appointing board members shall be to provide the board with the needed technical, professional, financial, business, or administrative expertise. The membership of each board should be representative of the community at large and should reflect the racial, ethnic, and cultural makeup of the community.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 21-035, § 1(App. A), 6-21-2021; Ord. No. 21-048, § 1(App. A), 7-19-2021; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

For all boards other than the audit finance board, each member, unless sooner removed by the city council, shall serve a term of two years. Their terms shall be staggered, such that the terms of either three or four members, on an alternating basis, shall end on the 30th day of June of each year. Members may be appointed to succeed themselves; however, no member may be appointed to serve more than two consecutive terms, not including partial terms. All members shall serve until their successors are appointed and qualified. Terms of office for the audit finance board are as provided in section 2-120.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 25-049, § 1(App. A), 7-7-2025)

No board member shall serve more than two consecutive terms on any one board. Any part of a term shall not constitute a full term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, advisory boards other than the finance audit board may appoint term-limited members to serve as ex-officio members to serve as non-voting members of the board for a period not to exceed two one-year appointments.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 25-049, § 1(App. A), 7-7-2025; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

Vacancies on the boards, other than councilmember vacancies on the audit finance board, shall be filled by the city council. Unless sooner removed by the city council, a person appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the time for which his predecessor on the board was appointed. Newly appointed members shall be installed at or prior to the first regular meeting of the board following their appointment. Councilmember vacancies on the audit finance board shall be filled by the mayor.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) A board member may be subject to removal by the city council if he or she is absent from three consecutive regular meetings. A member of a board shall be deemed absent from a meeting when he or she is not present at the meeting at least 75 percent of its duration. A report of such consecutive absences by a member of the board shall be reported to the city council by the board.

(b) Board members are required to attend all applicable trainings: state mandated trainings; board orientations conducted by the city; and for the statutory boards, specialized trainings conducted by the city.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

Members of the boards shall serve without compensation; however, each member shall be entitled to reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses incurred by the member in the discharge of his or her official duties, subject to prior approval by the city council.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

Members of the boards shall not vote or participate in any proceeding that involves any matter or property in which they have a personal or pecuniary interest, in which the decision of the board will directly affect them. In the event any such possible conflict should arise, the member affected thereby shall make disclosure of such fact to the board, which disclosure shall be duly noted in the minutes of the board, and disqualify himself from any further participation in the board's consideration of such matter. The provisions of chapter 2, article VI of this Code (code of ethics) shall serve as ethical guidelines and apply to the participation of members in board proceedings.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

For all boards other than the board of adjustment, a majority of the members of each board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The quorum requirement for the board of adjustment is as provided in section 2-112.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

For the advisory boards other than the audit finance board, regular meetings shall be held monthly as business shall require, and special meetings at the call of the chair, the vice-chair or a majority of the members. Meetings of the statutory boards shall be held as provided in sections 2-112, 2-113 and 2-114, respectively. Meetings of the audit finance board shall be held as provided in section 2-120. Each board shall provide notice of its meetings and specific agenda items in accordance with the procedures of the Texas Open Meetings Act.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

Except for the audit finance board and board of adjustment, each board shall hold an organizational meeting in July of each year, at which meeting it shall elect from among its members a chair and a vice-chair before proceeding to any other matters of business. The board shall appoint a secretary and such other officers as it deems necessary either from its membership or from the staff representative assigned by the city manager of the city to work with the board. The organization of the audit finance board shall be as provided in section 2-120; of the board of adjustment as provided in section 2-112. Each board, other than the audit finance board, shall adopt its own rules of procedure and shall keep a record of its proceedings consistent with the requirements of law.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

All boards shall submit copies of the minutes of their meetings and records of their members' attendance to said meetings to the city clerk to be maintained as a record of the city.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

Commencing with the year 2003, each city board and committee shall report in the following manner: by the first city council meeting in February of each year, its chairperson shall submit a report, approved by the board, to the city council setting forth the following information concerning the board:

(1) Whether the board is serving the purpose for which it was created;

(2) Whether the board is serving current community needs;

(3) A list of the board's major accomplishments;

(4) Whether there is any other board, either public or private, which would better serve the function of the board; and

(5) Other recommendations.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) The mayor shall annually appoint a member of city council to serve as the city council liaison to each board. Said appointment shall remain effective until reassignment or reappointment by the mayor.

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the council liaison is to serve as a communication link with the city council. Council liaisons will be available during board meetings to answer questions regarding current council policies and goals, and to ensure that reports, recommendations and requests to city council are scheduled for council agendas.

(c) Duties and responsibilities. The duties and responsibilities of council liaisons are to:

(1) Strive to attend all assigned board meetings;

(2) Participate in special activities, workshops and events of the assigned board;

(3) Monitor the involvement of the assigned board members and inform them of relevant educational seminars;

(4) Advise board members on city council goals and objectives as they develop throughout the year;

(5) Provide status reports from the assigned board to the city council as a whole; and

(6) Listen to board proceedings but not dominate, lead or direct board action.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 18-074, § 2 (App. A), 12-3-2018)

The city manager shall appoint a member of the city staff to serve as the staff liaison to each statutory board, such appointment to remain effective until reassignment or reappointment by the city manager. The city manager may, but shall not be required to, appoint staff liaisons to the advisory boards.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the board of adjustment, which was established, in its original form, by Ordinance No. 115 on May 7, 1939.

(b) Purpose. The board is created pursuant to V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 211.008 et seq., for the purposes therein authorized.

(c) Membership and appointment. The board of adjustment shall be composed of five to seven regular members to be appointed by the city council. Members of the board of adjustment shall possess the following minimum qualifications:

(1) Shall be citizens of the United States of America and qualified voters of the State of Texas;

(2) Shall have resided for at least one year next preceding their appointment within the corporate limits of the City of Bellaire; and

(3) Shall possess such other qualifications as shall be from time to time imposed by law by the city council.

(d) Removal for cause. The city council may remove a board member for cause, as found by the city council, on a written charge after a public hearing. (V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 211.008(b).)

(e) Organization.

(1) Chair and vice-chair.

a. At the first meeting after the appointment of members of the board for a new term, the members of the board shall elect one of their number as chair and one of their number as vice-chair.

b. In the absence of the chair, the vice-chair shall act as chair and shall have all powers of the chair.

c. The members of the board may select an additional person to preside over meetings in the absence of the chair and the vice-chair.

d. The presiding officer of any meeting of the board may administer oaths and shall be in charge of all proceedings before the board and shall take such action as shall be necessary to preserve order and the integrity of all proceedings before the board.

(2) Staff secretary. The city manager shall appoint a secretary to the board who shall serve at the pleasure of the city manager. The secretary shall keep minutes of all proceedings of the board, which shall include the vote of each member upon every question. Such minutes shall be a summary of all proceedings before the board attested to by the secretary and shall be approved by a vote of a majority of the members of the board voting to approve the minutes. The secretary shall maintain all records of the board and shall, in addition, prepare orders of the board for signature by the chair as the official order of the board.

(3) Planning and zoning official and building official. In order to implement the applicable provisions of chapter 24 of this Code, the planning and zoning official and the building official shall provide necessary staff support to the board.

(f) Meetings.

(1) Regular meetings of the board shall be held monthly as business shall require, and special meetings at the call of the chair or a majority of the members.

(2) All meetings and hearings of the board shall be open to the public.

(3) Notices of appeals to the board and requests for variances or special exceptions or for determination of nonconforming uses or elimination thereof shall be given by mail to the persons-in-interest and by publishing a notice of such hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Bellaire at least ten days prior to the date set for the hearing.

(4) All records of the board shall be public records open to inspection at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice in accordance with V.T.C.A., Government Code § 552.021.

(g) Quorum. No meeting of the board may be called to order nor may any business be transacted by the board without a quorum, consisting of at least three members of the board, being present.

(1) The concurring vote of at least 75 percent of members (four members) shall be necessary for the board to take action as defined in the V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 211.009(c).

(h) Duties and powers. The board shall have the following duties and powers:

(1) To hear and decide an appeal that alleges error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative official in the enforcement of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 211, or of chapter 24 of this Code;

(2) To hear and decide special exceptions to the terms of chapter 24;

(3) To authorize, upon appeal in specific cases, such variances from the terms of chapter 24 as will not be contrary to the public interest where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of chapter 24 will result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of chapter 24 shall be observed and substantial justice done;

(4) Appeals from the board. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, or any taxpayer, any officer, department or board of the municipality, aggrieved by any decision of the board, may present to the district court of Harris County, Texas, a verified petition stating that a decision is illegal and specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be filed with the court no later than ten days after the filing of the board's decision with the office of the board. If such person or persons fails to file such petition within such ten-day period of time, then the decision of the board shall become final and binding;

(5) To review and report on any matter referred to it by the city council; and

(6) To adopt rules of procedure which are not in conflict with the provisions of chapter 24.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 16-029, § 1, 6-6-2016; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created, as authorized by state law, the building and standards commission, which was established, in its original form, by Ordinance No. 2137 on August 4, 1975.

(b) Purpose. The commission is created for the purpose of fulfilling, in a manner consistent with the laws of the State of Texas, those responsibilities delegated to it by the Charter and ordinances of the city. The city does adopt the provisions of the V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 54, subchapter C, thereof, entitled "Quasi-Judicial Enforcement of Health and Safety Ordinances," and does further adopt the provisions of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 214, entitled "Municipal Regulation of Structures," and does authorize the building official and/or the building and standards commission to proceed under either V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 54 or ch. 214 or both chapters to the extent the same is deemed appropriate and necessary. The building official and/or the building and standards commission are further authorized to implement and comply with the provisions of Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.A. "Requirements for Floodplain Management Regulations" and 60.6 "Variances and Exceptions."

(c) Membership and appointment. The commission shall be composed of five to seven members appointed by the city council.

(d) Removal for cause. The city council may remove a commission member for cause on a written charge. Before a decision regarding removal is made, the city council must hold a public hearing on the matter if requested by the commission member subject to the removal action. (V.T.C.A., Local Government Code § 54.033(c).)

(e) Meetings. Regular meetings of the board shall be held monthly as business shall require, and special meetings at the call of the chair or a majority of the members. The proceedings, notifications, and authority shall be as provided for and specified under the provisions of law, it being the intent of the city council to grant to the building official and the building and standards commission the maximum authority and right to implement and/or proceed under the provisions of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 54 and ch. 214 to the maximum extent as permitted and authorized by law.

(f) Duties and powers. The commission shall have the following duties and powers:

(1) All powers, duties and responsibilities provided for under V.T.C.A., Local Government Code chs. 54 and 214, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to substandard structures;

(2) To hold hearings and grant appeals from administrative actions as provided for by section 9-18, and variances as provided for by Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.A. "Requirements for Floodplain Management Regulations" and 60.6 "Variances and Exceptions;"

(3) To review, report and/or make recommendations on any matter referred to it by the city council;

(4) To identify community needs and to advise city council of the implications of such needs for the health and safety ordinances of the city;

(5) To make recommendations to city council regarding the building code and the ordinances under the commission's purview;

(6) To provide public education on issues pertaining to building codes; and

(7) To report annually to city council.

In addition, if not specifically provided for in either of V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 54 or ch. 214, and/or to the extent either of said chapters requires specific authorization by the city council, the city council does hereby grant and delegate to the appropriate officer of the city and/or the building and standards commission any and all powers, duties and responsibilities as shall be from time to time provided for, permitted or allowed by the legislature of the State of Texas to be so granted and delegated, it being the intent of the city to fully implement V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 54 and ch. 214 as well as to further provide the building and standards commission and any other commission, officer or legal authority, as provided for under the provisions of state law, the maximum powers, privileges, and rights as may be from time to time provided for, created or permitted to be delegated by the city council to such commissions, officers and/or legal authorities of the city, without restriction or limitation.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 23-087, § 1(App. A), 11-20-2023; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the planning and zoning commission, which was established, in its original form, by Ordinance No. 115 on May 7, 1939.

(b) Purpose. The commission is created for the purpose of fulfilling, in a manner consistent with the laws of the State of Texas, those planning and zoning responsibilities delegated to it by the charter and ordinances of the city. One of its dominant purposes shall be to accomplish the following:

(1) To identify community needs and to advise the city council of the short-range and long-range implications of such needs for the total development of the city.

(2) To recommend to the city council achievable community goals for planning and development programs.

(3) To recommend to the city council plans, programs and policies calculated to aid the community in achieving its defined goals.

(4) To explain to and explore with citizens those plans and programs adopted by the city council in an effort to ensure that private activities and desires may be accomplished in harmony with public needs and policies.

(c) Membership and appointment. The commission shall be composed of seven persons, each of whom shall be at the time of his appointment and at all times while serving as a member of such commission a qualified elector of the city. The members of the commission shall be appointed by the city council.

(d) Removal for cause. The city council may remove a commission member for cause on a written charge. Before a decision regarding removal is made, the city council must hold a public hearing on the matter if requested by the commission member subject to the removal action.

(e) Meetings. The commission shall meet regularly at least once each month and shall designate the date, time, and place of its meetings. It shall hold such special meetings as may be called by the chair, the vice-chair, or a majority of its members. The commission shall adopt its own rules of procedure and shall keep a record of its proceedings consistent with the provisions of this section and the requirements of law.

(f) Duties and powers. The commission is hereby charged with the responsibility and vested with the authority to:

(1) Formulate and recommend to the city council, for its adoption, such plans, programs and policies related to the future growth and development of the city as the commission deems appropriate and necessary;

(2) Exercise all of the powers and responsibilities of a planning commission relating to the approval or disapproval of land subdivision plans, plats or replats and to the vacation of such plans, plats or replats granted by the laws of the State of Texas including, but not limited to, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code chs. 42, 43, 211 and 212, and by the ordinances of the city including, but not limited to, chapter 23.5 (land subdivision regulations) of this Code;

(3) Exercise all of the powers and responsibilities of a zoning commission relating to the formulation of a zoning plan, hold public hearings, and make recommendations to the city council relating to the creation, amendment, and implementation of zoning regulations, classifications, and districts, all as provided for in the laws of the State of Texas including, but not limited to, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 211, and the ordinances of the city including, but not limited to, chapter 24 (planning and zoning regulations) of this Code;

(4) Perform such other duties and address such other matters as may be conferred upon or referred to the commission by the city council.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the audit finance board, which was established, in its original form, by Ordinance No. 02-051 on September 9, 2002.

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the board is to advise the city council concerning audits of the city and any auditing matters as may be referred to it by the chief financial officer of the city and/or the city council.

(c) Membership and appointment. The board shall be composed of three members of the city council, a citizen appointee with financial and/or audit experience, as well as the city manager and the chief financial officer of the city, ex officio, as non-voting members. The councilmembers of the city serving on the audit finance board shall be appointed by the mayor; the mayor may appoint him or herself as one of the councilmember appointees. The citizen member of the audit finance board shall be appointed by the city council.

(d) Terms of office. The members of the board shall serve a term of one year each, commencing February 1 of each year and continuing through January 31 of the following year. Councilmembers may not be appointed to serve more than three consecutive one-year terms on the board; the citizen member and the mayor, should he or she serve on the board, shall not be subject to such term limit.

(e) Organization. The board may elect from among its voting members any officers as it deems necessary.

(f) Meetings. The board shall meet as needed, but at least annually, in order to monitor the city's financial status throughout the year. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code, section 2-101 shall not apply to the audit finance board.

(g) Duties and powers. The audit finance board shall be responsible for the following:

(1) Recommending an auditor to city council during those years in which an auditor must be appointed by the city.

(2) Reviewing the audit of the city prior to submission to city council.

(3) Assisting the auditor and city staff with the presentation of the audit to city council.

(4) Providing a communication link between the auditor and city council concerning the following areas:

a. Accounting and financial reporting policies;

b. Debt management and fiscal policies;

c. Cash and investment management policies;

d. Purchasing policies;

e. Business services policies;

f. Other matters as may be referred by the city council;

g. Assist city council in carrying out its oversight and improvement responsibilities as they relate to the city's financial and performance reporting practices, internal controls, compliance with laws and regulations, and initiatives to improve the performance of city services; and

h. Any other auditing matters as the board deems appropriate.

(5) Reporting to city council at council meetings regarding the meetings of said board and at any other time deemed appropriate by said board.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the parks and recreation advisory board, which was established, in its original form, by Resolution No. 88-03 on January 18, 1988.

(b) Purpose. The board shall serve in an advisory capacity to the parks and recreation department (the "department") and to the city council regarding policy matters pertaining to city parks and recreation, and is responsible to the city council.

(c) Membership and appointment. The board shall be composed of five to nine members appointed by city council.

(d) Duties and powers. The board shall have the following specific purposes:

(1) Make recommendations to the city council regarding sources of funding for parks and recreation programs, amenities, facilities, additions, and improvements;

(2) Review and make advisory recommendations to the department and the city council on existing and proposed parks and recreation programs, amenities, facilities, additions, and improvements;

(3) Promote and stimulate public interest in parks and recreational programs and assist the director of the department in seeking the cooperation of public and private agencies that may have a direct or indirect involvement in parks and recreation; and

(4) Review and make advisory recommendations to the department and the city council on changes, modifications, and amendments to parks and recreation policies of the city. Other functions and duties of the board shall be to:

a. Acquaint itself with and make a continuous study and inspection of the complete parks and recreation system;

b. Recommend and help secure a comprehensive master plan and other studies for parks and recreation for the development of parks, facilities, and recreation programs;

c. Conduct a periodic review and update of the master plan and provide an annual report to the city council; and

d. Perform such other duties as the city council may prescribe.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 18-074, § 2 (App. B), 12-3-2018; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the environmental sustainability board, which was established, in its original form, by Resolution No. 88-10 on May 9, 1988.

(b) Purpose. The board shall serve in an advisory capacity to the city council and is responsible to the city council in advancing the city's environmental and sustainability vision.

(c) Membership and appointment. The board shall be composed of five to nine members appointed by city council.

(d) Duties and powers. The board shall have the following specific purposes:

(1) Review, evaluate, and issue advisory recommendations to the city council on the initiation, prioritization, modification, and development of city programs, policies, and activities relating to environmental sustainability, including, but not limited to, energy efficiency, and natural resource conservation, waste reduction, recycling, and climate resilience.

(2) Review, evaluate, and issue advisory recommendations to the city council on strategic planning, master planning, and capital improvement planning matters related to environmental sustainability.

(3) Develop and/or recommend programs, initiatives, and outreach strategies designed to educate the public and increase city residents' awareness of and participation in environmental sustainability practices.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 18-049, § 1(App. A), 8-6-2018; Ord. No. 24-035, § 1(App. A), 6-17-2024; Ord. No. 26-041, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the L.I.F.E. (Living, Information, Fun and Enrichment) advisory board, which was established, in its original form, by Resolution No. 85-21 on December 2, 1985.

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the board is to provide input to the parks and recreation department from the community regarding services and programs that have been or could be implemented by the city for the benefit and assistance of mature adults (aged 50 and older).

(c) Membership and appointment. The board shall be composed of five to nine members to be appointed by the city council.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)

(a) Creation. There is hereby created the cultural arts board, which was established, in its original form as an ad hoc committee, by Ordinance No. 03-046 on June 16, 2003, and later reconstituted as a standing board by Ordinance No. 04-027 on April 19, 2004.

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the board is to advise the city council concerning a cultural arts program, including visual and performing arts, to enhance quality of life in the city.

(c) Membership and appointment. The board shall be composed of five to nine members to be appointed by the city council.

(d) Duties and powers. The board shall have the following objectives:

(1) To provide the citizens of Bellaire with a cultural arts program that enhances our quality of life.

(2) To transform and evolve the places our citizens live, work and play into more inclusive, integrated environments utilizing art, dance, music, food and fitness.

(3) To create events that nurture our citizens' relationships with each other by learning to appreciate our cultural differences.

(4) To foster a culture in Bellaire that establishes our city as a unique, historic, yet contemporary community surrounded by a major metropolitan city.

(5) To participate in cooperative projects with city departments, other boards, and non-profits that serve the board's purpose.

(6) To serve as a resource to city council in assessing general aspects of beautification of the city, and in investigating and recommending possible funding mechanisms for cultural arts projects when appropriate.

(7) To assist the city in keeping a record of its history and artwork, while also overseeing the maintenance and accessibility thereof.

(8) To follow and update the board's master plan and be guided by it on an ongoing basis.

(Ord. No. 12-038, § 1(App. A), 8-20-2012; Ord. No. 18-074, § 2 (App. C), 12-3-2018; Ord. No. 26-040, § 1(App. A), 7-6-2026)