Is Temple a “City of Ethics” as defined by the Georgia Municipal Association, which awarded the city that designation in 2006?

According to the GMA Web site it is, and city officials received a plaque in 2006 boasting the accomplishment. They also use the City of Ethics logo on city letterhead and the city’s official Web site.

But city officials aren’t adhering to their own ethics ordinance and haven’t been since July 2008 when the ethics committee designated to hold hearings was disbanded and the approved ethics ordinance itself was sent back to the personnel committee chaired by Councilman Larry Estvanko a month later. The ordinance hasn’t once been discussed in six subsequent personnel committee meetings.

Before the original ethics committee was disbanded, there were three separate ethics complaints pending against elected officials: Estvanko, Mayor Rick Ford and Councilman Larry Mann. None of those cases have been investigated or have come up for a hearing as required by the ethics ordinance, nor has a new ethics committee been formed to hear those or any future cases.

Councilman William Simmons said he hasn’t dropped his complaint against Estvanko in which he accused his colleague of public statements subversive to the city government, and is only waiting on a new ethics committee to be seated so the case can move forward.

“I never dropped anything,” Simmons said. “We just never followed up on finalizing everything about it. I didn’t bring it up (after August) and no other councilman brought it up. I’m going to see where it goes and if we follow through on coming up with this ethics committee.”

The pending ethics complaint against Ford filed by resident Linda Walden related to his alleged use of city equipment and labor to haul dirt and construction debris from his yard to various places around town, as well as a complaint that he conducted remodeling work on two homes on Tallapoosa Street without purchasing permits or submitting to inspections. Both issues were recently presented to the Carroll County grand jury for a criminal indictment. However, a “no bill” was returned, which means there wasn’t sufficient evidence to support a case of criminal misconduct.

Though there have been statements from some in the community to the contrary, most notably by Walden, Ford said he hasn’t been trying to sweep the matter “under the rug.”

“We’re going to bring it back to the forefront because we’d all like to get it resolved and out of the way,” Ford said. “I have said all along that I’m looking forward to the complaints moving forward because I certainly have nothing to hide. There is a lot of misinformation being disseminated out into the public.”

The complaint against Mann -- also filed by Walden -- alleges that he used his public office for private gain related to various real estate deals in which he was involved that came before the City Council. Mann, too, said he is looking forward to clearing his name in an ethics hearing.

“I welcome the committee to hear my case,” he said. “I’d love to be able to tell my side.”

Though GMA says the formation of an ethics board can be an essential step in implementing a comprehensive code of ethics, it doesn’t require a city to do so. While some ethics codes provide for a separate board, others rely on the existing governmental authority and the courts to enforce their ethics laws.

“Basically what that is saying is you don’t have to have a committee, but there should be a process in place,” GMA Public Information Manager Amy Henderson said.

Last July, the council attempted to form a new committee after the original committee was disbanded when City Attorney Cynthia Daley ruled that the council had passed an ethics resolution in 2006 as required by GMA, but not an ethics ordinance. The council approved the ordinance that month, but couldn’t approve a committee because with Councilwoman Hiley Miller out on maternity leave, only Councilman Richard Bracknell was left to nominate and vote on committee members when all other members of the council abstained due to their involvement in pending ethics complaints.

Daley said the council will again make an attempt to nominate members of the three-member ethics committee in March. Because the nomination process wasn’t tweaked in committee to compensate for inevitable abstentions, the council may have the same issue it had last July. One member of the original committee, Gene Merritt, has said he is willing to continue to serve, which would take care of Ford’s nomination, and only the council’s nomination would need to be approved. But one issue that has yet to be resolved: if there was no ordinance in place as originally thought in 2006, then legally the original committee never existed and Merritt’s prior committee service never took place.

If Merritt is allowed to serve on the new ethics committee and the council is able to approve another member, the third member would then be appointed by the two sitting members. One of the three must be a member of the Georgia Bar Association.

“The intent is try to move forward getting another person on the (ethics) committee so they can get a third person,” Daley said. “I’m really hoping we’ll be able to get somebody in place.”

The lack of an ordinance also brings into question whether the pending complaints are null and void. Daley ruled last July that they would be valid and would be heard once a committee was in place. But GMA’s Web site states that a common feature of most ethics codes is a provision that “actions taken by public officials prior to passage of the code shall not be affected by the code’s enactment.” That statement is not in the city’s ordinance, but the ordinance defines a complaint as having to be filed within six months of discovery of the alleged misconduct.

Daley said the committee will determine whether or not the cases move forward.

“All of the complaints have been with the committee the whole time,” she said. “They’re with the committee and they have the discretion to do with them what they will once they get their quorum. I look at it as I don’t have any input into what the committee does. They have guidelines that they follow and if they say, ‘We didn’t have an ordinance so we can’t do anything with these,’ that will be up to the committee.”

Henderson agreed that GMA’s model could leave some room for interpretation. In fact, GMA points out on its Web site that it does not act as an enforcement or regulating agency. Ultimately, it is the local electorate that determines the acceptable level of ethical conduct by the character of those elected to and retained in office.

“I think sometimes, even with an ordinance in place, there can be some gray areas,” she said.

Henderson added that the city can’t be stripped of its City of Ethics designation because it complied with GMA’s two requirements -- adopting a resolution and an ordinance.

“What our program requires is that they pass a resolution and they pass an ordinance that passes the committee review. Whatever happens after that is up to the local community,” Henderson said. “The City of Ethics program is not a blessing of behavior. It’s not to say that this city has acted ethically. It is only to say that this city has an ethics ordinance in place that meets certain criteria.”

Beginning this year, those cities in Georgia that are newly certified by GMA as a City of Ethics will have to renew their certification every four years. Cities that have already received the designation will come up for recertification immediately with those having the designation the longest being the first up for recertification.

Temple’s recertification will likely not come up for several months or a year.

“They can’t actually be stripped (of their City of Ethics status), but we had a study committee that looked at the City of Ethics program and decided we needed recertification because some of the cities have been Cities of Ethics since maybe 1999 and the original council members who voted on the resolution are no longer there, or maybe changes have been made to the ordinance, so therefore it needs to be looked at again,” Henderson said.

When Temple’s ethics resolution was approved in 2006, Ford and all five then-sitting members of the council -- Estvanko, Mann, Simmons, Gene Yearty and Jerry Robinson -- signed it and sent it to GMA as a promise to adhere to the five principals of ethics. But since that time Bracknell and Miller have taken the place of Yearty and Robinson, respectively, but have yet to sign the resolution. When the city comes up for recertification, all sitting members will have to sign a new resolution or the city won’t be recertified.

The GMA review committee, made up of a panel of city attorneys, reviews the resolution and ordinance to make sure everything is in order before certifying a city as a City of Ethics. But the committee doesn’t follow up to make sure the ordinance is being followed.

“The committee is not going to the city and asking whether they’ve done these things (in the ordinance),” Henderson said. “They’re looking at the ordinance itself. The ordinance is the foundation.”