By Leslie Collins
Northeast News
March 23, 2011

“The city has a public perception problem.”

That was one of several conclusions the City of Kansas City’s Auditor’s Office listed in its recent performance audit of the city’s efforts to encourage ethical conduct.

Citizen satisfaction continues to drop, said City Auditor Gary White, who cited recent surveys.

In 2008, 25 percent of those surveyed said they were satisfied with how ethically the city conducts business. That number dropped to 17 percent in 2010.

White said the city’s citizen survey report is mailed quarterly to 8,000 Kansas City households and to compile results, at least 4,000 surveys must be returned.

Citizens aren’t the only ones dissatisfied.

According to a 2008 employee survey conducted by the city’s auditor’s office, 30 percent of respondents agreed with the statement, “Top city management sets a good example of ethical conduct.”

Approximately 30 percent of those responding said they believed that someone who engaged in unethical conduct would probably be detected and punished.

“We found that the city has the basic elements recommended for an effective ethics program… but those tools need to be strengthened,” White wrote in his audit.

He cited how the “Ethics Handbook” has not been substantively revised since 1999, ethics training for employees and elected officials doesn’t occur as often as required by ordinance, the city’s Committee on Administrative Service Ethics hasn’t been active, the city’s Ethics Hotline is not publicized to the public, among other items.

Although included in the Code of Ordinances, information on whistle blower protection is not found in any of the city’s ethics-related materials, he said.

Thirty-eight percent of employees surveyed said they would fear retaliation if they reported unethical conduct.

“Employee’s beliefs about retaliation – that it will happen or already has – drive how much misconduct is taking place and whether it gets reported,” the audit said. “Employees need to believe that management values the reporting of ethical violations and that it is safe to do so without fearing retaliation.”

To set the right tone, top management must lead by example and actions, the audit said.

The city must also work proactively to promote its values and ethical expectations.

White made seven recommendations, which said the interim city manager should:

•Review Code of Ethics at least every three years, suggest changes and ensure necessary revisions are made promptly to the city’s ethics-related materials

•Provide ethics training and updates to employees, contract employees, elected officials, and members of boards and commissions as often as required by ordinance

•Ensure the Committee on Administrative Service Ethics meets regularly and fulfills its obligations

•Ensure whistleblower information is included in the city’s ethics-related materials and training

•Communicate frequently with employees about ethical expectations and improve accessibility to the city’s ethics-related materials

•Publicly promote the city’s ethical standards and expectations and its commitment to being an ethical organization

Interim City Manager Troy Schulte agreed with all seven recommendations and laid out a plan of action for each.