Ethics Deformed

 Series Introduction

  Throughout the nation there seems to be a cry for a unilateral, ethical government that resonates from the souls of tired and angered citizens. This cry has been growing louder throughout the various public reports of hypocrisies, immorality, and abuse of power. The cries have grown with enormous crescendo and the people have demanded ethical reformation in their government. Here in Louisville, a significant cry has also emerged from various citizens that are crying for the same reformation in ethics that are demanded other places, and some of the representatives have heard the cry and are attempting to answer; the others have good intentions as well as hearing impairment. Instead of hearing the cries for reformation, they have heard sounds similar to words like deformation, declination, and devastation- and they are seeking to answer as well.

 

  Ken Fleming (R- 7^th District) went to work on sponsoring a bill with David Tandy (D-4^th District), in which many experts on ethics at various levels, including federal, contributed ideas and information. Both these men were well aware of the importance of ethical government and rules. Ken Fleming had been a councilman since the merger of Jefferson County and the City of Louisville governments merged. David Tandy is an attorney. Both Fleming and Tandy knew that in order for ethics to exist properly it must extend beyond the upper management of the government. Together, in absolute bipartisan fashion, these two men sought, and wrote a proposal that met the recommendations of the Metro Louisville Auditor’s report, as well as the report by Crit Luallan, the Commonwealth auditor.

 

  Though this proposal was well researched, bipartisan, and in agreement with audits as well as exemplary of similar ordinances utilized throughout the nation, there were representatives of this proposal. Newcomers to the council, Marianne Butler and Jon Ackerson together came up with a proposal that was much weaker and less extensive as the Kramer/Tandy proposal. This new proposal brought glee and agreement from many in the council. Long story short, the two proposals had to be rectified into one, and so David Tandy, as the council president, called an ad hoc committee consisting of five members from each caucus. He, (Tandy), would oversee the committee and only vote should there be a tie in the vote.

 

  What are the issues in the original ordinance that others contend with? What has led up to this battle for ethics? Why are certain members of the council adamant about not signing the ordinance that promotes and demands accountability and ethical reform?

 

  In this series, therealville will take you on a journey where we will compare the two ordinances, discuss the various aspects that are contested, and introduce the reader to the key players, participators, and arguments to the ethics bill. We will also take a look and see who has caused Louisville to really become more ethical than  it has been, and why.

 

  We look forward to educating and enlightening you in this series. It is our hope that you enjoy the education enough to ensure your participation in the process.