The Metro Council once again has the new ethics ordinance on the agenda for tomorrow night. After delaying the measure at the end of 2008, the council is expected to pick back up on the debate that torpedoed the ordinance a few weeks earlier.

Introduced by Councilman Ken Fleming, R-7, and co-sponsored by Councilman David Tandy, D-4, the ethics ordinance had been ping-ponged in the council for nearly eight months, with Fleming eventually withdrawing his sponsorship in November fearing Democrats were going to weaken the ordinance beyond recognition.

After making key compromises and amendments, the ethics ordinance finally made it out of the Rules, Ethics and Appointments Committee with a unanimous 4-0 vote in late December.

Before the full council had a chance to vote on expanding Metro government’s ethics rules and changing other provisions, however, a handful of Democrats voiced concerns over the wording in the 35-page ordinance and argued they needed more time to look it over.

“It’s an extremely lengthy document and there is some concern about the language,” says Councilwoman Madonna Flood, D-24. Flood tells LEO the new ordinance is much broader than before and council members should be concerned about such a quick expansion of ethics guidelines.

For instance, the new ordinance would define a metro officer as anyone with a “managerial type position or position having the authority to make policy, enter contracts over $10,000, make purchases over
$10,000, or with supervisory authority over subordinates.” Flood also is worried about a provisin that prohibits Metro officers from endorsing commercial products and services.

“That would stop a council member from saying they support Ford Motor Co. I don’t think that’s an ethics violation to promote a business in the city,” she says. “The only problem we were having with the ethics ordinance was the timing it took to get complaints through the system and now we’re changing things that weren’t broken,” she says.

Flood and Fleming met earlier this week to discuss the ethics ordinance but it is unclear whether a compromise was reached. Flood says several council members have concurred with her reservations about Fleming’s ordinance and to expect a lengthy discussion tomorrow night.

Fleming says he is pleased with the ordinance as it reads currently. He says opponents of the ordinance often take their criticisms to the most extreme conclusions, and that the council needs to give the ethics commission the best guide possible to enforce the rules of a responsible Metro government.

“This has been out for over eight months,” Fleming says. “I asked what [Flood's] plans are and she said she’ll talk to David Tandy and we’ll go from there. I’m being forthright and trying to cooperate and I hope it’s there, but I really don’t know what amendments they may introduce.”

UPDATE: For our fair citizens asking here is a copy of the ethics ordinance that Metro Council members had before deciding to table the issue until their Feb. 12th meeting. The language is still being changed as there are many revisions being made to the ordinance presently with input from the county attorney’s office and council members. The ordinance was introduced by Councilman Ken Fleming, R-7, and co-sponsored by Council President David Tandy, D-4.