Nearly a year after beginning an inquiry into whether City Council President Sheila Dixon used her influence to direct city money to a company that employed her sister, Baltimore's Board of Ethics announced yesterday that it has found no cause to pursue the allegations.
In a terse statement, the five-member board said it will not pursue an investigation of votes cast by Dixon that allowed the company, Union Technologies Inc., to receive city contracts nor a February City Council committee hearing in which she asked why the company had not received more business from the city.
The board "has determined, based upon information presently before it, that there is no cause for issuing a complaint against Ms. Dixon alleging a violation of the Baltimore ethics law," the statement read. "Based upon the sensitive nature of this matter and the rights of Ms. Dixon and others, the Board of Ethics is restrained from commenting any further."
The decision, handed down days before Dixon is to be sworn in as mayor to serve out the remainder of Gov.-elect Martin O'Malley's term, appeared to lift a cloud that has hung over her for months, though at least one ethics expert suggested that the guarded announcement could do Dixon - and the city - more harm than good.
Dixon declined to answer questions on the decision but issued a statement saying she was pleased with the board's conclusion.
"I have always sought to put the interests of the citizens of Baltimore first, and I am gratified that the ethics board has recognized that there is no cause for even issuing a complaint," the statement read. "I will continue to focus my energy to the job of continuing to move Baltimore forward."
Meeting behind closed doors on Monday, the board unanimously decided not to pursue the matter with a formal complaint, which, according to the city's ethics law, would have triggered a preliminary investigation, possible hearings and, finally, a determination of whether the ethics law was violated. Because no complaint was filed - by the board, or anyone else - it is not clear how thoroughly the panel reviewed the allegations.
"The public needs to know that these matters are being looked at seriously, that they're being dealt with," said James C. Benton, ethics director of Common Cause, a national watchdog organization in Washington. "The statement ... is so cryptic that it doesn't even begin to instill confidence. It more or less arouses suspicion."
