Ethics Guidance For and Jurisdiction Over Independent Agencies
Independent agencies are more likely than regular government
agencies to get into trouble, because they are usually more closed
and less supervised. And yet officials too often listen to agencies'
calls for independence from ethics programs, as if the
"independence" meant something positive that should be respected,
rather than that the agencies are unsupervised and unaccountable. An independent agency's
independence is only something positive when it is a watchdog
agency, like an ethics commission, auditor, or inspector general.<br>
<br>
Massachusetts agencies known as "special education collaboratives"
were in the news yesterday after the state ethics commission, which
has jurisdiction over local and regional agencies, brought
allegations against a school superintendent who sat on the board of
one of the collaboratives, according to <a href="http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/topstory/ci_20784934/ex-north-midd…; target="”_blank”">an
article in yesterday's <i>Sentinel and Enterprise</i></a>.<br>
<br>
The superintendent, one of five on the collaborative board, is
alleged to have participated in a decision to enter into a $5.5
million contract with a nonprofit, on whose board he sat and from
whom he accepted a high-paying job a month after the vote on the
contract.<br>
<br>
According to the article, the ethics
commission said that the superintendent should have contacted his
appointing authority, that is, the school committee for which he
was superintendent, because he had a possible conflict. This
points to a serious problem. Usually, an appointing authority is
involved in an official's work, providing some oversight. But the
school committee would have no way of knowing what its
superintendent was doing on this regional body. That makes it
important that the ethics commission have direct authority over the
body, and that the superintendent be required to seek advice
directly from the ethics commission rather than from the school
committee.<br>
<br>
<b>Fiefdoms</b><br>
This was not an isolated incident. It appears that the
collaborative had a very poor ethics environment. Investigations
were conducted into the collaborative by the state inspector general
and the state auditor, finding spending abuses of about $32 million.
The collaborative's lobbyist was also given a job by the
collaborative's contractor.<br>
<br>
After the IG and auditor reports came out last year, the governor established new ethics requirements for board
members and employees of these special education collaboratives. But it shouldn't
stop there. Supervision through audits and other means should be
required for all regional and other independent agencies in the
state, and their officials and employees should be required to seek advice
directly from and be subject to the jurisdiction of the ethics commission, even where they do not hold another position, as the superintendent did. It is also important to
consider requiring independent agencies to hire outside counsle, and placing
limits on the agencies' use of lobbyists. It is too easy for independent agencies to become <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/search/node/fiefdom" target="”_blank”">fiefdoms</a>. Prevention is the goal of ethics
programs. Enforcement long after the fact is not enough to
maintain the public's trust and prevent misuse of government resources.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
203-859-1959