David Grandeau: “Mr. Nicey Nice”

I’m going to try to write this post with calm detachment and the utmost professionalism.
 
Understand, of course, that I want to curse up a storm. I want to savage the hypocrisy and incompetence of some of the people involved.
 
But no, I’ll be Mr. Nicey Nice.
 
I woke up this morning and read a very interesting article. It was about the salary of the CEO of a not-for-profit founded by Governor Cuomo and closely associated with the Cuomo family. It turns out that this CEO received a good salary, well above half a million dollars. In the non-profit world, this is rather generous, but it is not illegal and may not even be improper because the entity involved is a large national organization that has been quite successful in its mission.
 
And yet, something must be amiss because the CEO – who is related to Cuomo by marriage -- resigned abruptly, and nobody seems to want to defend him or his salary.
 
I don’t know why this is the case, but maybe it has something to do with the fact that the Cuomo administration is investigating excessive non-profit executive salaries. Whatever.
 
The thing that surprised me about this article was a quote from Barry Ginsberg, the soon to be former head of the Public Integrity Commission. Mr. Ginsberg said this: “There is nothing under the ethics section of the Public Officers Law that specifically speaks to the situation of a public officer having a relative as an official for a not-for-profit.”
 
Where to begin? Well, let’s start with this. The chief ethics enforcement official in the state should not be commenting on matters that have a possibility of becoming a subject of investigation by his office.  And they certainly shouldn’t do so in a way that appears to sanction the conduct in question.
 
If they do comment on a matter, they should have their facts straight. In reality, Mr. Ginsberg’s comments are wrong. There are several sections of the public officers law that would give his office the right – and perhaps the obligation -- to review this matter.
 
Moreover, before commenting, Mr. Ginsberg might want to consider the relevance of his statements to any number of ongoing cases, not the least of which is the Pedro Espada matter.
 
Think about this strictly hypothetical situation: What if Andrew Cuomo, as governor or as attorney general, did not recuse himself and was actually involved in decisions that benefitted his family’s non-profit.  Wouldn’t the Public Integrity Commission have to investigate?
 
For all these reasons and more, I think Mr. Ginsberg’s comments were unwise.
 
There, I did it. I was thoughtful, fair and ever so polite. And now I think I’m going to puke.
 
Whoa Whoa stop the clock! What is really going on here? Could it be that Barry is trying to curry favor with Cuomo? He is known to be trying to get another job in the administration. Is he showing the administration how “helpful” he can be on matters of ethics? Does he now expect them to return the favor? Or have they already found Barry a new job and Barry’s comments are just another installment on the debt he believes he owes?
 
Here’s another set of concerns: Barry’s wife is part of an organization regulated by the commission. A while back, she failed to timely file the required registration disclosure to the commission. Was her organization fined like so many others? Nope.
 
Given the fact that he is looking for or has received a job with the administration, and given his wife’s situation, Barry’s comments would appear to raise the possibility of a conflict of interest.
 
Barry could be guilty of the same ethics law violation that he charged so many others with – a failure to recognize the appearance of conflict of interest.  And who is left to investigate?  Only the Inspector General and they are already investigating Barry’s role in SUNYBRUNOGATE.  At least that prevents Barry from taking a job with the IG, could you imagine?
 
There now. I’ve said what I really think. I feel better now, but don’t you, dear reader, feel sick?
 

Grading the Watchdogs

Summer vacation is over and the Labor Day weekend is past. Now it’s time to get back to work in earnest. But first, we should take stock of everyone’s performance during the last political cycle in Albany. I’m not talking about politicians, but the people who are supposed to monitor the politicians.


Let’s start with the good government groups. I love my goo-goo friends, but, honestly, they just haven’t been the same since Blair Horner departed. Blair was their Pope, Rabbi, Sachem and Guru. Without him, they lack direction and cohesiveness. Case in point: The state is currently without any ethics enforcement capability thanks to the continuing failure of the Governor and leaders to appoint commissioners to a new ethics panel. The response from the groups: Silence from some, and from others a soothing “Don’t worry. Self policing works.”


Let’s turn to the Fourth Estate. There is only one word to describe the LCA – jaded. Reporters rely on the public officials they cover to make their jobs easier by providing them leads and story ideas. The end result is the media is afraid to bite the hand that feeds them. As a result, the unbiased truth resulting from honest investigative journalism has become a rare treat.


Now let’s consider the official watchdogs one by one:
The Feds: Yes, they are plodding. Yes, the Bruno case got complicated. Yes, when it comes to information they eat like elephants and crap like mice, but they are the only real cops in town. The Kruger/Boyland/Seminerio/Leibell cases and the AEG case are evidence of that.


The Attorney General: He hasn't come roaring out of the gate. But neither did Spitzer or Cuomo. Casework being done now will result in headlines next year. So it’s really too early to tell. That said, I’d like to see Eric Schneiderman be more visible and more aggressive in using the bully pulpit.


The Comptroller: Everyone I know regards Tom Dinapoli as a kind and decent man, but no one I know regards him as aggressive. His integrity unit has had personal integrity problems of their own. There is a tremendous opportunity to be an ethics watchdog in this office but it has gone unutilized. The office reflects the man who occupies it.


The State Inspector General: Something tells me she's not Joe Fisch in a dress, but, again, it is too early to tell. She needs time to prove herself. I do have this major personal issue with the way she is being repeatedly characterized in the media as a former top staffer and close aide to the governor. If I were her and saw a characterization like that, I would call an immediate news conference to say the following: “I want you all to know that my former association with the Governor means absolutely nothing. My obligation is to the people of New York and if I find evidence of wrongdoing I will pursue it relentlessly no matter where it leads.” And then I’d back it up with actions.


COPI: What can I say that I haven’t said already many times. Oh wait, how about this: I recently received a tip that at least one member of the commission may have been acting a lobbyist while still serving on the commission. I don’t know whether this is true or not, but I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if it is. From the beginning, this commission has made a mockery of ethics enforcement. They gave us the dubious distinction of being the only ethics panel in the nation to be cited for unethical conduct by not one but two law enforcement officials. (I’ll also be keeping a close eye on where Barry Ginsberg lands. If the Cuomo administration provides him a soft landing, one would have to question if it was a quid pro quo for his prior work on integrity issues related to the governor’s close friends and confidants.) And while I’m thinking about COPI, can someone explain how they are still performing audits when the new bill prohibited any investigatory action? I wondered why the auditors were not laid off. This is a complete waste of state resources.


This brings me to me. How should I be graded in my role as a watchdog and advocate for ethics in government? Well, perhaps you’ll give me a small amount of credit for speaking my mind. Not enough people are willing to do that nowadays, especially with regard to the new administration. I also think it can be fairly said that I’m an equal-opportunity critic (some say crank). I play no favorites. I don’t believe that ethics is a partisan issue. This said, I feel as though I’ve failed in an important respect. I just haven’t been able to get enough people to care, to really and truly care, about ethics. Despite my best efforts, there’s no sense of outrage at the abuses that have occurred and are still occurring. In fact, a lot of people, including many reporters, just yawn. Perhaps my fixation on getting rid of COPI and its leaders caused me to take my eye off the ball. Alas, if nothing else, I’m stubborn and I will continue to try to change this unhealthy situation.

Ensuring the Integrity of Gaming in NY

The redoubtable James Featherstonhaugh made a presentation to a Senate committee recently and pleaded the case for “enhanced” gaming at the state’s existing racinos. His main point was that it makes no sense for New York to prohibit table games and other forms of gaming that are currently legal in neighboring states and Canada. He said New York is losing more than $5 billion a year as New Yorkers travel to those other venues to gamble.

It’s hard to argue with his reasoning, especially given the sorry state of New York’s economy, and yet…

We need to keep in mind the dubious history of this industry. It’s a sector that has been linked at times with organized crime. It’s a sector associated with various social ills. And it is a sector that has had far more than its share of scandals involving elected officials.

Thanks to very tight regulation and aggressive oversight bodies, some states, such as Nevada, have controlled these problems, but ethical breaches still occur. That’s why New York needs to think carefully about how it can better monitor its gaming industry.

Here’s an idea for New York policymakers to consider:

Why not create an entity in New York that would be an analog of the famed Nevada Gaming Commission? This body’s mission would be to ensure the integrity of gaming in New York. This responsibility is now split among various state agencies and oversight bodies without a single, bright-line set of rules for gaming interests to follow.

Establishing such a panel wouldn’t be difficult. You could draft someone from the State Police, the Comptroller’s Office, AG’s office and Racing and Wagering Board to staff it. You would then charge the panel with conducting a periodic reviews of the entities involved in gambling activities in New York.

Heeding the lessons that should have been learned by recent history in New York, we should ensure that the members of this review panel aren’t the friends and associates of prominent politicians, that they follow accepted oversight practices, and, most important, that they conduct themselves in the open.

I haven’t talked to Feathers about this, but I would think that he and his industry colleagues would welcome the concept, reasoning that anything that levels the playing field for honest business operators is a good thing. In fact, they probably ought to get together and pitch in the resources to adequately fund the panel.

Now some might say: Is this really needed? In answering that question, I would point to the glaring example of Aqueduct, where we are still awaiting the fallout from federal investigations of the whole AEG mess.

For these reasons and more, I think a rigorous oversight panel could help make casino gaming a better bet in New York.

The New “I for Integrity”

Today marks the beginning of a new phase for the “I for Integrity” blog. For some time, I’ve been toying with notion of broadening its subject matter. A number of people encouraged me to do this, but I was a little hesitant. The reason is simple. When I was involved in ethics law enforcement, I always sought to avoid commenting in ways that might be construed as partisan. That served me well for a long time. People may have disagreed with me, but at least they didn’t think I was being “political.”
I don’t want to do anything now to jeopardize that standing, but I do want to speak more generally about matters of ethics, accountability and state policy. I think it will make the blog more interesting.

I also want to do something else. I want to work in tips and suggestions that often come to me from people in government and from ordinary citizens. People tell me things because they think I’m independent and not afraid to ruffle a few feathers. I appreciate their faith in me and I don’t want to disappoint them.

To help me with the expanded blog, I’ve recruited some friends and former associates to participate in a kind of informal advisory board. They’ll help me with the subject matter, and also with my tone, which I know can be a little edgy at times.

I’m very excited about our new effort. The goal is to be a kind of plain-spoken “conscience of Albany.” No, I’m not going to pretend that I have all the answers, but I do want to weigh in constructively and say things that need to be said.

I hope you enjoy the blog.


“Delay of Game”


Our new governor has done many things right, but his handling of ethics law enforcement is an open question.
Think of the Governor as the quarterback on a football team who has called a new play. He abolished the old state ethics panel and established a new one. This is a good move that was announced with a lot of fanfare. It was called the “Clean Up Albany Act” and the New York Post proclaimed that “Crooked pols are running for the exits.”

The problem isn’t the play itself, but its execution, or rather the lack of execution. It’s been nearly four months since the new panel was announced and it hasn’t been constituted yet. In the meantime, the predecessor Public Integrity Commission has gone out of business. And so, as I write this, there is no ethics law enforcement in New York. That’s right – there’s no one to investigate a violation, no one to follow up on a tip regarding potential wrongdoing.
Supposedly, the governor and his people are busy trying to find the right appointees to the panel – but there’s been no word on how the process is proceeding and that’s a concern in its own right.

Given the storm clouds that surrounded the Public Integrity Commission, doesn’t it stand to reason that there should be more openness and transparency regarding appointments to the new panel? For the new panel to do its job properly, we need people of real integrity and independence. And in this regard, the best thing the governor could do is appoint people with whom he has no prior relationship and no connection. He should do so right away and set an example for the legislative leaders who also have appointments to the panel.
I really hope the governor avoids the typical politician’s mistake of appointing people who are friends and associates. That may work in the short term, but, later, when judgments are made on controversial cases, there’ll be an appearance of a conflict. That is inevitable.
The issues I’ve raised here can certainly be resolved, but the governor needs to focus on the matter and get it done. He needs to do it now. It’s simply outrageous that the State of New York has no working ethics panel.

Back to the sports metaphor: I’m not prepared to say that the governor has fumbled the ball on ethics, but he and the legislative leaders should be called for delay of game.


Tell the Truth, Tell it All, Tell it Now

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has come under fire in recent days for the way he handled the departure of his deputy mayor for operations, Stephen Goldsmith.
When Goldsmith resigned last month, the Bloomberg administration (and Bloomberg himself) said he was leaving to pursue other professional opportunities. But the real reason involved a domestic altercation with his wife.
Much has been made of the misleading comments at the time of the resignation, but, to my mind, the real problem came two days earlier. That’s when Goldsmith was arrested and held for 24 hours. This development should have been disclosed immediately by the administration. It is certainly news when the mayor’s top aide has been jailed.
Instead, Bloomberg and his people apparently tried to “manage the media,” a strategy that almost always backfires. It was sure to backfire given the nature of the incident, which is reminiscent of the situation involving Governor Paterson’s top aide David Johnson in 2009.
Domestic abuse is a scourge with devastating effects on the adults involved and their children. Our society still struggles to address this problem, and looks to its elected officials to make sure that law enforcement agencies and social service providers are doing all they can to recognize it and prevent it. In his role as one of the mayor’s top aides, Goldsmith oversaw the city’s police department, which plays an enormous role in the city’s response to domestic violence.
For all these reasons and more, the mayor should have recognized the need for full and timely disclosure of the arrest. Had that occurred, the Goldsmith’s subsequent resignation would have resolved the matter without the need for further comment by the mayor. But because that didn’t happen, the mayor’s adversaries can now (with cause) draw out the process of investigation and fault finding.
The way to avoid these dramas is to follow the dictum: “Tell the truth, tell it all, and tell it now.”

BURY THE DEAD BEFORE THEY STINK UP THE JOINT

Well it was bound to happen. The commission failed to hold its bimonthly meeting as required by law. Of course all the lobbyists and clients are required by that same law to file reports in a timely fashion but I guess what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander. We will have to see about that if I get the chance to represent someone the commission tries to act against before they go out of existence. I wouldn’t mind cooking some gander.
Or maybe Barry and the commissioners will take advantage of their zombie status and write some opinions settling scores before they go out of existence. I know there is at least a couple of commissioners and a lot of staff lawyers at PIC that would like a second shot at my lifetime ban opinion. Better be careful guys the IG is already investigating you (I hope this time they send averments to everyone and don’t leave the leaker out like they did in the troopergate case. By the way why didn’t PIC investigate Herb and Barry after the IG report p154 for those that have a short memory) and I would love to start a couple more investigations into why PIC does what they do. The longer Mr. Cuomo takes to sign the bill eliminating PIC the more responsibility he has for what they do while he waits.
Rumor is the meeting couldn’t happen as required by law because Barry was on vacation all week polishing up his resume after commission staff avoided the ax last week (at least Walter “got scotch” and the lawyers get some extra time to send those resumes out). You can tell the end is near when folks slated to be let go take vacation. To the rest of the staff the message should be clear what do they know that you don’t?
Missing the meeting required by law is a fitting end to an agency that could never get it right. Now it’s like watching the night of the living dead as this zombie agency keeps trying to impose fines, write opinions and hold hearings long after its demise or maybe it’s more like the Black Knight in Monty Python continuing to try to act the bully with his arms and legs hacked off
It’s only a flesh wound right Ralph?
Publish that opinion Barry I’d love to get you and the commissioners under oath.

WHO SHOULD STAY AND WHO SHOULD GO

Today’s Times Union had a very interesting article by Jim Odato for all you conspiracy theorists out there.

You can read it here

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Integrity-panel-s-farewell-1431239.php

Just why were they having a meeting before the governor signs the bill? It’s pretty clear from the comments of the outgoing commissioner’s that they wanted one last shot at those high profile investigations they have routinely flubbed. These guys have turned more routine outs into errors than the New York Mets (I’d have said Yankees but with the commission’s ties to that team and the Patterson case it was too easy).
And on that subject you got to wonder who was providing the information to Odato? Walter “GOT SCOTCH” Ayres? Or perhaps one of the commissioners? There has been quite a bit of speculation around town that the Spitzer era commissioner’s are not fans of the gov or the legislature and are leaking like sieves. Or could it be Barry Ginsberg the soon to be outgoing ED? A word to the wise Barry if you want help on your transition to ex ed status don’t bite the hand that feeds you. The fact that Walter is still employed lends credence to the rumor that the Got Scotch comment was yours not his.
In addition the agenda showed an executive session pursuant to section 105 (1) (d) and (f) of the Public Officers Law. Sub (d) is what they use to discuss pending cases nothing new there but sub (f)? That’s personnel decisions. You have to wonder was the Spitzer crowd going to try and pull a fast one? Or was the commission going to take the appropriate business step of downsizing in light of the bills effect? Either way whoever pulled the plug on this meeting did the right thing. At this point let’s get the bill signed and take the patient off life support. I’d hate to see what would happen if Barry Walter et al get another chance at the governor or legislature now. The scotch would just be the beginning.
Here’s what should happen. The governor signs the bill, the commission staff that is not needed to fulfill the function of form intake processing and disclosure is laid off, a new commission is quickly appointed and a new staff and ED are hired. Start to finish it should take less than a month not the 6 months to a year the commission is claiming it will take (although it did take them longer than that and they still don’t work) And none of the existing investigations, to the extent they are valid, would be endangered.
Since all you would need is caretaker staffing during the interim you could lay off the following departments and individuals and still fulfill the requirements of the new legislation, Trust me no one would miss them.


EXECUTIVE

BARRY GINSBERG
DEBORAH L. NOVAK
Barry is at the heart of the problem just read the IG report page 154

PUBLIC INFORMATION

WALTER C. AYRES — Public Information Officer
TONI L. DIEHL — Confidential Stenographer
Got scotch? Need I say more

COUNSEL'S OFFICE

THERESA A. SCHILLACI — Special Counsel
RALPH P. MICCIO — Special Counsel & Audit Supervisor
SHARI CALNERO — Associate Counsel
BRIDGET E. HOLOHAN — Associate Counsel
BARBARA H. O'NEILL — Associate Counsel
MELINDA E. FUNK — Confidential Assistant
JENNIFER W. SABADAY-SNOW — Confidential Stenographer
No investigations no opinions no enforcement NO LAWYERS

INVESTIGATIONS

ROBERT J. SHEA — Confidential Investigator
LAWRENCE J. MURELLO — Confidential Investigator
SCOTT A. CLARK — Confidential Investigator
LORI DONADIO — Confidential Legal Assistant
No investigations NO INVESTIGATORS You should replace these folks with retired FBI agents there are plenty in town and available and they come with their own benefits so you save money

TRAINING

RICHARD H. A. WASHBURN — Manager of Training
HOWARD W. GRIEVES — Training Associate
BETHNEY A. DENNO — Training Associate
MARLENA C. DIAZ — Training Assistant
We need charter schools for ethics training Time for some new teachers and new classes

AUDIT UNIT

MICHAEL T. FURNARI — Compliance Auditor
MARIA E. GUEVARA — Compliance Auditor
AMY HOSLER — Compliance Auditor
No investigations no audits NO AUDITORS Let the new investigators perform this function

ADMINISTRATION

JEANNINE M. CLEMENTE — Administrative Director
Not much work to be done after bill signing and it’s dangerous to let these folks make decisions that affect who stays and who goes.

HEARING OFFICER

CHRISTINE C. KOPEC
This one is funny but no one could keep a straight face and say you need a hearing officer ever again.

With what would be left and the quick hiring of those retired FBI agents you could be up and running in short order and rebuild the new agency into something to be proud of. Of course it all depends on who gets appointed to the commission BECAUSE IT’S THE PEOPLE NOT THE LAW THAT REALLY MATTERS.

HEY WALTER YOU CAN NOW RETIRE THE NAME THAT DOPE AWARD

Walter Ayers the former (oops I might have jumped the gun on that but not by much) spokesperson for the PIC just provided the Times Union the following quote related to the soon to be passed ethics bill

“While many New Yorkers are struggling to put gas in their cars, it appears many of our political leaders will not have to worry about putting Scotch in their bellies.”

Are you kidding me Walter? After all these years of saying the politically correct thing you decide now to call the governor and the legislators liquor swilling pigs. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL Bad judgement. (say that with a Russian accent and you could be the next Teddy KGB)

Do you think it’s because the new bill does not provide for a transfer of employees? Or is it because soon to be former Executive Director Barry Ginsberg is allegedly packing his parachute and hoping to land at the controller’s office? And by the way guys Barry is only packing one parachute and no guarantee now that it even opens since Walter just sewed it shut.
If it helps here’s a list of the rest of the insane clown posse I’d get rid of if anyone asked.

In no particular order:

Ralph Miccio lawyer

Terry Schellaci lawyer

Bridget Hoolihan lawyer

All the investigators Bob, Larry and Scott (aka Curly, Moe and Larry)

The education unit – it hasn’t helped


I could go on and on but it does bring up a serious point. The bill correctly stops PIC from taking any action after it becomes law for a very good reason. No one trusts Barry Walter et al from being vindictive, and judging from Walter’s quote that’s probably a smart move. By the way I got a couple of Barry letters last week after the bill was announced threatening my clients on trivial matters. I decided not to blog about them or tell Barry to go f himself because I know how stressful this time in his life must be (right Walter?) so I’m going to ignore him like the rest of the lobbying community now will.

But the key to ethics enforcement in Albany now is to clean out the mess Spitzer left in the PIC and bury the garbage so it doesn’t pollute the new agency which will need to built quickly and with some forethought. Let me know if I can help I still got that shovel.