 |
On November 15, 2008, I posted We’re 44th! (That’s Not Good). Yesterday’s Idaho Statesman contained an editorial from State Senator Kate Kelly (D-Boise) titled Sen. Kate Kelly: Idaho needs to upgrade ethics standards for public officials.
What are your thoughts? |
How do you feel about Sen. Kelly’s concern? If changes need to be made, where should they be made?
Is she correct when she observes:
“Why are ethics reforms rejected? Because even if it’s a good idea, those in authority are reluctant to change a system that brought them to power. Let me restate that: The people with the power are reluctant to risk losing that power by changing a system that works for them?”
Bill, this is one of the most important subjects facing our community! If we only had decent ethics laws and enforcement, we wouldn’t have the horrendous problems with LCDC, the city council and NIC Trustees. They would have to be more open and transparent about their business connections and they would be required to actually conduct the public’s business in public, not in backroom meetings they call Executive Session, where now they seem to discuss everything they don’t want to talk about openly.
Comment by mary — December 8, 2008 @ 9:49 pm
I agree, Mary. I would add stiff consequences – not the meaningless and ineffective slap on the wrist.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — December 9, 2008 @ 7:49 am
As regards abuse of executive sessions to discuss real property, this really falls under the Open Meeting Law not ethics laws. Be patient, help may be on the way. I am presenting to the Attorney General, who is presently working on OML amendments, suggested remedial language to limit that authority to actual acquisition processes once a property is identified, not just general discussions about real property needs, which many boards are suspected of doing, especially LCDC. The intent of this provision in the first place was to prevent speculation on a proposed acquisition by a public entity in order to prevent increased cost. Any closed door discussion beyond actual acquisition is beyond the intent of closed door executive sessions.
Comment by Gary Ingram — December 9, 2008 @ 10:21 am
There will be additional requirements suggested for sealed minutes of executive sessions subject to court review upon complaint.
Comment by Gary Ingram — December 9, 2008 @ 10:24 am
I hope any remdedial legislation includes meaningful penalties for violation. I would also like to see a requirement for timely AG review of every declination to prosecute an OML complaint by a county prosecutor. If the Idaho legislatures doesn’t have the courage to impose penalties and stand behind them, then the legislature ought to just repeal the OML. Allowing an unenforced law (including city ordinances) to remain on the books is nothing more than giving false encouragement to citizens who trust the law rather than resort to bribes and intimidation.
Comment by Bill — December 9, 2008 @ 12:19 pm
Bill, your post about the breaking news investigation of the Illinois Governor, talks about some of his other activities too. The press release from the US Attorney Fitzgerald says that the governor et al were strong-arming various businesses “…in a push before a new state ethics law takes effect January 1, 2009.”
Maybe Idaho should look at the new ethics reforms Illinois has planned. They are like the seat of corruption (Chicago) so maybe their clean-up legislation is worth copying!
Comment by mary — December 9, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Mary,
I’ve added the -more- line to my Illinois Governor Arrested Today – Corruption post. What follows that is the link to the Illinois AG’s website, links to the new state ethics laws, a link to a model ordinance recommended by the AG for adoption into local government ordinances, and a link to the Illinois AG’s manual to help local governments adopt and implement the ordinance.
Comment by Bill — December 9, 2008 @ 2:27 pm
The article stated in so many words that folks in power are reluctant to change conflict of interest laws because they are now there, and do not want to give up their power. That is because the mess is in our judicial branch. itself.
For instance, Patti Ann Lodge is on the Senatate Judiciary and Rules Committee. She is a Senator from southern Idaho. She is also the wife to Edward Lodge who is a Federal Judge. She is also the chair to the Health and Welfare Committee with other leaders, such as Joyce Broadsword out of Bonner County. Patti Lodge is known for her ineffective lawmaking and how she shot down the law that would have investigated child deaths in Idaho. Broadsword was too scared to open her mouth in opposition. Forty nine states study child deaths – Idaho does not because of Judge Lodge’s wife.
This information is off of Idaho.gov and is the most current info available to the public.
Additionally, you have Benjamin Simpson who is a judge here in District 1 and is the chair for the judicial Families in the Courts Committee. These guys design civil rules of procedure that our legislatos evidently aprove. Simpson as chair, is not current on Idaho.gov, but I was told that by Vicki Howard who is the court reporter for that committee. His (Simpson) wife does needs assessments for District 1, and his wife is on the Judicial Wellness Committee that addresses personal issues among the judiciary regarding their own personal/family issues because she is a psychologist. She is the “understood” appointed expert for the courts for these assessments/appointed assignments. Can someone say why?
My question – do these husband/wife teams talk?
I have issues with this area regarding due process, and I have called and talked with Patti Lodge. She is old and she was worried about getting her IRS payment off when we talked. She also shared with me that many of Idaho’s representatives have other jobs, so we cannot expect them to be overly effcient. She also mentioned to me that sometimes, “Your first loss is your best loss.” I had to ask her if she was married to the Federal Judge – Lodge. She did disclose that she was.
With that kind of representation and connections at the helm of our government and it’s judicial processes – I don’t think I am going to get anywhere without bias, especially if it involves another judicial member and his/her relation(s).
Obviously, the changes need to start WAY at the top.
Now, Senator Jorgenson from Hayden Lake is on the same judicial committee with Lodge – he would be the one to complain to, right? I think he lives in the same area as the Simpson team. Kate Kelly is also on that same committee. Is this not facinating?
If we do not “demand” change, then nothing will happen. Guess who is into “demanding” this upcoming session? Watch me blow more bubbles that they will pop.
The fact that Idaho is number 44 on the list regarding ethics does not surprize me. They don’t have any, and neither does Illinois.
Comment by Stebbijo — December 9, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
Well, I called Kate Kelly.
I “demanded” ethics in Idaho. (LOL)
I told her that Sentor Patti Lodge does not need to be on the Health and Welfare Committee or the Judical committee because there is a direct conflict of interest with her husband as a federal judge who is Judge Edward Lodge. If one wants to sue Idaho Health and Welfare in Federal Court – for instance – on privacy. People complain to their legislators and then they complain to their spouse.
I told her Jonelle Simpson PhD. does not need to be an appointed “understood” expert for the courts, regarding child needs assessments in District 1 because her husband, Judge Benjamin Simpson, is a local judge and is the chair for The Families and Children in the Courts committee. Judge Simpson needs to remove himself from that committee. He has successfully helped worm her “in” as the “understood” expert. Enough is enough.
A year or so ago, I talked with attorney Ann Marshall out of Sandpoint, Idaho. She was interested but could not help BECAUSE, her husband is the county prosecuter. Well, at least she was open about that, but her whole practice must be a conflict up there in po-dunk Sandpoint.
The above examples are perfect representations of why conflicts of interest and ethics laws need to be strenghthened. Unfortunately, there are probably more examples of ‘professional nepotism’ in this state – lots more.
When I filed my public records case and appealed it to the District, Judge Verby from Bonner County recused himself. Smart – he was too close to the local judges, so I went before a Kootenai judge for a Bonner County case. That was right.
Jim Clark from Hayden Lake is the chair for the house for the judiciary committee. I am on a roll. I called him too – left a messge.
Kelly said all she can do is make laws and she can see where I have done everything I can possibly do, but our system does revolve around “money” and the State of Idaho is a “small” state. I am sure if I could drop a 50 thousand dollar retainer in her lap, she would have bailed to the front of the line to be my attorney. That’s right, she is an attorney.
Bottomline? Money is justice in Idaho.
Thanks for posting that article. It was a dandy and nothing but a “fluff” peice written by Kelly, herself.
Comment by Stebbijo — December 10, 2008 @ 8:56 am
Stebbijo,
I don’t agree that Sen. Kelly’s op-ed was just a “fluff” piece. If you look at her record, she’s made several tries over the years to get ethics legislation through. I haven’t read them, so I can’t attest to the quality of what she’s tried to do, but I will certainly give her credit for trying.
It sounded to me as if she was being brutally honest. Money influences legislators in Idaho and the other states, too. Look at the amount of money the LCDC spends on behalf of the City on a lobbyist in Boise.
One legislator can only propose. It takes cooperation from several to get bills through committees and voted on. I don’t know Senator Kelly, but I’m quite willing to give her credit for trying. My own personal experience back in WDC supports her statement:
It doesn’t matter which party is in power, because it’s the power, not the party, that corrupts.
Comment by Bill — December 10, 2008 @ 9:36 am
Bill,
Thanks for opening up a discussion on this.
You are right, I am just not very happy with our judicial system at this point – to put it mildly. I will take a closer look at Kelly’s record and get a hold of that Ethic’s report. “They” are all so bad, I find it difficult to think there might be a decent one out there.
Kelly also states,
She has some great responses and we do need to start exposing these people/situations.
Who is the lobbyist for the LCDC?
Thanks
Comment by Stebbijo — December 10, 2008 @ 10:04 am
The lobbyist for the LCDC is Teresa Molitor, 413 W. Idaho, Boise, ID 83703. She is also the lobbyist for North Idaho College.
Comment by Bill — December 10, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Thanks.
I called the legislative library and asked for the Ethics Report – Idaho does not appear to have one and he (Mark) seems to think it is the National Report which you have already posted.
Also, on the legislature site you can do a search on Kelly and some of her bills come up. Title 59 – Chapter 7 – specially relates to ethics. Unless the bill is identified, trying to find just her work is hunt and peck. It’s hard to chase these bills down specific to the sponsor because there is no clean search, or I haven’t found it yet.
I think this is the one that was shot down. It’s a financial disclosure bill that would require politicians to expose personal gifts of certain amounts. Go figure why that went down the tubes. This would have been added to Title 67 – Chapter 6 which is bare and deals with the control of legislators/State Affairs.
I can barely keep up with any of it – there is so much and I try to learn it from a layperson perspective. After all, I did not take a government class at NIC.
How much money is this Teresa Molitor getting from the taxpayers here?
My mobile home tax is due and it is a couple hundred dollars. Not much to some, but for a very old mobile without land, it’s a chunk and I don’t want it in her pocket. It could pay my electric bill.
Comment by Stebbijo — December 10, 2008 @ 11:01 am
Well, looks like it my money gets Molitor into some parties. Those attorneys like to party hearty while they lobby.
I found this on the Boise Weekly from last year. She is mentioned a couple of times. Unda’ The Rotunda
Political Ragers: An Idaho’s pol’s social life requires a check
Comment by Stebbijo — December 10, 2008 @ 11:19 am