Who Knows the Henhouse Better than a Fox?

Years ago I worked on a series of TV shows produced at the Columbia School of Journalism by Fred Friendly. Fred was “retired” at the time, working harder than someone fully employed. He was a true pioneer of television journalism: he’d been Edward R. Murrow’s producer, established CBS Reports, been President of CBS News, and a long-time professor at the Columbia Journalism School. Although my duties were formally financial and production-oriented, everyone who worked with him participated in a full-time journalism and politics seminar.

One of the most useful and important lessons Fred taught me is what he said about political ethics and political corruption. “Most of the time, scandals aren’t about crimes. The real scandals are about what’s legal.”

We read several articles in both of the local fishwraps today. One describes the third in a continuing series of pre-inauguration meetings of the Council-elect; I suppose I missed the reports on the second get-together. Our new council-members-to-be are getting a little more savvy about media relations, it appears: only one person is quoted for attribution.

“We just talked about procedural issues,” said North Ward Councilwoman Marge Caldwell-Wilson.

A few things bother me about this. First off, I know that Mr. Parker must be anxious to curry favor with the newbies in City Hall, but Ms. Caldwell-Wilson and five of her colleagues won’t be Councilmembers until Thursday. It is perhaps only a formality, but you are purporting to be a journalist working for what purports to be a newspaper. Please do try to respect facts.

Ms. Caldwell-Wilson’s explanation that her group “just talked about procedural issues” bothers the hell out of me. Process is what Council does, or should be. They introduce ordinances , they debate policy, they confirm appointments and approve contracts, they approve budgets and revenue matters. All of those things are Process. All of those things ARE “procedural issues.” Even though they are not yet sworn in as Council members – despite what Mr. Parker thinks – to meet as a body and discuss ANY public business outside of the public’s view is wrong. It may be entirely legal, but it stinks.

A perfect illustration of how important “procedural issues”  are to Council is this next article in this morning’s Times. In one of their last actions, the outgoing Council took care of one of their own, appointing Cordelia Staton to a Deputy Clerk spot. To take the job, Ms. Staton resigned her At-Large seat last week, as well as her fulltime position with the school district. This was done awfully quietly: apparently this was approved by Council at its June 3 meeting, although the article by Meir Rinde reports “…but the hiring did not appear on the agenda for the June 3 meeting and it is unclear when it was discussed.”

Now it is rather unusual that an article about Council appears in the papers on a Tuesday morning. Most news items appear on Wednesdays or Fridays, after Council actually meets. I think the appearance of the article had something to do with an anonymous letter I received yesterday in the mail. It was also addressed to the Mayor Elect, Councilmembers Elect, Media and other Community Leaders. The letter was apparently written by City employees outraged at the appointment of Ms. Staton and the quiet way it was handled, but speaking anonymously for fear of being targeted for layoffs.

Although the newspaper article quotes acting deputy clerk Leona Baylor as saying there were no layoffs to allow for Ms. Staton’s appointment, the letter alleges that there is in fact one person marked for layoff and another being bumped down or demoted to make room for Ms. Staton.

Ms. Baylor’s suggestion that, according to the article “Staton’s hiring essentially enlarges the office because no one has been laid off”  is shockingly insensitive to every employee in City Hall. During a week that all talk is about massive layoffs of as many as 25% of City Employees due to the collapse of city revenues, any suggestion that one City department is actually being enlarged to benefit one retiring member of the City Council is just appalling.

This appointment by Council may be entirely legal – although the absence of the item from the June 3 meeting docket is suspicious, and the murky recollections of when the appointment was actually discussed and voted bears further investigation. That Ms. Staton did not announce her resignation from Council at the time is interesting. And the fact that this whole affair did not even come to light until whistleblowers in City Hall spoke out is very telling.

Like I said, this – may – be entirely legal, but it is wrong. Certainly after many years in office, the outgoing Council knows its way around the rules and regulations of the City. As they say, who knows the Henhouse better than a Fox?  This is scandalous behavior on the part of this Council. It is wrong to give, or be seen as giving, preferential treatment to one of their own at the same time that hundreds of municipal employees – firefighters, police, teachers, sanitation workers, inspectors, business administrators – are in fear of the hatchet that is coming. Don’t talk about “essentially enlarging the office” to make room for a Council member at the same time many other offices are set to “essentially” disappear!

And, to Ms. Caldwell-Wilson and all of your colleagues, don’t meet out of the public eye and try to wave it off by claiming that you “just talked about procedural issues.” It’s all Process.

Going forward, at tonight’s Council meeting, I hope this issue comes up. The anonymous letter writers posed some good questions that should be raised. Among them are:

• Where is the money coming from for this created position, if the City has no money?
• How much does it pay?
• Why does the City need two Deputy Clerks, (Ms. Baylor and Ms. Staton)?
• Why wasn’t anyone else offered this job?

To which I will add a few more:

• Why wasn’t this matter on the June 3 docket?
• Why is it unclear as to when this appointment was discussed and approved?
• Why was this position not publicly posted?
• For new Council members: have you been party to any conversations, with Current or Elect Council members or anyone else associated with city administration formal or informal, about this or the permanent City Clerk appointment to be made in the Fall?
• Is the Fix In?

OK, I suppose I shouldn’t expect an honest answer to that last question. But that is the heart of the matter.

That’s enough for now. I haven’t had a chance to even address the other news: ballooning budget deficits, and midnight appointments by Mayor Palmer to all kinds of boards and commissions in his last days in office. Gotta leave some material for days to come.

One last note: if there is any interest, I might order some bumper stickers that read “Don’t Blame Me, I Ran to Clean This Mess Up!!” Let me know if you’re interested ;-D