Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Sheriff Evicts Insiders - The First Victory in the Cleansing of Jackson County Legislature

First, big kudos to Sheriff Mike Sharp, who has taken a stand against the literal insiders who have used courthouse access to unfairly gain early access to getting their name first on the ballots. In prior years, incumbents would use their courthouse passes to get in and file for themselves and friends while the hopes for reform sat outside in the cold.

Finally, Mike Sharp has put an end to that odious and unfair practice. Using his role as chief of security for the courthouse, he decided to take names at the courthouse door starting at 5:00 yesterday.

I had written about the unfairness of the prior system before, when Theresa Garza Ruiz proposed a simple and fair fix to the insider game. Greg Grounds joined her in seeking to eliminate cronyism.

Heny Rizzo voted for special insider privileges.

Dan Tarwater voted for special insider privileges.

James Tindall voted for special insider privileges.

Scott Burnett voted for special insider privileges.

Dennis Waits voted for special insider privileges.

Fred Arbanas voted for special insider privileges.

Bob Spence voted for special insider privileges.

Not surprisingly, even under the new system, Henry Rizzo managed to find a way to use his position to engage in petty cheating. He loathes Theresa Garza Ruiz because she has consistently sought to bring openness and reform to the Jackson County legislature. With that in mind, he let Ruiz's opponent cut in line to get his name on the ballot before her.

Can you believe that? Most people grow out of that kind of behavior in 1st grade, but Henry Rizzo and his friend apparently did not.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

Is the End Near? - Day 149 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout


Finally, after almost half a year in an ethical wasteland, the Jackson County legislature is reportedly prepared to accept Ethical Home Rule. Amusingly, Tarwater and Rizzo are pushing for the new deal. “We’re going to put ourselves under the ethics code,” Rizzo said in an interview. “But it will take a unanimous vote of the commission to eliminate one of us.”

The news of the yet-unwritten deal came (not coincidentally) on the same day that the Ethics Commission Selection Committee came forward with a panel of 5 new people to serve on the commission. Janet Blauvelt, Karen Graves, Fred Mills, Myron Sildon, Gwendolyn Washington will make up the new Ethics Commission, and it looks like the Selection Committee did a fantastic job of recruiting and choosing solid people. I know and admire two of the Commissioners.

It remains to be seen whether the entire Legislature will go along with the proposal. Early in the process, Scott Burnett drew a line in the sand over the false issue of "double jeopardy" by both the County Ethics Commission and the Missouri Ethics Commission. Most citizens accept the fact that they are subject to multiple levels of oversight, but Burnett somehow felt that he should be exempt. Fortunately, the rest of the Legislature disagrees with him on that point, and he apparently stands alone in his absurd claim that two levels of ethical oversight amount to "double jeopardy".

Ultimately, this is a good day for Jackson County, though it's a major loss for many of the members of the legislature. Rizzo and Tarwater will probably lose their seats over their efforts to eliminate Ethical Home Rule, and Scott Burnett's term as Chair of the Legislature has been forever tainted by the half-year-long ethical blackout. If it hadn't been for a few citizens who stood up to the good-old-boy network, they might have succeeded. In fact, they still could succeed - until the deal is passed by the legislature, only a fool would trust in their willingness or ability to do the right thing.

Thanks and congratulations should go to Pat McInerney for his quiet and determined leadership on this issue.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Influence-Peddling and Failed Ethical Oversight - Day 123 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

Jackson County legislators have influence. With a few words, a handshake, or a backroom meeting, they can change the fortunes of a company, an individual, or a nonprofit organization. On a small scale, they do stuff like give a friend a thousand tax dollars to put a sticker on his car. It's an expensive form of fondness, but they're only spending our tax dollars, so who cares?

On a large scale - well, we don't know how large a scale their corruption has achieved. We hear that close friends have been hired. We have money getting siphoned into expensive arts programs that employ friends and benefit few. All of this money gets divvied up in backrooms to "certain outside agencies" with only cryptic messages offered to the public. And please don't forget that a majority of the committee that controls the COMBAT money has a criminal record, and one of the criminals on the committee is using county resources to falsely claim that he is the Chair of that committee.

Plainly stated, when you have shady dealings involving county money, legislators who are overstating their own influence and a complete absence of local ethics enforcement, the situation is ideal for influence peddling. This whole situation stinks to high heavens.

In a closely related development, press reports claim the FBI has been conducting an investigation into influence-peddling in Jefferson City. Apparently, the Missouri Ethics Commission, a "toothless" body that "takes too long to investigate complaints and announce its conclusion, and is too timid about fining lawmakers found to be in violation of ethics law", has failed to keep a close eye on the legislators down the hall.

Believe it or not, this toothless, timid and ineffective oversight is exactly what the County wants for a watchdog
. The legislators, including Dan Tarwater, Henry Rizzo, Scott Burnett and Denny Waits, have loudly claimed that they don't need Ethical Home Rule, because they are also supposedly "watched" by the MEC - a group that has allowed things to slip so badly that the FBI is stepping in.

Meanwhile, the Jackson County Legislature has exempted itself from the Jackson County Ethics Commission's oversight, and, in the face of legislative hostility and probable litigation, the Jackson County Ethics Commission remains completely vacant.

It is hard to overstate the degree of danger Jackson County government faces. It really, truly has convicted criminals (Tindall and Rizzo) on its legislature, controlling millions of dollars. The legislature has exempted itself from local ethical oversight, in violation of the County Charter, and submits only to a toothless, ineffective and timid entity that is housed miles and miles away.

If influence-peddling is happening in Jefferson City, what do you think is going on in the halls of Jackson County Courthouse?

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Day 100 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

It's now been over a hundred days since Jackson County has had functioning Ethical Home Rule. A hundred days for people like Henry Rizzo, James Tindall and Dan Tarwater to thank their lucky stars that no local authority exists to examine what they are doing with millions of dollars of COMBAT funds. A hundred days of a broken ethics system.

This is how they like it. They think they're winning.

By exempting themselves from Ethical Home Rule, the Jackson County legislators have abandoned one of the key tenets of Jackson County government. As wise commentators here have pointed out, principles of statutory construction probably make their monarchic attempts to place their ethics beyond scrutiny legally ineffective - but, until we have a panel of brave citizens with the courage to fight the kind of fight that Rizzo and Burnett and the rest of the anti-Ethical legislators will fight to free themselves from scrutiny, it looks like we will have no functioning Ethical Home Rule in Jackson County.

Have they really won, though? In reality, they have lost more than they know.

First, almost all of them will face vigorous challenges in the 2010 elections. Rizzo will lose his election. Tarwater will lose his election. Tindall will lose his election. Burnett, Spence and Waits will face stronger challenges than they've ever seen, and two of them will lose their seats in races defined by ethical issues. Arbanas will attempt to handpick a successor, but his seat will go to an experienced politico running on a pro-Ethical Home Rule platform.

Second, they may well lose the COMBAT tax in the next reapproval election. By funneling all the money through a committee with a majority actually found guilty of financial crimes, they have undercut confidence in the administration of the COMBAT tax. It's a terrible shame, because the COMBAT tax accomplishes much good in our community, but, even if we weren't in the midst of an economic crisis, nobody can expect Jackson Countians to ignore the potential of massive corruption coupled with a refusal to accept Ethical Home Rule.

Third, they will lose the Ethical Home Rule battle anyhow, but not until they have destroyed their own credibility and electability in the process. Whether it's through the work of a few brave legislators who could bring this issue up for a reconsideration, or through a brave Ethics Commission taking on the battle of standing up for the Jackson County Home Rule Charter, or through a revision of the Charter to make it even more explicit that our legislators do not get to prevent their own ethical oversight, or even through an initiative petition, Ethical Home Rule will be restored in Jackson County.

Finally, the scrutiny is not going to stop. Now that we've hit day 100, I will be scaling back my Jackson County Ethics Blackout coverage to weekly updates on the misdeeds of the Jackson County legislature. There's plenty of material to do a daily piece, but there are other topics I want to cover in this blog, as well. By doing a weekly piece, bolstered by more time to do a few Sunshine Law requests and some insider interviewing, I'm hoping that less will be more.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Jackson County Legislature Extraordinary Secrecy, Without Ethics - Day 99 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

When a legislative body sttempts to exempt itself from an Ethics Code, and to deny the Charter-granted right of its citizens to oversee its ethics, the wisest course of action is to start with the assumption that they are up to something untoward. No benefit of the doubt goes to those who insist they are above the scrutiny and accountability they would impose on others.

In that light, yesterday's hijinks at the Jackson County Legislature ought to be raising eyebrows. Chair Scott Burnett introduced a last-minute resolution calling for a closed meeting, excluding the press and citizens from knowing what the Legislature is up to. Typically, such resolutions are introduced at the meeting preceding such an extraordinary action, but this one was introduced and acted upon without normal notice. The exception to the Sunshine Law relied upon by the Legislature was RSMo 610.021(1) - "Legal actions, causes of action or litigation involving a public governmental body and any confidential or privileged communications between a public governmental body or its representatives and its attorneys."

The Jackson County legislature is lawyering up again? What is it this time? Is somebody trying to explain in simple terms to Henry Rizzo that the City is under no legal obligation to spend $2,000,000 on public safety rather than entertainment for suburbanites? Are Tarwater and Tindall fighting it out over the disputed chairmanship of the Anti-Drug Committee? Is yet another federal investigation for corruption focusing on the Jackson County Legislature - a fresh chapter in the rich history of Jackson County crime and corruption?

We can only guess at what went on behind those closed doors. We can be certain, however, that the Jackson County legislature has exempted itself from Ethical Home Rule, and now it feels the need to have emergency meetings about secrets.

Is that the type of government Jackson County deserves?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, March 16, 2009

Tarwater's Tape Exposes Rizzo - Day 98 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

As promised earlier, a videotape of Dan Tarwater grandstanding on the stadium issue may be found here. In watching the performance again, it's hilarious to see Henry Rizzo spring into action and attempt to nail down the legal obligation of the City to make a donation to cover Jackson County's commitment of funds. Rizzo flails away, asking awkward question after awkward question, until, finally, Tarwater admits that there is no legal obligation for the City to divert two million dollars from public safety into suburban entertainment.

Even the County Counselor was dodging Rizzo's questions, not wanting to make him look like a fool in front of everyone. Nice try, but when Rizzo gets on a roll, there's no stopping him.

Sadly, truth may have emerged on the tape when a legislator from outside of Kansas City pointed out that several Kansas City Council members are willing to join in the diversion of funds and sell out Kansas City. Any Council Member who votes to give away $2,000,000 during our budget crisis will demonstrate that s/he is on the side of Henry Rizzo and Dan Tarwater.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 13, 2009

Who is Dan Tarwater Working for? - Day 95 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

In the March 9 meeting of the Jackson County Legislature, Dan Tarwater usurped the role of Inter-Governmental committee members and abandoned the economic interests of his constituents. And he accomplished all this misbehavior in only 6 minutes.

An amateur video appeared in the comments of one of my prior posts, but I won't embed the video here because its producer has marred it with a title which engages in childish name-calling.

In the video (I will link to the official video when it is available), Dan Tarwater goes off on a rant about the Mayor's position on stadium financing. While it's kind of disturbing that he has his facts wrong, I wouldn't expect straight talk from someone who has sought to avoid Ethical Home Rule. Sadly, the dishonesty of my County Legislator is neither interesting nor surprising.

What is surprising, though, is that he uses his tirade to attack the interests of his own constituents. Dan Tarwater's district covers a large number of Kansas Citians, who are bearing the burden of double taxation (actually, triple if you count the State money) for the Sports Complex. Those of us in Kansas City pay both as Jackson Countians and as Kansas Citians, to support the same cause.

As a representative of Kansas Citians, Dan Tarwater owes us a full measure of representation. Instead, he abandoned us and got caught up in an inter-governmental spat between the city and the county. In an "us" versus "them" battle, Tarwater foolishly believes that he is on the side of the County as an entity, when, in fact, he should be representing the interests of his constituents. I can understand that as a Jackson County legislator, Tarwater would prefer not having to face the struggle of having to replace the $2,000,000 that the County signed a contract for (but not the City), but not at the cost of having his constituents facing double taxation.

Dan Tarwater should be representing his constituents, not the Legislature.

It's easy to see how someone without intellectual rigor could miss this point, and perhaps that is why Tarwater was not chosen to serve on the Inter-governmental Affairs Committee, and ought not to be injecting himself into that committee's role, anyhow.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, March 09, 2009

Who's Chairing the Anti-Drug Committee? - Day 91 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

According to every official document I have seen, Dan Tarwater chairs the Anti-Drug Committee, a powerful committee that controls the $21 million COMBAT tax. As the only member of the committee who does not have a rap sheet for financial crimes, he is probably the least inappropriate person of that committee to be in charge.

Why, then, is James Tindall claiming to chair the Committee, and using County resources to publicize that claim? Is it an attempt to convince inattentive outsiders that he is more influential over the dollars than he truly is?

Of course, it's probably just a mistake. But, with the County Legislature fighting hard against Ethical Home Rule, and with an Anti-Drug committee consisting of two people with financial rap sheets, it's dangerous to assume that things are on the up-and-up.

Until the legislature accepts Ethical Home Rule, it does not deserve the benefit of any doubt.

Why is James Tindall using county resources to claim he is chairing the Anti-Drug committee?

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 06, 2009

Theresa Garza Ruiz Gets It - Day 88 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

Yesterday, I received an e-Newsletter from Theresa Garza Ruiz, the Jackson County legislator in the first district at-large seat. Her newsletter included the text of a column she wrote for The Examiner, expressing her feelings about her vote on abandoning Ethical Home Rule for Jackson County.

Theresa Garza Ruiz agrees that the Ethics Blackout is wrong, and she call on the "old dogs" to fix it. It's a wonderful piece of writing, and signals hope that significant change will be coming to the dark underworld of the Jackson County legislature.

Ms. Garza Ruiz writes:
For far too long, Jackson County government and "ethics" have been somewhat of a running joke throughout the metro area. Honestly, when were these two items used in a good light in the same paragraph, let alone the same sentence?

In spite of the progress the county has achieved in the past few years, I can understand why critics are skeptical on whether our hearts are truly into overhauling the rules that govern us. In my book, the fact that a Jackson County ethics code was even passed speaks volumes, but then I'm optimistic.

When decent people are faced with having to compromise due to situational choices, then an ethical dilemma has been presented. Ethical dilemmas can involve right-versus-wrong situations or right-versus-right situations - also known as no-win situations.

So, there it is. The ethics code is not perfect.
In an of itself, the admission that the code is imperfect is what I would call "Praising with faint damn". By excluding the legislature from Ethical Home Rule, the County Legislature has undercut the Jackson County Charter and established a arrogant, almost monarchic attitude toward ethics in Jackson County. "The ethics code is not perfect" is kind of like writing "The economy is not perfect" or "The intelligence on Iraq was not perfect."

But, thank goodness, Ms. Garza Ruiz was just getting warmed up. She next turns her focus on the wretched good-old-boys who have long viewed Jackson County Government as their fiefdom and family employment agency: "With no disrespect intended, as that old saying goes, 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks.' Not that it's impossible, it just takes time." So far, its been 88 days of time trying to get the old dogs on the Jackson County Legislature to learn the new trick of being ethical. Seems like Ms. Garza Ruiz is getting impatient in her role as the "dog whisperer" of ethics.

Finally, Ms. Garza Ruiz ends on two high notes:
The ability for any Ethics Commission to deal credibly and forthrightly with the issues that come before it depends on a governing body's willingness to reform its own ethical rules and behavior. As I said before, greater scrutiny and public awareness can help set a higher standard and force change from our leaders and our governmental institutions. In the end, no matter what's on the books, it still boils down to personal integrity.

As for the ethics commissioners who resigned, I was disappointed upon hearing the news. It was a good group of solid, decent, hardworking individuals dedicated to upholding the public interest.
In those two paragraphs, Ms. Garza Ruiz draws a line in the sand and dares her fellow county legislators to remain on the wrong side of it. Where Dan Tarwater attacked the citizens who served, and Dennis Waits accused them of playing politics, but Ms. Garza praises them. Old dogs snarl and bite when people want to look inside their doghouse, but friendly dogs welcome them.

More significantly, Ms. Garza Ruiz sets out the terms of the changes she seeks. By speaking of "a governing body's willingness to reform its own ethical rules and behavior", she is saying that the bogus reforms being bandied about by corrupt insiders that do not result in Ethical Home Rule will be insufficient.

It is wonderful to see an elected official embrace - even encourage - scrutiny of the Jackson County legislature designed to "force change from our leaders and our governmental institutions." It's going to happen, and Theresa Garza Ruiz is going to wind up on the right side of Jackson County history over this issue. Ethical Home Rule will return to the Jackson County Courthouse, and the smart legislators are getting on board.

Thank you, Theresa, for the leadership and encouragement. We're glad you're not joining of the pack of old dogs.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Cozy Cash Committees Closely Controlled - Day 87 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

Why are the "Big Money" Committees on the Jackson County Legislature controlled by only 5 legislators?

Why are 3 legislators (Theresa Garza Ruiz, Greg Grounds, and Fred Arbanas), excluded from the three committees (Anti-Drug, Finance & Audit, and Budget) that have the most financial influence on Jackson County (Anti-Drug, Finance & Audit, and Budget)?

Dan Tarwater serves on all three of the Big Money Committees. Theresa Garza Ruiz serves on none.

James Tindall (convicted of income tax evasion) serves on two of the Big Money Committees (Budget and Anti-Drug). Greg Grounds serves on none.

Henry Rizzo (convicted of providing false information to a financial institution) serves on two of the Big Money Committees (Budget and Anti-Drug). Fred Arbanas serves on none.

It can't be based on experience, because Fred Arbanas has been on the County Legislature since it started.

It can't be based on knowledge, because Theresa Garza Ruiz is completing a Master's Degree in Public Administration with an emphasis on Government Business Relations and Public Management.

It can't be based on qualifications, because Greg Grounds has over three decades of government and business experience, including a stint on the Jackson County COMBAT Commission.

It can't be based on public trust, since two of the Financial Five (controlling 4 of the seven seats on the Budget and Anti-Drug committees) have criminal records for financial improprieties, while none of the other three have rap sheets.

It just doesn't make sense. Any auditor knows "there is safety in numbers", meaning that you should have as many people as possible involved in oversight of financial matters - a rule that would apply with special force where some of individuals involved have been caught and convicted of financial improprieties.

At the same time this bizarre and unsettling committee structure was being set up, the Jackson County Legislature decided (in violation of the Charter) that it should not have to answer to the Jackson County Ethics Commission anymore.

Why does the Jackson County Legislature oppose Ethical Home Rule? Is there Big Money involved?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

Tarwater Vulnerable? - Day 85 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

It has been 15 years since Dan Tarwater was first elected to the Jackson County legislature. I remember the election well - it was my first exposure to how slimy Jackson County politics can be. Tarwater cruised to a victory over a young lawyer named Matt Davis, partially by recruiting a woman named Mary Davis to appear on the ballot as M. Davis. Tarwater was part of the Bill Waris operation, and Matt Davis was like that brave student in Tiananmen Square, only the tank didn't even slow down.

Since that time, Tarwater hasn't faced a serious opponent. According to Missouri Ethics Commission reports, it's been well over a decade since Dan Tarwater has raised more than $500 to support a campaign. Even in 2008, when other unchallenged politicians were raising money for their more embattled friends, Tarwater sat on the sidelines and only made token contributions to a couple organizations.

While Tarwater was a tank in 1994, 15 years can gather a whole lot of rust. Since that time, he has gathered bad publicity in the form of a brawl with another legislator, on-again-off-again bribery issues asserted by former Chair Katheryn Shields concerning COMBAT funds (he's the only one on the Anti-Drug Committee who hasn't been convicted for criminal financial behavior), and he's given his aide lavish bonuses from county funds. Et cetera.

Now that Tarwater has come out aggressively against Ethical Home Rule, he has made himself an attractive target for a spirited campaign in 2010. I've heard rumblings that some budding politicos in the south Ward Parkway corridor are talking to friends about running on a pro-Ethical Home Rule platform.

Here's a map of the district. Take a second and think about all the good people in that district, who could really bring something fresh and positive to the Jackson County legislature . . .

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, February 20, 2009

To Whom, for What? - Dan Tarwater Resists Local Oversight but Spends a Quarter Million Dollars - Day 75 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

A quarter million dollars is a lot of money. In a time of tight budgets and taxpayer suffering, a Jackson County politician ought to be as open and transparent as possible when proposing to spend a quarter million dollars of tax money. Such a massive investment deserves a little fanfare, right?

Not in Jackson County world.

Here's an agenda item on the legislative calendar for Monday's meeting, quoted in its entirety:
AN ORDINANCE appropriating $255,410.00 from the fund balance of the 2009 Anti-Drug Sales Tax Fund and authorizing the County Executive to execute agreements with certain outside agencies which engage in anti-drug prevention activities for the purpose of preventing illegal drug use and drug-related offenses, at an aggregate cost to the County not to exceed $1,715,067.00.
As my father would have said, "Clear as mud, but it covers the ground."

Good citizens with adequate computer skills are able to dig a little deeper and gain access to the ordinance itself, but it's a pointless exercise. Who is the money going to? The ordinance identifies them only as "certain outside agencies engaged in anti-drug prevention activities". What will they do for the money? It's not really stated, but the most clear statement we get is that they will "engage in anti-drug prevention activities for the purpose of preventing illegal drug use and drug-related offenses." What does that even mean?

(As an aside, I hope that the money would be spend FOR drug prevention activities, not for "anti-drug prevention activities".)

Why the secrecy? Why the coded talk of "certain outside agencies", instead of saying who's getting how much for what?

More ominously, this coded quarter million dollar transaction is sponsored by none other than Dan Tarwater, one of the defenders of the exemption of Jackson County legislators from the Jackson County Ethics Code, and the only member of the Jackson County Anti-Drug Committee without a rap sheet for financial misdeeds. Who's profiting, and how are they connected?

Jackson County taxpayers have every right to be suspicious. When the same people siphoning huge contracts to secret parties are the same people who refuse to accept local ethics oversight, they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Good News and a Good Example on Jackson County Ethics - Day 65 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

Go look at the Jackson County Ethics Selection Committee's website's "Process" page. Notice what's missing?

No longer is the Selection Committee promising to keep applications confidential.


I had a very pleasant conversation with someone deeply involved in the selection process yesterday, and he had a forthright explanation for the bogus promise of confidentiality - they hadn't really thought about it. As soon as they saw my objection, coupled with local attorney and sunshine law expert Jean Maneke's excellent legal analysis, they realized their mistake and fixed it.

What a remarkable example of good leadership!

Too bad the Jackson County Legislature is bereft of such leadership. I recall, back in the early days of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout, before Christmas, having a conversation with one of the legislators and discussing the crisis with him. I know and trust the guy, and it turned out that he was honestly confused. He genuinely thought that the Missouri Ethics Commission would enforce whatever the Jackson County legislature passed, and he thought that having both entities enforcing the same code was "double jeopardy".

He was completely wrong on both counts, but I am 100% willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that those were simple, good faith mistakes. I don't expect perfection from my politicians, and I don't blame him for being wrong at first.

But now the Missouri Ethics Commission has stated quite clearly that they will not be enforcing the Jackson County Code, and the "Double Jeopardy" argument has been demolished. There's a big difference between being mistaken and being pigheadedly mistaken, and the Jackson County legislature has crossed over to the latter.

I've talked to a lot of insiders who promise me that "this problem will be fixed" after we get a new Ethics Commission appointed. I admire their optimism, but I think the legislators are making a terrible mistake in waiting. I'm supposed to meet a candidate for Henry Rizzo's seat soon, and one of Dan Tarwater's more well-known constituents has spoken with me about an urge to run. Once people get in the race, they aren't going to back out, and the incumbents are going to answer the voters' questions about why they allowed themselves to be wrong about ethics for 6 months, or whatever amount of time passes in the Jackson County Ethics Blackout.

Why can't the Jackson County Legislature simply admit it made a mistake and fix it? That's what the Selection Committee did. That's what grown-ups do.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, February 06, 2009

COMBAT, Crime and Ethics - Day 61 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

In 1989, the COMmunity Backed Anti-Drug Tax (COMBAT) was approved by Jackson County voters with a mission of "Making substance abuse history...". 2 decades have passed, and literally hundreds of millions of tax dollars have been "made history", but substance abuse appears undiminished as a problem in our community.

Who is in charge of this humongous pot of money that has failed utterly to accomplish its mission for two decades, and supports such lofty goals as paying a favored citizen a thousand dollar to put a sticker on his car (yes, I'm serious)? The Jackson County legislature, the same group of arrogant politicians who have passed an ethics code that can be enforced against everyone but themselves.

Does anyone else here think the spending of twenty million tax dollars without an ethics code is a good idea?

Oh, it gets worse. Much worse.

The COMBAT slush fund gets handled by a three person committee on the legislature. Guess who's on it? Hint: the majority has a rap sheet.

Here is the composition of sterling characters spending twenty million of your tax dollars in 2009 while insisting they should not be held to the Jackson County Ethics Code. The Chair is Dan Tarwater. As far as I know, Dan Tarwater does not have a criminal record, unlike his two friends on the committee. But, as if to assure that he has "street cred" with his two criminal friends, Dan did manage to get into a fistfight with a fellow legislator over money. Unsavory, but unconvicted.

The other two people that the Jackson County legislature has put in charge of spending twenty million tax dollars are actually, literally criminals. James Tindall was convicted of income tax evasion, though he managed to get off on the bribery charges. Henry Rizzo had to go to the Supreme Court to even get on the ballot, because he had "pled guilty to a charge of providing a false statement to a financial institution in 1991".

I think it's great that Rizzo and Tindall have returned to public life and won the voters' trust after breaking the law in matters involving the handling of money.

But does it make any sense at all to trust them to be the majority in a committee that controls twenty million tax dollars? Does it raise some concern in anyone's mind that all three members of this committee voted in favor of exempting themselves from enforcement of the Jackson County Ethics Code?

Please take a moment today and drop an email to members of the Jackson County legislators and tell them that you think that anyone in charge of spending twenty million of your dollars ought to be subject to enforcement of an ethics code, especially if they have a rap sheet. Here are their email addresses:
Scott Burnett - sburnett@jacksongov.org
Theresa Garza Ruiz - tgarza@jacksongov.org
Henry Rizzo - hrizzo@jacksongov.org
Fred Arbanas - farbanas@jacksongov.org
James Tindall - jtindall@jacksongov.org
Dennis Waits - dwaits@jacksongov.org
Dan Tarwater - dtarwater@jacksongov.org
Greg Grounds - ggrounds@jacksongov.org
Bob Spence - bspence@jacksongov.org
Remember to be polite, but firm. All we want is for them to reverse their exemption from the Jackson County Ethics Commission.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, February 02, 2009

Will Jackson County Legislative Arrogance Kill COMBAT? - Day 57 of the Jackson County Ethics Crisis

One of the joys of being a Jackson County legislator is the thrill of dishing out buckets of pork through the COMBAT tax. About $21 million dollars gets doled out to support over 80 anti-drug programs, and every nickel of it goes through a legislature that refuses local ethical oversight.

Personally, I'm in favor of the COMBAT tax, despite its many flaws in implementation, but many taxpayers will not support its renewal if the Jackson County legislature refuses to answer to the Jackson County ethics code. Already, the Legislature has been caught funneling $1000 to an anti-crime activist to put a sticker on his car (no, really, I'm serious), so, in a down economy, who can blame people for opting out of a slush fund for unaccountable legislators?

Voters vote on COMBAT renewal in 2010. In 2003, the .25% COMBAT sales tax was renewed with a margin of 64-36% (not quite the "more than" 2:1 margin claimed on the COMBAT website, but what's a little lie on a taxpayer funded website in a county governed by legislators with so little regard for ethics?), but times have changed, and, unless the legislators drop their sneaky exemption from local ethics oversight, they will bring the COMBAT tax down with them.

Jackson Countians have demonstrated that they will support a good tax if they believe it is well-administered. Unfortunately for those of us who support the good things accomplished by the COMBAT tax, the image of the Jackson County legislature will be horribly tarnished by that point. Last week, I spoke with a bright, well-connected, well-liked woman in Henry Rizzo's at-large district and Dan Tarwater's local district, and she is thinking of filing for office. If she goes after either one of them, she would make ethics the theme of her campaign. Who could blame her? It's a natural.

If the Jackson County legislators really, truly believe that the COMBAT tax is a worthwhile endeavor, and accomplishes good things, then they owe it to their constituents to give it the best renewal chance possible. To do that, they must reverse their exemption from local enforcement of the Jackson County Ethics Code.

If they fail to do so, Jackson Countians will have every right to assume the worst possible reason that they want to spend $21 million without ethical oversight, and vote the tax down.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Burning Houses, Severed Fingers, Blinded Children - Jackson County Wants More of These - Day 51 of the Jackson County Ethics Crisis

Our Jackson County legislature has legalized the sale of fireworks in Jackson County. They claim that the reason they are doing so is to help nonprofits.

No, seriously, they are claiming that.

I attend a lot of nonprofit meetings, I read a lot of nonprofit publications, and I know a lot of nonprofit executives. Never once have I heard anybody propose that fireworks sales are the solution for the funding crisis faced by nonprofits. Not once.

And, really, Mr. Rizzo and Mr. Tarwater, if you want to help nonprofits increase revenues, why choose a seasonal item that causes fires, traumatic amputations and blindness? Nonprofits have funding needs all year, not just in July. Why not let nonprofits sell drugs, or run brothels? There's a lot more money in those vices than you can get from the chump change people fork over for bottle rockets.

Perhaps I am mistaken. Perhaps Henry Rizzo and Dan Tarwater have been talking to the National Society for Blind Homeless Kids Missing Fingers.

Or, perhaps they have lined up some donations from people with ties to the wholesale fireworks industry.

It has now been 51 days since we have had a fully staffed Jackson County Ethics Commission with the power to investigate our Jackson County legislators. As long as the legislature exempts itself from local enforcement of the Jackson County Ethics Code, Jackson County voters should assume the absolute worst of legislators.

With characters like Rizzo and Tarwater helping out the fireworks industry, it's hard to believe anything but the worst.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Dan Tarwater Responds, but Appears Not to Know What is in the Jackson County Charter

Dan Tarwater is my in-district County Legislator. I wrote to him and the rest of the Legislators expressing my dismay at their refusal to support local ethics review, and asking them each three specific questions. I also promised to publish their answers, unless they requested that I not do so. Here's what I got from Dan Tarwater:
1. Do you support empowering the Jackson County Ethics Commission to have authority to "receive complaints and conduct investigations" regarding Jackson County legislators?
Yes I do and the legislature does authorize and allow the Ethics Commission to have authority to receive complaints and investigate but then it is to be passed on to the Missouri Ethics omission. The reason for that is that the Jackson County Ethics Commission is appointed by us and it could have a conflict of interest since we also fund them. There are already provisions in place to avoid this conflict and that is the Missouri Ethics Commission.

2. If not, why not?

3. Do you believe that the Jackson County Charter supports your
interpretation, or do you believe that it needs to be changed to
allow for the exemption of elected officials from local oversight?

I do believe that the County Charter does support this position. I feel that we as elected Officials should be help to a higher standard than anyone else. If an elected official does something that is wrong they should be suffer the consequences. Any act that is deemed to be a violation should be investigated by an authority that does not have ties to body. We would not want someone to look at a ruling and say they did not find them guilty because they had a conflict of interest.

So there you go. Let's take a look, though, at the truth of what he said.

"The reason for that is that the Jackson County Ethics Commission is appointed by us".
That, folks, is a pure, unadulterated LIE. The County Legislature does not appoint the Jackson County Ethics Commission! While supporting legislation to rob Jackson Countians of ethical oversight, Tarwater doesn't even have a passing familiarity with how the current system works!!

Here, for those who care about the truth, is what the Charter, not Dan Tarwater, has to say about how the Commission is appointed, and it's linked to the real Charter, in case you want to read the entire Charter by yourself:
There shall be an ethics commission selection board, which shallappoint all of the appointees to the ethics commission. This board shall consist of the executive director of the Mid-America Regional Council, the dean of the Henry W. Bloc School of Business and Public Administration at the University of Missouri - Kansas City, and the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Greater Kansas City. Within thirty days of the effective date of this section, the selection board shall appoint five residents of the county to the ethics commission. The commission members shall select their own chairman. Thereafter, within thirty days of the occurrence of a vacancy on the ethics commission, the selection board shall fill the vacancy.
That's a lot of technical language, but it raises a vital question.

Does Dan Tarwater not know what he's talking about, or is he lying to his constituents?
It's one or the other, and neither answer is acceptable for someone making decisions about how Jackson County voters can hold their legislators accountable for unethical behavior.

Tarwater's second answer also includes a major blunder about what is in the Charter. He claims that the Charter supports his position on robbing Jackson Countians of the right to oversee the Legislature's ethics. Once again, let's go to the primary sources.

The Charter: "The commission may receive complaints and conduct investigations of violations of the conflicts of interests, financial interest disclosure, and lobbying registration and disclosure provisions of the charter, the code and ordinances, and the statutory and common law of the state of Missouri as it applies to county officers . . ."

The Ordinance Dan Tarwater and the rest of the Jackson County Legislature enacted: "the Jackson County Ethics Commission shall be without jurisdiction to hear complaints [[filed with the Jackson County Ethics Commission]] concerning the compliance with any provision of this chapter of any actions or conduct of any County elected officials . . ."

So, the Charter specifically authorizes the Commission to look into ethics violations by county officers (including elected officials), while the ordinance specifically robs them of that jurisdiction, and Tarwater seems to think the two are consistent. Once again, we are left wondering, "Does Dan Tarwater not know what he's talking about, or is he lying to his constituents?"

It's an interesting question, but does it really matter?

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Insiders (No, Literally, Insiders!) Want to Keep Control

One of the rites of Jackson County politics is the camp-out the night before the filing deadline for County races, in an attempt to gain the first spot on the ballot. This year, the silliness fell apart into a display of temper, whining, and favoritism. None of those things are new to Jackson County politics, but it's disheartening to see them displayed so prominently in the pregame show.

The dirty secret is that people who have connected friends, or who are incumbents, get to enter the building early. Simply stated, the system is unfair and undignified. Jackson Countians deserve a better system.

Theresa Garza Ruiz has a better way. She is proposing a lottery system, so that ballot position is decided by chance among those who file on the first day. “It needs to be a level playing field, and this is the way to do it," Ruiz claims. This is the same system that created rare agreement in the thread about the Sheriff's race that sprung up (strangely enough) under my post about Mary Ann from Gilligan's Island.

Of course, it's impossible to disagree with her, right?

Not surprisingly, a few "insiders" prefer the system that makes regular people wait out in the cold. Henry Rizzo and Dan Tarwater have said that the current system works fine for people with special courthouse access, and, since they have it, they see no need to change.

“The only ones unhappy about it are the ones who couldn’t get in early to file,” said Dennis Waits, the chairman of the legislature. In other words, who cares about the losers that don't have Dennis Waits to sneak them in the back door?

The current legislators have courthouse access, but the rest of us don't. They and their friends have an advantage that they have used to play games with our ballots. We should not allow their gamesmanship to continue.

The proposal by Ruiz is a sensible one. She is taking a small but important step against cronyism and "insider" politics (literally). Any legislator who opposes this proposal announces clearly that he is prefers insider games.

Labels: , , , ,