You are here
Gov. Christie Should Not Be Selecting the State Ethics Director (Now or Ever)
Monday, February 3rd, 2014
Robert Wechsler
Updates: February 5 and April 16, 2014 (see below)
Here is a must-read Star-Ledger op-ed piece by Paula Franzese, a professor at Seton Hall Law School and former chair of the New Jersey Ethics Commission (2006 to 2010). She provides a short history of the selection process for the executive director of the state EC, and then looks more closely at the context of the latest selection for that position.
In 2007, it was the EC itself that selected its executive director, with no involvement by the governor. The EC's choice replaced the retiring director, who had been in the position for 20 years.
In 2010, Gov. Christie removed the director, replacing her with a member of the office of the governor’s counsel. After appointing the director to a judgeship, Gov. Christie once again selected the director, and once again this individual was an associate of his, not only in public service as his associate counsel, but also as an attorney at his law firm.
As Prof. Franzese notes, "the executive director’s independence is crucial." This is why an executive director should be chosen only be EC members, without the participation of anyone under the EC's jurisdiction.
In light of current allegations against Gov. Christie, Prof. Franzese rightly points out that "it is difficult for the public to be assured that the executive director will be able to fully and independently review conduct alleged to have been committed by members of the governor’s staff when that executive director is hand-picked by the governor’s office from that very staff."
Update: February 5, 2014
According to a Daily Record editorial yesterday, the state EC chair, who was appointed by Gov. Christie, said that any concerns about the director's ethical conflicts were irrelevant. “It’s just not something we consider.”
If this is true, it is so outrageous and damaging to the ethics program, that the chair should resign. But that would not be enough. At this point, Gov. Christie is not in a position to select anyone to the EC. He should designate a completely neutral organization, such as the League of Women Voters, to select the chair's replacement. Why? Because of the damage that Gov. Christie has done to the ethics program. As the editorial says, it looks like "he’s trying to turn the Ethics Commission into a partisan panel poised to protect some of his allies." This is unacceptable.
Update: April 16, 2014
For a more detailed description of what happened in 2010, with respect to the ethics commission, read this new article from the Star-Ledger
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Here is a must-read Star-Ledger op-ed piece by Paula Franzese, a professor at Seton Hall Law School and former chair of the New Jersey Ethics Commission (2006 to 2010). She provides a short history of the selection process for the executive director of the state EC, and then looks more closely at the context of the latest selection for that position.
In 2007, it was the EC itself that selected its executive director, with no involvement by the governor. The EC's choice replaced the retiring director, who had been in the position for 20 years.
In 2010, Gov. Christie removed the director, replacing her with a member of the office of the governor’s counsel. After appointing the director to a judgeship, Gov. Christie once again selected the director, and once again this individual was an associate of his, not only in public service as his associate counsel, but also as an attorney at his law firm.
As Prof. Franzese notes, "the executive director’s independence is crucial." This is why an executive director should be chosen only be EC members, without the participation of anyone under the EC's jurisdiction.
In light of current allegations against Gov. Christie, Prof. Franzese rightly points out that "it is difficult for the public to be assured that the executive director will be able to fully and independently review conduct alleged to have been committed by members of the governor’s staff when that executive director is hand-picked by the governor’s office from that very staff."
Update: February 5, 2014
According to a Daily Record editorial yesterday, the state EC chair, who was appointed by Gov. Christie, said that any concerns about the director's ethical conflicts were irrelevant. “It’s just not something we consider.”
If this is true, it is so outrageous and damaging to the ethics program, that the chair should resign. But that would not be enough. At this point, Gov. Christie is not in a position to select anyone to the EC. He should designate a completely neutral organization, such as the League of Women Voters, to select the chair's replacement. Why? Because of the damage that Gov. Christie has done to the ethics program. As the editorial says, it looks like "he’s trying to turn the Ethics Commission into a partisan panel poised to protect some of his allies." This is unacceptable.
Update: April 16, 2014
For a more detailed description of what happened in 2010, with respect to the ethics commission, read this new article from the Star-Ledger
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
