You are here
Unacceptable Mischaracterization of an Ethics Settlement in D.C.
Thursday, July 24th, 2014
The District of Columbia's former chief administrative law judge
settled with the D.C. Board of Ethics and Government Accountability
(BEGA) this week (the settlement agreement is attached; see below).
The misconduct she admitted to included her hiring of a business
partner without going through the standard hiring procedures, and
contracting with a company owned by the business partner's boyfriend
(see my
detailed discussion of the charges against her).
The reason this is not an update to the earlier blog post is the way in which the judge's attorney mischaracterized the charges after the settlement was reached. According to an article in the Washington Post, the attorney characterized the charges she admitted to in the settlement as “technical violations relating only to the appearance of conflict of interest, rather than an actual conflict. ... We are pleased that our client has again been vindicated as part of this process. ... Given that all of the serious charges relied upon by Mayor Gray to discharge Walker are being dismissed, . . . Walker intends to continue to pursue her appeal to overturn Mayor Gray’s imprudent disciplinary decision.”
The former judge should publicly criticize this statement. There was an actual conflict (her relationship with her business partner) and she dealt with this conflict as irresponsibly as she could have: she hired her business partner as a government attorney without going through standard hiring procedures. This is not a "technical" violation, but a clear violation, and admitting to this violation does not "vindicate" the former judge. Dismissal of the charges will occur only on payment of the agreed-upon sanctions for violation of the ethics code. They are not being dismissed because they had no validity, but rather because the matter has been settled.
It is unacceptable for an attorney to say what he did, even if it were at the request of his client. I was happy to see that the litigator's online bio says nothing about government ethics work.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
The reason this is not an update to the earlier blog post is the way in which the judge's attorney mischaracterized the charges after the settlement was reached. According to an article in the Washington Post, the attorney characterized the charges she admitted to in the settlement as “technical violations relating only to the appearance of conflict of interest, rather than an actual conflict. ... We are pleased that our client has again been vindicated as part of this process. ... Given that all of the serious charges relied upon by Mayor Gray to discharge Walker are being dismissed, . . . Walker intends to continue to pursue her appeal to overturn Mayor Gray’s imprudent disciplinary decision.”
The former judge should publicly criticize this statement. There was an actual conflict (her relationship with her business partner) and she dealt with this conflict as irresponsibly as she could have: she hired her business partner as a government attorney without going through standard hiring procedures. This is not a "technical" violation, but a clear violation, and admitting to this violation does not "vindicate" the former judge. Dismissal of the charges will occur only on payment of the agreed-upon sanctions for violation of the ethics code. They are not being dismissed because they had no validity, but rather because the matter has been settled.
It is unacceptable for an attorney to say what he did, even if it were at the request of his client. I was happy to see that the litigator's online bio says nothing about government ethics work.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 DC admin law judge settlement 0714.pdf | 0 bytes |
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
