Nepotism and Oversight Relationships
It's hard for ethics codes to deal with every kind of relationship where nepotism might be a problem. In a
matter involving the <a href="http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/sfwmdmain/home%20page" target="”_blank”">South
Florida Water Management District</a> (SFWMD), the relationship involves oversight.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/south-florida-water-district-ch…; target="”_blank”">an
article in Sunday's Palm Beach <i>Post</i></a>, the SFWMD executive director's
boyfriend was hired as an engineer auditor, a newly created job, by the
SFWMD inspector general. The IG does not report to the executive
director, and the executive director was not directly involved in the
hiring process. There is no question that the boyfriend is experienced
and qualified. So far, so good.<br>
<br>
The first problem was that, although the executive director was not on
the three-member panel that selected her boyfriend, a deputy executive
director and an assistant deputy executive director were on the panel.
Had the IG been told that one of the people up for the job was the
executive director's boyfriend, it's likely he would have not chosen
them to be on the panel.<br>
<br>
Which leads to the second problem, a lack of transparency: the
boyfriend did not disclose to the IG's office his relationship with the
executive director. Nor did the SFWMD board chair know about the
relationship, until he received an anonymous letter. The information
leaked to the IG's office before the boyfriend started working, but the
IG says he still doesn't know the true extent of the relationship. The article goes into the relationship in some depth, but it is irrelevant to the issues raised here.<br>
<br>
The third problem was that the job involved oversight, possibly over
the SFWMD. Usually, nepotism restrictions are limited to hiring and
supervisory relationships. Oversight is not a common relationship, and
usually someone hired as an auditor can be used in departments other
than the one his spouse works for. But oversight over a spouse, if that
actually occurs, is a serious problem.<br>
<br>
The IG's office told the SFWMD board that the boyfriend would be based
primarily in northern Florida, so that there would not be direct
oversight issues. But over the most recent three-month period,
according to the article, the boyfriend spent only 14% of his nights in
northern Florida.<br>
<br>
The article notes that the IG's website urges employees to report
suspicious activities, and assures confidentiality and whistle-blower
protection. The question is, would someone report suspicious activities
to a group that included the boss's boyfriend? There could be a serious
chilling effect.<br>
<br>
Then there's the issue of appearances. The article quotes the
Miami-Dade County IG saying, “The perception of utter and total
independence from the entity you’re inspecting is essential.”<br>
<br>
The SFWMD board chair at the time of the hiring (still a board member)
said, "He’s either posted in Jacksonville, as was represented to me,
or, if he’s not, that’s a glaring conflict of interest.”<br>
<br>
The executive director said, “Since the position of engineering auditor
was not in my chain of command, whether the individual hired was my
friend, sister or husband was of no consequence in the hiring process.” This position may be legally correct, but is not
responsive to the situation.<br>
<br>
It appears that most of the SFWMD board supports the executive
director. They like the idea of having a district person (in this case
one with a history of working for the district, before the executive
director was hired) in the IG's office. This benefit appears to
outweigh the appearance problem and the chilling effect. In fact, it might appear
that some people find the chilling effect desirable. This is the
worst appearance there could be.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---