You are here
On Location: COGEL Meets in the Midst of Serious Unethical Behavior
Friday, December 11th, 2009
Robert Wechsler
COGEL (Council on Governmental Ethics Laws) annual conferences are often held at a time and place where there are
serious government ethics issues. Last year, the conference was held in
Chicago the day Gov. Blagojevich was arrested. This year, the
conference was held in Maricopa County, AZ, where few days go by when
there isn't a serious government ethics issue. Maricopa County has got
to be the most dysfunctional county in the U.S.
According to an article in the Arizona Republic, in a little more than a week, county sheriff Joe Arpaio and his loyal sidekick, county attorney Andrew Thomas, filed three suits against a large number of other county officials.
In the first suit, a week before the COGEL conference, they named judges, county supervisors, county administrators, and private attorneys in a civil corruption and racketeering complaint filed in federal court. This suit is detailed in another Republic article. Why a civil suit? According to the Republic, the county attorney "has been stymied by court rulings in his criminal investigations of county officials. The burden of proof is less in civil court. And filing in federal court potentially sidesteps accusations of conflict of interest that have plagued his office." The county manager told the Republic, "The sheriff and the county attorney have filed a number of lawsuits over a range of issues, and they've lost every time, and then they ascribe these losses to a vast conspiracy."
On the third day of the conference, the two men indicted two county supervisors on separate allegations that include perjury, forgery, and making false statements.
And on the last day of the conference, they filed a suit against a superior court judge who had made several decisions against them, accusing the judge of failing to disclose an attorney-client relationship with two lawyers hired to represent the county on issues related to the construction of a county court tower, which the sheriff and county attorney are investigating. The suit also alleged that the judge is biased against the sheriff's office.
According to another Republic article, on the second day of the conference, the sheriff asked the county board of supervisors for $7 million in legal fees. This request is due to a new county policy "that requires elected officials to cover their own legal fees when engaged in disputes with other county officials." So far in 2009, intra-county suits have run up $2.5 million in attorney fees. But the sheriff is on the warpath, so he wants a lot more for next year.
But the most significant cost to the county, not in dollars but in meaning, is the $100,000 in attorney fees the county will have to pay to five county residents who were arrested for clapping at a board of supervisors meeting. According to yet another Republic article, the county attorney's suit against them was dismissed in September. The justice who dismissed the case "noted that a similar disruption, if not a more excessive one, took place during a June 2008 supervisors meeting. The difference between the two disruptions ... was that the summertime applause came for a speaker who supported Arpaio while the applause of the five arrested was for speakers who questioned the sheriff's policies."
It's bad enough when a sheriff and county attorney insist that the rest of the county government is conspiring against them. But it's even worse when they arrest citizens who clap for their opponents. Is the America the sheriff says he is defending nothing but a police state?
That $100,000 in legal fees should come out of the sheriff's and county attorney's pockets. But they don't want to take any responsibility for what they do. Sheriff Arpaio waxed eloquent to the East Valley Tribune, "Sometimes you have to do what you have to do." But he's already done most of what he did in the last two weeks, just in different forums and with different tactics.
A former county supervisor told the Tribune, "If you go out there and ask anybody, they've lost total confidence in all of county government." That's the bottom line. This insanity has got to stop.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
According to an article in the Arizona Republic, in a little more than a week, county sheriff Joe Arpaio and his loyal sidekick, county attorney Andrew Thomas, filed three suits against a large number of other county officials.
In the first suit, a week before the COGEL conference, they named judges, county supervisors, county administrators, and private attorneys in a civil corruption and racketeering complaint filed in federal court. This suit is detailed in another Republic article. Why a civil suit? According to the Republic, the county attorney "has been stymied by court rulings in his criminal investigations of county officials. The burden of proof is less in civil court. And filing in federal court potentially sidesteps accusations of conflict of interest that have plagued his office." The county manager told the Republic, "The sheriff and the county attorney have filed a number of lawsuits over a range of issues, and they've lost every time, and then they ascribe these losses to a vast conspiracy."
On the third day of the conference, the two men indicted two county supervisors on separate allegations that include perjury, forgery, and making false statements.
And on the last day of the conference, they filed a suit against a superior court judge who had made several decisions against them, accusing the judge of failing to disclose an attorney-client relationship with two lawyers hired to represent the county on issues related to the construction of a county court tower, which the sheriff and county attorney are investigating. The suit also alleged that the judge is biased against the sheriff's office.
According to another Republic article, on the second day of the conference, the sheriff asked the county board of supervisors for $7 million in legal fees. This request is due to a new county policy "that requires elected officials to cover their own legal fees when engaged in disputes with other county officials." So far in 2009, intra-county suits have run up $2.5 million in attorney fees. But the sheriff is on the warpath, so he wants a lot more for next year.
But the most significant cost to the county, not in dollars but in meaning, is the $100,000 in attorney fees the county will have to pay to five county residents who were arrested for clapping at a board of supervisors meeting. According to yet another Republic article, the county attorney's suit against them was dismissed in September. The justice who dismissed the case "noted that a similar disruption, if not a more excessive one, took place during a June 2008 supervisors meeting. The difference between the two disruptions ... was that the summertime applause came for a speaker who supported Arpaio while the applause of the five arrested was for speakers who questioned the sheriff's policies."
It's bad enough when a sheriff and county attorney insist that the rest of the county government is conspiring against them. But it's even worse when they arrest citizens who clap for their opponents. Is the America the sheriff says he is defending nothing but a police state?
That $100,000 in legal fees should come out of the sheriff's and county attorney's pockets. But they don't want to take any responsibility for what they do. Sheriff Arpaio waxed eloquent to the East Valley Tribune, "Sometimes you have to do what you have to do." But he's already done most of what he did in the last two weeks, just in different forums and with different tactics.
A former county supervisor told the Tribune, "If you go out there and ask anybody, they've lost total confidence in all of county government." That's the bottom line. This insanity has got to stop.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
