June 01, 2006
Sewer of Corruption (XV)
The Port of Seattle arranged a make-work consulting gig for current state House Transportation Committee Chairman (and state Senate candidate) Ed Murray , the Seattle Weekly reports. Although Murray and some Port officials claim that the arrangement is legal. If so, the real scandal is what's legal. The e-mail trail gives the remarkable appearance that the Port's Olympia lobbyist and one of its customers got together to give Murray a consulting job as a favor to a helpful legislator well before figuring out what services they actually needed Murray to perform.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 01, 2006
08:52 AM | Email This
1. I first noticed you didn't mention political party. Good, because it goes to both parties.
This type of payback is getting more and more common, I am afraid.
My favorite example is of a Port where it is illegal to enter the housing business, yet, here we are. The Port has become land speculators as have many cities.
Then, the Mayor gets a 40k contribution from political donors that received the benefits of a land deal that was for less than market value. Boy, could you imagine the back-slipping that would happen if the mayor wasn't backed by the local paper?
Keep exposing these sweetheart deals that happen.
Of course, the favorite is for an elected official to serve 15-16 years in PERS and then get a cush job for the next 3-4 years at top dollar to get full retirement benefits. In Washington, that is usually Democrats.
2. amazing
3. 1 Ed Murray needs some type of a second job since being a house member is only part time and pays $35k
2 However, my professional ethics require me to not only follow the rules, but to avoid an appearance of a conflict of interest
3 Since Murray is Chair of the Transportation Committee soliciting and accepting work from the Port is wrong
4 Also Port CEO Dinsmore has a history of troubling behavior and needs to be supervised more closely by the Port Commisioners
5 The State Board of Ethics needs to come up with a list and industries and companies that Murray can work with and a list that he is prohibited from working with
6 The remaining question is did George Howland, Jr come up w/ this article on his own, or was it fed to him by Pat Thibaudeau's (the sitting Senaotr that Murry is trying to defeat in the Sept Primary) staff
7 Finally (Port Commission President Pat Davis, however, finds nothing to be concerned about. "It sounds like it was perfectly legal," says Davis. "Everyone in the Legislature has to work. It depends on the expertise. Ed Murray is a hero on transportation and the environment.") comments are just absurd and are another example of why she should have been defeated in Nov-2005 by the former Microsoft employee.
4. Absurd is the right word. The legislature should be supervising Port districts much more closely. Murray would be fundamentally incapable of asking tough questions, like why is the amount of debt the Ports can take on defined by the taxable property in the district, not by income levels? Or why do we have two ports competing against each other, with taxpayers the losers and shipping companies winning through lower rates? Or why is the Port of Seattle able to have such a huge role in setting state-wide aviation policy, blocking discussions about customer needs and alternative solutions? (Just wait for the so-called state-wide airport study, I'm sure Howland and other Weekly reporters will find the Port's dirty fingerprints all over the study's conclusions.).
Murray was also lobbying the Port for business at the same time they were trying to get permission to dump arsenic-laced fill on top of the Highline Aquifer, which supplies part of the water to cities around the airport and also is a backup for the City of Seattle. This was not mentioned in the Weekly's story, but it would be fascinating to know if Dinsmore's emails also mentioned how they owed Murray a big favor because of his kow-towing to the Port, over the objections of all legitimate environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Washington Toxics.
5. Those ports seem to operate under a whole different set of rules, don't they? Junkets (er, work trips) to Asia a couple times a year are a few of the perks those commissioners get.
Why do these second jobs need to be such a conflict of interest?
At least with the tribal guy up north (the name escapes me, my bad)you knew he would promote special deals for the tribes. But, new careers that are in conflict with your elected position? That is taking it too far.
6. heh, heh
Verrrry Interesting
/artie johnson voice
Also, kudos to the Seattle Weekly for running this story. It's exactly the type of local, political, investigative journalism which has been sorely lacking at the state's major dailies.
7. "After examining Seattle Weekly's findings, Murray himself asked the Washington State Legislative Ethics Board for an opinion. "I didn't do anything unethical," Murray says. "One could infer from that e-mail in isolation [that] I was getting hired as a favor."
Herein lies the problem. The Code of Ethics sets an incredibly low bar of conduct and is easily twisted. The attitude in Washington State for Ethics of both State and local elected officials is that if they aren't honest, VOTE THE B*STARDS OUT OF OFFICE!!! Well, that's all fine & well in contested Districts...but not in Ed Marray's District. Ed is immune from any punishment.
The problem with Ethics Codes is NEITHER Party is very excited about them as they can be used as a weapon....and to prevent graft (imagine that!).
Also, who is on the Ethics Board that "advised" Ed that he is as clean as "Honest Abe"????
8. Washington State Legislative Ethics Board
Mike O'Connell, Counsel
P.O. Box 40482
Olympia, WA 98504-0482
T: (360) 786-7540
F: (360) 786-7520
oconnell_mi@leg.wa.gov
Washington State Legislative Ethics Board (RCW § 42.52)
Web site: http://wsl.leg.wa.gov/common/ethics/default.htm
Members: 9 members: 2 senators, appointed by president of the senate; 2 representatives, appointed by speaker of the house; five citizen members, appointed by governor and selected from lists submitted by each of the four legislative caucuses and the citizen members of the legislative ethics board.
I tried the link to find out who precisely are the Ethics Board members. Page Not Found.
This is something worth delving into though.
Ethics????
9. Thanks to the Weekly for reporting this - but I wouldn't put it past a disgruntled tipster at the Port or in the PT camp to have spilled the bean. What the Port did was wrong, wrong, wrong. Mic Dinsmore should know better. And so should Ed Murray. He should have had the stand up guts to admit that the appearance is troubling and that he made a mistake. The effective operation of the Port is far to important to risk public confidence through silly stunts like this. Mangement with integrity would know this. So would a legislator with integrity.
10. These people see taxpayers as their personal doormat, don't they???
11. We have a citizen legislature not a full time professional legislature. Citizen legislators usually work on issue and/or chair committees directly related to their employment in private life. A few examples would include the past republican chair of the health care committee who was a corporate officer of a health insurance company, or the numerous teachers who have chaired the education committees over the years.
I would suggest a visit to the Public Disclosure Web site to review the types of employment legislators are engaged in before applying criteria to me that does not exist in the constitution or statues of this state.
I spent the four years prior to my time in the legislature working in the public sector on local transportation issues.
When I applied to the port I went through a rigorous review by their legal department. In addition I consulted as many as four attorneys’s who work on legislative ethics issues and hired my own attorney to review any work I might accept. I think if you check you will find I put myself through a vetting process beyond what is usual for a legislator or required.
The trade mission to Ireland referenced was paid for with my own funds and not public funds (I have family there, I worked in Belfast on peace issues in the 1970’s and continue to work on supporting the current peace process).
I have in my years as chair of the transportation committee been both an adversary and a supporter of the port depending on the issue. I think most who have worked with me have found that is my approach to all who come before the committee (just ask projects I support such as Sound Transit and they will tell you how frustrated they are with me).
Like most legislators I have family obligations and need to work for a living and like most legislators my family has made huge sacrifices so that I can serve in the legislature.
If after having gone beyond the requirement of the ethics laws of this state your anonymous respondents still believe I have been unethical then I whole lot of legislators in both parties are in deep trouble. Ultimately what they are arguing for is a legislature made up of the independently wealthy or those with good pensions. What is sad is more and more they are getting just that, as young legislators with young children leave after only a few years and the almost complete absence of female legislators with school age children.
12. Give it up Ed, nobody feels sorry for you. Try getting a job in the private sector, not a public entity and this will all go away. We all make sacrifices and choices in our lives, please don't ask special treatment because you are an elected. BTW, teachers union people chairing education committees is probably not the best idea either, it doesn't look good.
13. Your pity I am not asking for. I absolutely reject the idea that only private sector employees can serve in a citizen legislature. Since my background prior to the legislature was in transportation I don’t see why working for a private transportation corporation would be any less of a conflict. Many I believe would see it as more of a conflict of interest.
But is would appear by your comments (about teachers, interesting you failed to mention the republican health insureance exc.) you want citizens legislators not to have responsibility for issues in the legislature that conflict with their employment. My definition that is the end of the citizen legislature, is that what you really want? Just be sure to apply this standard to all legislators and not just me (check out what the others do in the legislature and in their employment) or is their some reason why this standard should applly only to me? My last thought on this subject: The article stated they had uncovered this situation because someone anonymously left them the information. It had been filed and was available on the PDC web site for months. Easy to find and no need to depend on sneaks.
14. sorry hit the button before I proofed it.
15. Rep Murray makes many excellent points. There are lots of legislators who also work in the public sector and add great perspectives. There are others who work for major companies that have benefited from big tax breaks on which said employee voted.
There are some differences though. First, usually those employees were employees before they were legislators. (Sen Esser in AG is an exception, but he had previously worked for AG McKenna). Second, those employees are usually covered under civil service rules for hiring / firing. There's very little chance they would be fired for not going along with what their employer specifically wanted.
With the Port, and a consulting gig, one can not be so sure. Would this be "more" or "less" of a conflict of interest than working for a private sector company? Hard to say. But the Port has consistently played hardball with taxpayers, communities and other governmental bodies. It is legitimate to ask whether someone who, apparently from the emails, was hired in part because of favorable actions "liked" by the head poobah, can then stand up to said grand poobah and say "NO." Or even say "now why do laws passed 60to 90 years ago still stay in effect, are the basic assumptions valid, and are the ways you govern yourself really adding value to taxpayers, or just transfer payments from the many to the few?"
Also, the article raises an excellent question by Commissioner Creighton: just why should there be pass through contracts in the first place? Again, what is the value to taxpayers of the specific projects?
Definitely the same standards should apply to everyone.
16. Ed the problem is that many in office also get their paychecks from and advocate for the government organizations they regulate. The problems appear to be that nobody is looking out for the taxpayers in all of this. Teachers union members are an example (which you provided) of this. The Olympia teachers are the designated "strikers" this year, so the legislature can expect direct lobbying pressure for higher wages. When union sponsored Chairmen and Chairwomen are approched will they be more or less likely to support the teachers cause? Can the taxpayers count on them being objective? The same with the Higher Ed Committee, Transportation and on down the line. Special interest groups are just as guilty, if not more so, as unions.
I find it amusing that you mention republicans, if they do it too does it justify union abuses? Does having a working majority in the House, Senate and Governors mansion make it acceptable for electeds of any party to have a conflict of interest?
The Port is a unique organization and has an important role to play. They also have had many instances of poor oversight, cost controls and management. If you are the candidate chosen for the job, taxpayers would expect you to recuse yourself from any votes for or negotiations with the Port. Also since Ports are in a competitive environment, stay away from any of decisions or negotiation with the other Port districts in the state. This appearance question could all be avoided if you simply found a job somewhere else. The demise of the citizen legislature has occured long ago.
Legislators and Ex-Legislators and thier staffs continue to give each other board positions, appointments and patronage jobs like at the Port and the taxpayers are the worse for it.
17. Smokie:
There are several problems with your comments.
First the citizen legislature is very much alive and Citizen Legislators usually work on issue and/or chair committees directly related to their employment in private life.
Second you fail to apply this standard to legislators in both parties who work for business and work on or chair committees that deal with business interest. Instead your argument is selectively applied to Unions.
Third since my prior background was in transportation and local government I am not sure what other type of work I could possibly do in the public or private sector that could possibly avoid the conflicts you are concern with. If I went out and got employment in another field unrelated to my background just imagine the eyebrows that would raise.
Another writer mention changing jobs after one is a legislator, check, it happens all the time, it is the reality of the new economy ( and the challenge of finding employers who are willing to hire people part time part of the year).
Now I must go spend the weekend doorbelling and move on from the blogs (because regardless of what Mr. Cynical wrote incumbent democrats not losing in safe districts: Gary Locke defeated an incumbent African American as did Kip Takuda, Pat Thibaudeau defeat an incumbent for the house in 92. But before I leave I am impressed with the tone of the exchange on this blog, it has been tough but respectful. Not what I am use to.
Thanks
18. Ed,
Thank you for your thoughtful response and explaination of your position. I do not believe as you do that people who are directly compensated by public entities or private businesses that stand to gain directly or indirectly should sit in oversight of those organizations. Certainly those with industry experience should lend their expertise to legislation, however if they stand to gain as with the Teachers or the Insurance committees they should recuse themselves.
I am not picking on a party, I never mentioned Democrats, only unions. Who are the Republican chair's that you speak of? Have these Republicans moved legislation through the committee process that violated their fiduciary responsiblities to the people? I will be happy to discuss their conflicts in this forum as well. State Employees, Environmental groups have all over represented their organizations at the expense of the taxpayers of this state, it needs to stop.
19. Maybe it is time to give up the charade of a part - time legislature and recognize that for a lot of people this is indeed a full time job. Maybe there should be a track where people could say "I'm full time" and be compensated at double the current rate. Though the part-time salary is adequate in some parts of the state, where housing is a lot lower, it is really tough for people in Puget Sound.