Need for inspector general greater than ever
Back in May, this column took note of legislation calling for the formation of a state Inspector General’s office.
Since that time the case for the office has grown more compelling, with Common Cause coming on board in a recent release.
It has not been a priority for legislators. The measure now appears to be stuck in a House committee, despite widespread support outside Legislative Hall. (Update – the bill is finally getting a hearing this week
We’ll see further evidence of the need for the office this week when the trial of state Auditor Kathy McGuiness moves forward in Kent County after a turn of events that included moving the proceedings to Dover.
it will be up to a jury to decide whether McGuiness is guilty of a number of felony and misdemeanor charges. Regardless of the outcome, it is clear that McGuiness is, at minimum, guilty of questionable judgment, although a not guilty verdict is more than a remote possibility.
It’s all made worse by the fact that the Auditor’s office operates with the goal of ensuring that agencies that receive large amounts of state money are engaged in proper practices and “go by the book” – something we don’t see in the non-financial side of the auditor’s office.
Granted, the problems with the office date back several years.
Last week, Kathleen Davies, a certified public accountant who ran against McGuiness in the Democratic primary, filed suit claiming harassment by McGuiness who later fired her.
Davies had earlier been dismissed by McGuiness’ predecessor Tom Wagner but was later reinstated by a personnel panel that reportedly agreed that she had overstepped the difficult role she was given while serving as interim leader while Wagner dealt with health issues.
Davies went on to run for auditor and lost in the primary to McGuiness. Things did not go well.
Had an inspector general been in place back when troubles in the office first surfaced, some of this melodrama could have been avoided by an inspector general’s audit that outlined the problems and suggested corrective actions.
Granted, the troubles in the auditor’s office alone is not a reason for starting an inspector general’s office The case could be made that the auditor’s office should not be an elected position but instead should be a part of a bipartisan selection process that ensures that accounting professionals serve in the post. That practice has worked well in selecting judges.
Still, the track record of other state agencies is far from squeaky clean and an inspector general would have plenty on his or her plate, even if headline-making corruption isn’t always uncovered.
Agree or disagree? Let me know. – Doug Rainey, chief content officer.
