PDA

View Full Version : examples of nepotism in township operations


GRILL MASTER
03-01-2009, 02:06 PM
Like a lot of township trustees in rural Indiana, Mike Dohoney didn't need job postings or interviews to hire his two employees.
Dohoney, the Posey Township trustee in Washington County, chose his wife to be first deputy and secretary. And his second deputy? His son.


When David King Baird, the trustee of urban Wayne Township in Marion County, needed a chief of staff, he went outside the township. But he kept it in the family. He chose his brother, Hershell, for the position that pays $78,744 a year -- not including the new Ford Crown Victoria.
DATA CENTRAL: How much money does your township have socked away? (http://www.indystar.com/data/government/township_spending.shtml)
Urban or rural, large or small -- whether the job pays a pittance or a pretty penny -- nepotism is a tie that binds Indiana's disparate 1,008 townships.
A continuing examination of township government by The Indianapolis Star shows that, based on a sample of 617 townships, two-thirds of trustees had a relative on the payroll.
In addition, those relatives received more than $1.4 million in taxpayer money -- a conservative estimate of the overall picture that, like other aspects of township government, is nearly impossible to ascertain because of the autonomy of trustees, lax oversight and inconsistent record-keeping.
More than 300 townships didn't file the payroll disclosure form required by the state and used by The Star to help determine family relationships in township government.
Numerous other examples of nepotism go uncounted because only spouses and dependents are required to be reported on conflict of interest forms -- a process that excludes parents, siblings, grandchildren and other extended family members from the overall tally.
In many townships, often in rural areas, nepotism is taken for granted as innocuous and even essential to running a low-budget, hyper-local operation.
But no matter how quaint the operation, when the family business (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090301/NEWS05/903010400#) is local government, it raises ethical issues, real and perceived: Is the trustee or board lining the pockets of friends and family? Are there other deserving applicants being shut out of the process? Is your son-in-law really the most competent person for the job? And, if not, are you willing to fire the father of your grandchildren?
Peggy Kerns, director of the Center for Ethics in Government, said family hires sometimes can make sense, but added, "Generally, when public money is involved, there should be a lot of effort to make (hiring) an open process."
The issue is front and center in the legislature. Senate Bill 512, which originally called for the elimination of township government, was amended and now includes a provision that ends nepotism in township government.
"Anytime you use taxpayers' dollars you have to have standards for employees and contracts," said Sen. Connie Lawson, R-Danville, the bill's author.
"It's for the protection of taxpayers."
Rules tougher for state employees

When it comes to state employees, Indiana is considered tougher than most states on nepotism, according to a study by the Center for Ethics in Government. That's because Indiana has restrictions written into law, not just ethical guidelines.
State law prohibits the hiring of relatives to work for agencies, boards and commissions headed by a family member. The definition of family member includes father, mother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, husband or wife, son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, niece or nephew.
It also states: No person may be placed in a direct supervisory-subordinate relationship with a relative.
But that doesn't apply to township government, where the situation is more rampant -- and doesn't stop with the trustee. Relatives of township board members show up on many payrolls and lists of contractors. Businesses (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090301/NEWS05/903010400#) owned by township officials are sometimes recipients of public funds.
Bulletins distributed to townships by the State Board of Accounts point to the real potential for fraud: "We have been advised that isolated situations in some townships where clerks and other employees have not been assigned any duties and/or do not perform any work," the agency reported in a 2006 bulletin. "Other situations have come to our attention of individuals being assigned duties but documentation of work performed is not presented for audit."
"The problem is that at the small city local level -- and particularly at the township level --there are often no rules at all," said Vincent R. Johnson, a visiting professor of law at the University of Notre Dame and author of a law review article titled "Ethics in Government at the Local Level."
Johnson said uniform, statewide standards for all public agencies would be "a great step forward for the cause of ethics in government."
"This is particularly true," he explained, "because in small communities, where everyone knows everyone and family members may live in close proximity, nepotism can be a serious problem."
Common problem

The Star found examples of nepotism in township operations of all sizes, from Indiana's largest township to some of its smallest. And although the practice appears to be more common in smaller, rural townships, the stakes are significantly higher in larger, urban townships.
In Wayne Township, where the trustee's brother is chief of staff, there also is a deputy trustee. Lynn McWhirter makes $58,493 a year and is the daughter of a former trustee and the wife of a current battalion chief on the township fire department. But why, Baird was asked, does he need both a chief of staff and a deputy?

GRILL MASTER
03-01-2009, 02:07 PM
Baird, who makes $81,120 a year, said the job was too big for one person and that his brother could not serve as deputy trustee because he does not live in the township. When asked why the deputy could not serve as his chief of staff, Baird explained: "It was my call."
The township also assigned the Baird brothers township cars, Ford Crown Victorias, because, David Baird said, "We're on call, 24 hours a day."
Anna Peay, who joined the board of Wayne Township in January, said she heard concerns about nepotism and cronyism from voters during her campaign.
"I had people say: 'If I vote for you, will you get me a job?' " she said. "That's the perception. . . . To them it seems a long-term problem."
Family members are common on payrolls in other Marion County townships:
» Center Township Trustee William Douglas' brother, Robert Douglas, works at the township's healthplex for $16.86 an hour, and his great-nephew, also named Robert Douglas, makes $13.50 an hour to do maintenance for the township in the Julia Carson Government Center.
Both men started their jobs before William Douglas became trustee this year but were hired while he was chief executive of operations for the township.
» Decatur Township Trustee Steve Rink's sister, Jeanne Bain, serves as township clerk, he said. She makes $35,037 per year, according to a report filed with the state.
Rink said he did not remember doing any formal interviews for the job but said Bain had relevant experience at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
» In Warren Township, Connie Klepper, the wife of board member William Klepper, worked as a full-time small claims court clerk in 2007 and early 2008, Trustee Jeff Bennett said. She earned a salary of $28,685 per year, according to township records.
Bennett said the township board, on which Klepper's husband served, set the maximum salary for her position. But he defended the hiring based on her experience doing clerk jobs for the county, and said he interviewed two or three other candidates before selecting Klepper.
Bennett said he did not think there was any impropriety in hiring Klepper but he supports legislation that eliminates any such appearance.
"I feel like that process is defensible," he said. "In hindsight, maybe not."
An argument for nepotism

But is nepotism always bad? In many small, rural townships, trustees argue that hiring a family member actually is the best deal for taxpayers.
The Dohoney family in Posey Township in Washington County is one of many examples where the township is run out of the family home -- and the money, some would argue, is such a pittance that it might not be worth the worry.
Mike Dohoney pays his wife $4,800 a year as first deputy and clerk. His son receives $2,400 as second deputy.
If he hired someone else, Dohoney said, "It would cost the township a lot more money."
Diane Crim, trustee of rural Wayne Township in Hamilton County, also works out of a home office. Her husband, Roger, makes $6,000 a year as a clerk and township assistance investigator. She's uncomfortable with the idea of having an employee come into her home.
"Not only would that be awkward for me to have a virtual stranger here," Crim said, "but if I was the employee, I would feel awkward."
Billy Buzbee, who earns about $4,000 as trustee of Noble Township in Cass County, and his wife also run a mom-and-pop operation out of their home. He has hired his son and grandson to mow cemeteries for the township.
"It's not a money-making deal," he said. "It's not enough to live on, that's for sure."
His wife earns $600 a year to serve as clerk of the township. It's a bargain for the taxpayers, as far as he is concerned.
"I couldn't hire somebody to answer my phone (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090301/NEWS05/903010400#) for that," Buzbee said. "I might go a week or two without any calls, so it doesn't make sense to hire somebody to sit by the phone all day."
Critics, though, say that raises a broader question: Does Indiana really need a layer of government that operates out of people's homes and might go days or weeks without serving constituents?
Linda Williams, the Adams Township trustee in rural Hamilton County, employs her daughter full time and her daughter-in-law and great nephew part time.
She recalled the time she needed someone to install an air conditioner in the township office. Sealed bids were submitted by her brother and husband. Her brother won the job.
"Are family-run businesses bad?" Williams asked. "I looked at Main Street last night, and there were a lot of family-run businesses, some in the third and fourth generation. You expect much more from a family member. I would not ask an employee to do some of what my daughter does."

GRILL MASTER
03-01-2009, 02:09 PM
NEPOTISM BILL


Nepotism, as defined in Senate Bill 512, prohibits relatives of township officers and employees from working for townships in positions that would put the relative in a direct supervisory or subordinate relationship with the officer or employee.

The bill's definition of relative goes even further than the state nepotism rules. It includes a husband, wife, father, grandfather, stepfather, mother, grandmother, stepmother, son, grandson, stepson, son-in-law, daughter, granddaughter, stepdaughter, daughter-in-law, brother or stepbrother, sister or stepsister, aunt or uncle, niece or nephew, and first cousins. A relative by adoption, half-blood, marriage or remarriage also is considered a relative.

The proposed legislation does not require the termination or reassignment of any township employee who was in their position before July 1, 2009. However, that exemption expires Jan. 1, 2011.

COST OF KIN? IT'S ALL RELATIVE

BillyBub
03-01-2009, 04:28 PM
Just curious, was there a lot of problems with the Hudson's family in the Sheriff Office a few years back?

BaldEagle
03-02-2009, 01:14 AM
Just curious, was there a lot of problems with the Hudson's family in the Sheriff Office a few years back?


Good point, BB. No, there wasn't trouble, but trouble may be coming the way of ALL county officials soon.

Not only are the township trustees going to be watched as far as who they employ, but supposedly everyone at the Courthouse will be "examined" too. And maybe...finally...our County Council won't be composed of sheriff deputies or employess of a specific office when they say they will abstain from a vote for that employer...and then don't. But even if they do, they are already a vocal member of a team and expressing their views to their fellow councilmen. Ditto the City Council, and that problem has been a problem for a LONG time statewide, not just locally.
:confused:

BillyBub
03-02-2009, 03:48 PM
Good point, BB. No, there wasn't trouble, but trouble may be coming the way of ALL county officials soon.

Not only are the township trustees going to be watched as far as who they employ, but supposedly everyone at the Courthouse will be "examined" too. And maybe...finally...our County Council won't be composed of sheriff deputies or employees of a specific office when they say they will abstain from a vote for that employer...and then don't. But even if they do, they are already a vocal member of a team and expressing their views to their fellow councilmen. Ditto the City Council, and that problem has been a problem for a LONG time statewide, not just locally.
:confused:

Well the problem with an Abstention vote is that it is actually a no vote. A refuse to vote has the same effect as NO. It is my understanding that even then their is no clear law as to someone having to abstain in those situations. It may be an ethical thing but if you are elected to an office you have the right to vote. If may be bad or even just look bad, but it may not be illegal to cast your vote. That is not my opinion but one given to me by an attorney in response to a similar situation.

BaldEagle
03-02-2009, 05:57 PM
Well the problem with an Abstention vote is that it is actually a no vote. A refuse to vote has the same effect as NO. It is my understanding that even then their is no clear law as to someone having to abstain in those situations. It may be an ethical thing but if you are elected to an office you have the right to vote. If may be bad or even just look bad, but it may not be illegal to cast your vote. That is not my opinion but one given to me by an attorney in response to a similar situation.


Oh, I think you (and the attorney) are absolutely right. But that's the problem. Anyway you look at it, and regardless of what they do, it is simply a conflict of interest to have a deputy sheriff (just one example) on a council that appropriates money and benefits for the sheriff's department.
:nono