Beacon Hill Attitude Change Required

Speaking with many who interact in a professional capacity with the Probation Dept., the policy of patronage, no show jobs, nepotism - in short, the policy of corruption that created a Hack Haven was widely known and of long standing.

The legislation signed into law is lacking, as other editorials have indicated, as well as the comments below.

This might be an adequate 'band aid' for now, but an Attitude Change is required to restore public confidence that includes the elimination of back room deals.

One must wonder WHY the Governor signed this legislation if it was unacceptable. Hmm!


Governor signs court reform law
But Patrick plans to push for Probation Dept. oversight
By Stephanie Ebbert
Globe Staff

Governor Deval Patrick yesterday signed into law a court reform measure that aims to eliminate patronage in the Probation Department, but he signaled that he would continue to push for more systematic changes, which were already rebuffed by the two other branches of government.


“I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge and remind you that there is more work to be done,’’ Patrick wrote in a signing statement he issued with the new law yesterday. “The reforms required by this bill are important steps forward, but they alone do not create a modern, more accountable Probation Department.’’

In his letter, the governor continued his push to absorb the Probation Department, which remains under the judiciary‘s control, into his administration. “I still believe that centralizing parole and probation in a unified agency, as is done in more than 25 states, will make the departments more accountable, improve supervision and public safety, and be more cost-effective than the current bifurcated system,’’ Patrick wrote.

“I also believe that we must stop the costly and ineffective practice of warehousing nonviolent drug offenders, rather than favoring treatment.’’

The court reform measure was prompted by a 2010 Globe Spotlight report that found the Probation Department to be a haven for patronage hires and by a subsequent independent report that found the probation commissioner ran the department as a job agency for friends and family members of lawmakers, who in return generously funded his budget.

The three branches of government have repeatedly sparred over the issue in recent months, as legislators, embarrassed by exposure of their deep involvement in the Probation Department, took concerted steps to repair public perceptions.

But the governor continued to try to grab control of the department in an effort to create clear oversight.

In his letter yesterday, Patrick chided the state’s judges, saying he was “curious to see’’ them supporting the bill, which he says calls for eight new administrative jobs, in light of their concerns about hiring.

Last month, judges slammed the governor and the Legislature for budget cuts they said were so severe that they would be forced to lay off staff and shut down courthouses.

“At the same time, the court has recently called for a moratorium on judicial appointments as necessary to save the jobs of the current court personnel,’’ Patrick wrote in his signing statement. “I will listen with interest as the justices reconcile their positions.’’

Yesterday, House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray issued a joint statement returning the governor’s volley, saying the Legislature had listened to all sides of the argument and concluded “that the most efficient place for probation to be is with the judiciary.’’

“In fact, the only advocate for merging parole and probation into one agency under the control of the executive branch was the governor,’’ they wrote.

They also said that, with the exception of the one new court administrator who will oversee hiring, the employees would come from the judiciary’s current rolls and budget.

“The deputy court administrators “do not represent new positions,’’ they wrote. “They already exist in each department of the Trial Court. The legislation standardizes their duties and responsibilities and streamlines their reporting authority.’’

The new law calls for a court administrator to approve all hiring, , attending to a concern that the commissioner had unilateral control that was exploited by his friends in the Legislature.

The law also creates a standard hiring process for all court and probation officers and requires applicants to meet minimum qualifications to get jobs, rather than being referred by legislators.

And it makes letters of recommendation from lawmakers part of the public record.

“It truly is the most significant piece of court reform legislation we’ve seen in the last few decades,’’ Martin Healy, chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Bar Association, said yesterday. For years, task forces examining the courts have been recommending that the judiciary hire a court administrator, he said.

The association also disagrees with the governor about which branch should manage probation, saying that judges who work with probation officers on a daily basis should oversee their department.

“I think that issue has for now been decided,’’ Healy said. “The governor signed the bill. The bill maintains the probation office within the judicial branch.’’

The judges did not immediately issue a response to the governor.



3rdBranch wrote:
This bill does something far more important.

As stated in the Editorials of the Eagle Tribune of August 1st and other publications:

“Under current law, disciplinary proceedings against judges are opened to the public automatically once formal charges are filed. Under the proposed law, the SJC must act to make the proceedings public.

That's a significant change in the law, one that moves in the wrong direction — from greater transparency to less transparency.”

The almost incomprehensible action of the legislature and our (lawyer) governor is of enormous consequence to the public . . . and not for the good. In fact, it is one of the WORST blows to transparency and accountability in the judiciary in our state's history!





Renewable216 wrote:
Deval Laurdine Patrick was elected in 2006 since then we've had the Evergreen Solar fiasco,the 91 million dollar barge to no where ,the proposed Wind Energy Siting Reform Act that takes our towns zoning by laws and stimulus funds used to buy old 2004 commercial wind turbines built before there was even a stimulus program.

How in the world did the Town of Falmouth buy two turbines in 2009 valued at 5.2 million each through the MTC ? The Massachusetts Technology Collaborative bought these two turbines in 2004 and kept them in a warehouse at $3300.00 per month until the politically embarrassing turbines were sold to Falmouth through some Beacon Hill backdoor deal with our federal funds in 2009.

How did stimulus funds get used for two turbines that were so old they had NO warranty left on them ? These turbines were sold like a used car !

The federal prosecuters need to probe this whole deal !

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-9751.pdf

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9142–5]
Notice of a Regional Project Waiver of Section 1605 (Buy American) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) to the Town of Falmouth, MA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The EPA is hereby granting a waiver of the Buy America requirements of ARRA Section 1605 under the authority of Section 1605(b)(2)[manufactured goods are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory quality] to the Town of Falmouth, Massachusetts for the purchase of a foreign manufactured wind turbine to be installed at its existing wastewater treatment facility
site.

http://www.masshightech.com/stories/2008/08/04/weekly7-MTC-puts-mothballed-wind-turbines-on-auction-block.html

Friday, August 8, 2008

MTC puts mothballed wind turbines on auction block

As a result, the two turbines, originally purchased in 2005 for $5.2 million each went on sale last week





State Sen. Marc Pacheco still denies any wrongdoing in alleged Probation Department scandal, supports new bill
By Gerry Tuoti
Taunton Daily Gazette

TAUNTON —
Still denying any wrongdoing after an independent investigation alleged he and other lawmakers influenced hiring decisions in the Probation Department, state Sen. Marc Pacheco said he supports reforms signed into law Thursday.

"I was totally supportive of the initiative and any way we can remove any public doubt by having it be as transparent a process as possible," the Taunton Democrat said.

The new measure follows a patronage scandal detailed in an independent investigator’s report, which calls the Probation Department corrupt and mismanaged. Several state legislators, including Pacheco, were accused of influencing the hiring process in the Probation Department by securing jobs for friends and political supporters.

The new measure calls for a new "civilian" manager to oversee business functions and the hiring of non-judicial employees.

State Rep. Shaunna O’Connell, who had not yet been sworn into office when the investigator’s report came out, said she supports the reforms and wants to see more measures taken.

"The recently passed reforms are a step in the right direction," she said in a statement. "But we must continue to push for more reforms. I want the House to take up the Ethics reform bill as soon as possible so we can further clean up Massachusetts government."

While he maintains he did nothing wrong, Pacheco welcomed the reforms, saying they will remove any doubt or appearance of impropriety.

The independent investigator’s report, which was completed in November, describes a process in which the Probation Department kept secret lists of candidates the legislators supported, and a system in which the state lawmakers would urge state employees to solicit political contributions from their co-workers.

"I never had any issue with writing letters (of recommendation) for any individual," Pacheco said. "I feel it is within my job description to advocate for people who are qualified. Ultimately, it needs to be looked at by an objective party. It’s important we have an open, transparent process."

Most of the report’s references to Pacheco pertain to the 2005 promotion of Joseph Dooley as the first assistant chief probation officer in Bristol Superior Court. Dooley testified that on more than one occasion, Pacheco asked him to solicit contributions from his fellow employees and that he did so, according to the report.

Pacheco denied ever asking Dooley to solicit political contributions and said that any candidate he ever recommended for a job or promotion was highly qualified.

He added that he views the scandal as an internal matter within the Probation Department and said the independent investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing by lawmakers.

The report states that in and of itself, it is not illegal or inappropriate for legislators and others to recommend a particular candidate, "but it is for the objective interviewers and not those making such recommendations to decide what weight, if any, to be accorded to a recommendation. Legislators, judges and other elected officials should have no expectation that a recommended candidate, otherwise not the best choice, will be hired."

"Independent counsel did not uncover direct evidence that legislators were explicitly offering to sponsor candidates in exchange for campaign contributions, but there is statistical evidence that ‘pay to play’ was the reality," the report states.

Pacheco said he doesn’t believe lawmakers are responsible for alleged corruption within Probation.

"It’s a significant improvement over the process that was there, although the process that was there, if handled correctly internally, wouldn’t have been a problem," Pacheco said.