By STEVE THOMPSON
STEVE THOMPSON The Dallas Morning News
Staff Writer
Published: 28 July 2012 11:03 PM
Related
An ethics expert called it a “shakedown,” and City Manager Mary Suhm reproached the employee, saying that “the integrity of the city is paramount.”
But that party was not unique. Months earlier, city contractors had chipped in $12,439 toward a retirement party for a top water department official, Charles Stringer, according to city records obtained by The Dallas Morning News.
In addition to a $5,100 catering bill, the tab included gifts — lots of them: $2,500 in tickets to a Dallas Cowboys game; a $2,000 ride in a vintage World War II fighter plane; a $700 camera; an $800 handgun; $100 in Texas Rangers tickets; a $700 race car ride.
An itemized accounting of the contractors’ contributions was included in emails between a vendor and city officials. The total cost of the party is not clear. Stringer’s colleagues also appear to have contributed.
City employees worked for weeks to plan the event, but it’s unclear exactly how the contractor donations came about. Water department director Jody Puckett said she couldn’t remember the details.
“Sometimes they volunteer, and sometimes they may have specifically been asked,” Puckett said in an email.
Whether the vendors’ donations to Stringer’s party were spontaneous or solicited by city employees is important. That’s a key factor in determining whether the gifts were proper, according to Rita Kirk, an ethics expert consulted by The News. Kirk directs the Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics & Public Responsibility at Southern Methodist University.
For this year’s party, in honor of Trinity River project director Rebecca Rasor, a city employee asked for money.
If that also was the case for Stringer, “it’s clearly wrong,” Kirk said, because contractors are hardly in a position to turn down the request.
For the contractors, there’s much at stake. The city has paid the contractors who contributed to Stringer’s party at least $79 million during the last six fiscal years, according to a review of city check records. They have a lot of incentive to build goodwill among city officials.
But Kirk said that if the contractors came forward or got together on their own to fund the party, she sees no ethical problem. “Honoring people for their work in public service is something that we would want organizations to do,” Kirk said.
Either way, contractor-funded parties — apparently commonplace at City Hall — show how tricky it can be for city employees to navigate the ethical boundaries that come with their proximity to millions of dollars in city business.
A February report issued by the city auditor said that the city’s ethics program falls short. It called for improvements in several key areas, including establishing ethical guidelines, training employees to follow them and reinforcing that training as time passes. Suhm has promised changes.
The party, with a water-themed décor of blue and white, was held on a Friday afternoon, Sept. 16, at Texas Discovery Gardens. A menu beforehand called for tenderloin crostini, tequila shrimp, chicken wings and other snacks.
There were speeches and roasts. Stringer’s colleagues had gone through city archives to find old photos of him and some of the major water construction projects he directed. A couple of hundred people attended, many of them city vendors and consultants.
While inquiring about the party, The News tried to interview Puckett’s former boss, Ramon Miguez, who was a Dallas assistant city manager before he resigned in 2009. Miguez is now a vice president of the firm HDR Engineering, which contributed to parties for both Rasor and Stringer and played a big role in the fundraising for Stringer’s party.
At first, Miguez denied any knowledge of who contributed to Stringer’s party. But once a reporter laid out some of the facts of HDR’s involvement, he took a different tack.
“We had a party for somebody who left public service,” he said. “And I think it’s none of your [expletive] business. Am I clear?”
Miguez did not stay on the phone long enough for a reporter to ask him about his own send-off party. Puckett, who was in charge of coordinating donations for that event, said she could not recall whether money came from contractors.
Suhm, in response to a request for comment, said that after The News’ report on Rasor’s party, she sent a memo stating the city’s policy to all employees.
“Please remember that it is inappropriate to solicit donations from city vendors for retirement parties and city events,” the memo said. “Voluntary contributions, for such events from employees, citizens, and vendors may be accepted.”
Suhm did not answer further questions about whether that policy was in place last year at the time of Stringer’s party and, if so, whether it was followed.
Given the reluctance of those involved to discuss details of Stringer’s party, The News used the email of city employees in an attempt to reconstruct how it came about.
Stringer, an assistant director in the water department, announced his resignation late last July. Tough budget times had prompted pay cuts, sparking his decision to leave after 41 years with the city, he told a colleague in one email.
Stringer had found a job with Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, one of the contractors that contributed to his party.
Officials in the water department immediately started planning a retirement bash. They formed a nine-member committee that met several times during the weeks preceding the party. Managers of various water department divisions were asked to work on the committee or designate representatives to do so.
The committee’s first meeting was scheduled for two hours on a Friday afternoon. Those who attended assigned duties, such as decorations, guest list, music and budget oversight. The committee sought bids from catering companies.
“This function is being paid for by private funds and does not involve taxpayer monies,” a water department office assistant wrote in an email to one of the catering hopefuls. “Therefore I was asked to present three caterers and their quotes.”
Early on, HDR became involved in fundraising for the party. It’s not clear from records obtained by The News whether city employees solicited HDR’s help. Nor is it clear exactly how other contractors were approached.
It is clear that HDR and city officials worked closely together.
“I will send you updates periodically, to keep you in the loop on what donations I have received and who I have spoken with,” an HDR administrative assistant wrote in an email to a water department manager.
“Please feel free to direct any parties interested in donating to Charlie’s retirement to contact me,” the HDR employee wrote. “Donations can be made out to HDR Engineering, Inc. and mailed to my attention.”
The HDR employee built a spreadsheet of contributors. Beside each contractor was a box, which received a checkmark when a donation was received. Donors were designated with various “support levels.” Six contractors gave $1,000 each. Eight gave $500. Others gave lesser amounts.
A few weeks after the party, the HDR employee emailed the final spreadsheet to the water department manager who was in charge of the party’s budget. The manager, Jennifer Cottingham, forwarded it to Stringer.
“I thought you would want to know who contributed to your retirement party,” she wrote.
“Now I can send thank you cards to everyone,” Stringer replied.
In an interview, Stringer said he wasn’t aware of how the donations came about.
“I really don’t know and I never inquired,” he said. “I was just appreciative for all the appreciation that they extended to me. I was just in awe and overwhelmed.”
Kirk, the ethics expert, said an ethical gray area was presented by circulating the donor spreadsheet to the water department manager and potentially other current city employees who might have a say in awarding city business.
“When you begin to find out, here are all the people who buck up for that sort of thing, that’s where you begin to say, ‘Well, does that influence future generations of contracts, because I know that Smith Pump gave $1,000, and McCreary, whoever that is, only gave $25?’” she said.
But Kirk said there is a public benefit to making the contributions transparent.
“We want to know that,” she said, “because then we can observe future contracts, etc., and we can make a determination as to whether it constitutes influence peddling.”
But that party was not unique. Months earlier, city contractors had chipped in $12,439 toward a retirement party for a top water department official, Charles Stringer, according to city records obtained by The Dallas Morning News.
In addition to a $5,100 catering bill, the tab included gifts — lots of them: $2,500 in tickets to a Dallas Cowboys game; a $2,000 ride in a vintage World War II fighter plane; a $700 camera; an $800 handgun; $100 in Texas Rangers tickets; a $700 race car ride.
An itemized accounting of the contractors’ contributions was included in emails between a vendor and city officials. The total cost of the party is not clear. Stringer’s colleagues also appear to have contributed.
City employees worked for weeks to plan the event, but it’s unclear exactly how the contractor donations came about. Water department director Jody Puckett said she couldn’t remember the details.
“Sometimes they volunteer, and sometimes they may have specifically been asked,” Puckett said in an email.
Key factor
For this year’s party, in honor of Trinity River project director Rebecca Rasor, a city employee asked for money.
If that also was the case for Stringer, “it’s clearly wrong,” Kirk said, because contractors are hardly in a position to turn down the request.
For the contractors, there’s much at stake. The city has paid the contractors who contributed to Stringer’s party at least $79 million during the last six fiscal years, according to a review of city check records. They have a lot of incentive to build goodwill among city officials.
But Kirk said that if the contractors came forward or got together on their own to fund the party, she sees no ethical problem. “Honoring people for their work in public service is something that we would want organizations to do,” Kirk said.
Either way, contractor-funded parties — apparently commonplace at City Hall — show how tricky it can be for city employees to navigate the ethical boundaries that come with their proximity to millions of dollars in city business.
A February report issued by the city auditor said that the city’s ethics program falls short. It called for improvements in several key areas, including establishing ethical guidelines, training employees to follow them and reinforcing that training as time passes. Suhm has promised changes.
‘Inappropriate to solicit’
There were speeches and roasts. Stringer’s colleagues had gone through city archives to find old photos of him and some of the major water construction projects he directed. A couple of hundred people attended, many of them city vendors and consultants.
While inquiring about the party, The News tried to interview Puckett’s former boss, Ramon Miguez, who was a Dallas assistant city manager before he resigned in 2009. Miguez is now a vice president of the firm HDR Engineering, which contributed to parties for both Rasor and Stringer and played a big role in the fundraising for Stringer’s party.
At first, Miguez denied any knowledge of who contributed to Stringer’s party. But once a reporter laid out some of the facts of HDR’s involvement, he took a different tack.
“We had a party for somebody who left public service,” he said. “And I think it’s none of your [expletive] business. Am I clear?”
Miguez did not stay on the phone long enough for a reporter to ask him about his own send-off party. Puckett, who was in charge of coordinating donations for that event, said she could not recall whether money came from contractors.
Suhm, in response to a request for comment, said that after The News’ report on Rasor’s party, she sent a memo stating the city’s policy to all employees.
“Please remember that it is inappropriate to solicit donations from city vendors for retirement parties and city events,” the memo said. “Voluntary contributions, for such events from employees, citizens, and vendors may be accepted.”
Suhm did not answer further questions about whether that policy was in place last year at the time of Stringer’s party and, if so, whether it was followed.
City-vendor collaboration
Stringer, an assistant director in the water department, announced his resignation late last July. Tough budget times had prompted pay cuts, sparking his decision to leave after 41 years with the city, he told a colleague in one email.
Stringer had found a job with Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, one of the contractors that contributed to his party.
Officials in the water department immediately started planning a retirement bash. They formed a nine-member committee that met several times during the weeks preceding the party. Managers of various water department divisions were asked to work on the committee or designate representatives to do so.
The committee’s first meeting was scheduled for two hours on a Friday afternoon. Those who attended assigned duties, such as decorations, guest list, music and budget oversight. The committee sought bids from catering companies.
“This function is being paid for by private funds and does not involve taxpayer monies,” a water department office assistant wrote in an email to one of the catering hopefuls. “Therefore I was asked to present three caterers and their quotes.”
Early on, HDR became involved in fundraising for the party. It’s not clear from records obtained by The News whether city employees solicited HDR’s help. Nor is it clear exactly how other contractors were approached.
It is clear that HDR and city officials worked closely together.
“I will send you updates periodically, to keep you in the loop on what donations I have received and who I have spoken with,” an HDR administrative assistant wrote in an email to a water department manager.
“Please feel free to direct any parties interested in donating to Charlie’s retirement to contact me,” the HDR employee wrote. “Donations can be made out to HDR Engineering, Inc. and mailed to my attention.”
Spreadsheet of contributors
A few weeks after the party, the HDR employee emailed the final spreadsheet to the water department manager who was in charge of the party’s budget. The manager, Jennifer Cottingham, forwarded it to Stringer.
“I thought you would want to know who contributed to your retirement party,” she wrote.
“Now I can send thank you cards to everyone,” Stringer replied.
In an interview, Stringer said he wasn’t aware of how the donations came about.
“I really don’t know and I never inquired,” he said. “I was just appreciative for all the appreciation that they extended to me. I was just in awe and overwhelmed.”
Ethical gray area
“When you begin to find out, here are all the people who buck up for that sort of thing, that’s where you begin to say, ‘Well, does that influence future generations of contracts, because I know that Smith Pump gave $1,000, and McCreary, whoever that is, only gave $25?’” she said.
But Kirk said there is a public benefit to making the contributions transparent.
“We want to know that,” she said, “because then we can observe future contracts, etc., and we can make a determination as to whether it constitutes influence peddling.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.