There was more commentary over the weekend regarding the much-discussed offer by a Greensboro developer to transport two local elected officials to Washington by private plan to lobby for monies for a downtown development project.
Some good things have happened in terms of transparency in local government: the Mayor took it upon herself to get on the phone with a blogger to share some news; readers reacted quickly to the airplane plan; the newspaper read the blog and moved the story forward; the trip got postponed, and the ethics of developer/politician relationships -- surely one of the more important issues in this town -- got some fresh scrutiny.
Good intentions can lead to less-good outcomes, and processes that lead to good outcomes can be messy along the way. Nothing baffling about that.
Does it seem contradictory to say, on the one hand, that government needs partnerships with private business even more in these hard times -- but on the other hand, providing an above-board, well-publicized plane ride for official business is illegal? And could this have a chilling effect on the future partnerships between business and government?
It doesn't have to. As long as the arrangements are sufficiently vetted as legal and ethical before they happen.
Business leaders absolutely should not seek to influence public policy by offering favors to elected officials. But they should and do have the right to be good citizens by donating goods and services to their communities.
As long as they follow the letter of the law.
Getting things done in Greensboro is important. Getting them done right is more important.
To hear the Mayor of Greensboro Yvonne Johnson say that since local developer Roy Carroll had no financial interest in this property she was comfortable being on his personal plane to D.C. is a complete ethical lapse of judgment ...
It is also interesting to note that there hasn't been one quote from the chairman of the Guilford County Board of Commissioners in Skip Alston about the postponing of this trip.
My position is a bit different than that which was expressed on Ed's blog and the N&R editorial page. It appears to me that the local elected officials involved in this matter were not mere neophytes-- they each had been serving in public office for quite a number of years. They have been dealing with these issues for a long time.
There was nothing mysterious about this particular conflict. It was so obvious that there can be no excuses for having failed to see it. Is the standard of ethics in Greensboro politics so low that this particular episode must be treated like a revelation, as if we are exploring new turf?
Yvonne Johnson and Skip Alston should have known from the outset this arrangement was inappropriate; and they should have steered clear of it regardless of whether it was illegal or not. It was a no-brainer. I don't think we should sugarcoat that reality.
We need better ethical standards for local elected officials. This episode demonstrates amply that, in reality, we currently do not have any.
You know, even if we didn't have the "McQueen Campbell free jet rides" controversy plaguing the former Governor, Carroll's offer should have been viewed as inappropriate by local elected officials. But with that controversy in the picture, Yvonne and Skip shouldn't have been able to see five feet in front of them with all the little red flags waving.
The myopic nature of politicians never ceases to amaze me. Somebody could run over a couple of nuns at a pedestrian crosswalk and, the very next day, a politician would speed right through the same intersection while yakking on a cell phone and trying not to spill a coffee.
Posted by: scharrison | July 13, 2009 at 02:36 PM
I do not share Ed's optimism. What remains lacking is any acknowledgment from the players that it wasn't a good idea. A simple, "We got ahead of ourselves and really didn't think it through but, yeah, it would have been inappropriate," would be very encouraging.
No one has said that. Instead, they are all blaming other people for misunderstanding or getting in the way -- that's very disappointing.
Posted by: Roch101 | July 13, 2009 at 02:59 PM
Steve and Roch, I agree with the both of you. This is not a malady that is confined to elected officials from one party or who are of one skin color. Many of all types have proved themselves capable of this type of thing over the years-- including the Republicans in Washington earlier this decade.
What aggravates this situation, in my opinion, is the fact that the two officials in question have considerable amounts of experience in elective office, and should be able to differentiate right from wrong at this point. This is not a "new" issue for people who have served ten years or more.
But Roch, I am not sure I would be satisfied if there was an acknowledgment that the whole thing wasn't a good idea. That acknowledgment should have come immediately, when the idea was first floated before them.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 13, 2009 at 03:35 PM
Is the standard of ethics in Greensboro politics so low that this particular episode must be treated like a revelation, as if we are exploring new turf?
The problem is that the standard of ethic's is so low in Washington, DC that the GSO Mayor is simply monkey see monkey do, i.e. emulating (tutored) the big boy Washington politicans. Hey they get away with this stuff all the time in DC so why not in GSO. Just bought a new home in Davidson Co. so I'll be saying bye-bye to Guilford. Beau
Posted by: Beau D. Jackson | July 13, 2009 at 03:42 PM
"We need better ethical standards for local elected officials. This episode demonstrates amply that, in reality, we currently do not have any."
It's just "Business Ss Usual", the true "Greensboro Disease", which will continue as long as the same 20-25 percent of the voting public return the same people or their equivalent replacement clones to our city's highest elected offices.
Let's once again ask ourselves these questions:
Who benefits from the thoroughly corrupt status quo?
Why are those who benefit never held accountable for longer than it takes for a blog thread to run its course?
Posted by: Bubba | July 13, 2009 at 03:56 PM
Beau, it's not just DC that's conflicted. From a story in the N&O today: What did the Sleazelys do when Mary's overseas trips started wrinkling noses at the state auditor's office?
They hired Tony Rand - a lawyer and N.C. Senate Majority leader - who oversees the state auditor's budget.
As for moving to Davisdon County, I'm sorry. I've worked all over this state. "Pay-to-play" is embedded and it's everywhere. The grass isn't greener . . . just different animals pooping on it.
(I've been really working the BS theme lately;)
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 13, 2009 at 03:59 PM
Probably a good move, Beau.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 13, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Thanks but as being quoted this stinks to high heaven and a new post just out with some quotes from the latest triad business journal where we have talked about in another post that needs more scrutiny in the land swap deal with the school board on their properties in fisher park. Here is the post,
http://triadwatch.blogspot.com/2009/07/this-trip-on-local-developer-roy.html
Ethical standards of our local elected officials needs to change or exposed like this has done for the citizens here.
Posted by: triadwatch | July 13, 2009 at 04:16 PM
Bubba, you raise some important questions, and I think we know the answers.
Mary, you are right that we should not forget Raleigh. But I can't help but think Davidson must be at least somewhat better than Guilford.:)
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 13, 2009 at 04:18 PM
"but on the other hand, providing an above-board, well-publicized plane ride for official business is illegal?"
This was not a well publicized event and it was a simple post on ed cone that brought this whole trip for all to know about and we chimed in on the ethical standards missing from our local elected officials.
In the triad business journal , they have been planning this for awhile so to say it was well publicized is far from the truth.
Posted by: triadwatch | July 13, 2009 at 04:31 PM
le me reiterate they have been planing this trip but it wasn't out there for all to know about.
Posted by: triadwatch | July 13, 2009 at 04:32 PM
Keith, thanks for providing that link, and also for your leadership on this issue.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 13, 2009 at 04:47 PM
Thanks as well to you on this issue. I think this needs to be talked about in this upcoming elections about ethics and local leadership, and where do they stand on a scenario like this trip. We can also start to question who is providing the trips for the local elected leaders.
We can also maybe question who is paying for these keith debbage make the aerotropolis fly studies. but that is another post as well. The sunday editorial was filled with tidbits to talk about .
Posted by: triadwatch | July 13, 2009 at 05:02 PM
I agree that some introspection and acknowledgment on the part of our elected officials would be a good thing. I don't mean to give them a pass, by any means.
Posted by: Ed Cone | July 13, 2009 at 05:26 PM
The problem that we are starting to see, as here, is the merging of big business and government. This is not in the best interests of the country. A good example is the merging of interests of business such as G.E. and Goldman Sachs with the federal government. Along with some other companies, they stand to make mega profits, thanks to our government policies.
Posted by: Stormy | July 13, 2009 at 06:17 PM
"The problem that we are starting to see, as here, is the merging of big business and government."
And that is the essence of what I call "Business As Usual".
For the most part, I do not trust ANY of these organizations, including their political/social/economic allies, to make decisions of importance that affect the citizens of Greensboro.
Most of our city's elected officials and too many of our city's bureaucrats are subject to that same criticism.
Posted by: Bubba | July 13, 2009 at 07:08 PM
Stormy, I agree with you in essence and don't want this extremely condensed history lesson to take away from your point, but...this merger dates back to the birth of our country and has been with us the whole way.
From the Hamiltonians to the robber barons to the military industrial complex, and all points in between, that private-public partnership has sculpted our Republic. While ethics has always been on the minds of farmers and professors, to most politicians it is like a fancy silk scarf that can either make you look good or strangle you.
Okay, what just happened? Beelzebubba, please stop using me as a telepathic conduit. It hurts.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is: since most politicians can't grasp that ethics is a frame of mind and not a pesky gnat that can be swatted away with a little rationalization or plausible deniability, it remains up to us to constantly observe their behavior and smack their knuckles with a ruler when they stray.
Posted by: scharrison | July 13, 2009 at 07:11 PM
Steve,
You are correct, this problem has been around since the inception of the republic, but it is getting more intense. People need to look carefully at the roles of G.E. and Goldman Sachs in this administration. They stand to make billions from government policy. And, it is the taxpayers that will be paying. the trade and tax will enrich G.E. phenominally, just like the TARP did Goldman Sachs.
Posted by: Stormy | July 13, 2009 at 09:46 PM
Sc, I think they're too old for a ruler to make the impression. How about a 2 by 4? It absolutely amazes when I mentioned a while back that it would be simple ethics to recuse ones self if a petitioner that came before you who had contributed to your campaign. That happens quite often in Greensboro, particularly in zoning cases. I was treated on one blog as if I had 3 eyes.
Posted by: Roger Greene | July 13, 2009 at 09:50 PM
The state legislature had been considering legislation that would extend state ethics laws to local public officials. I don't recall what progress has been made on that measure. But if it has not already happened, it should.
Thanks for all the comments. I agree that the unhealthy intermingling of business and government is occurring at all levels-- local, state and national. Perhaps we should demand elected officials who generally want robust entrepreneurialism and free markets; but who eschew being influenced by and entangled with individual businesses and industries.
I appreciate all the comments.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 13, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Wonderful. This will do wonders for North Carolina's image.
"WASHINGTON — Disgraced financier Bernard Madoff has been moved out of a New York lockup on his way to a North Carolina facility to begin serving his 150-year sentence, a law enforcement official said Monday.
Madoff is headed to the Butner federal prison, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss prisoner transfers."
Posted by: Stormy | July 14, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Roger, I know how it feels when you advocate for something that is steeped in common sense, yet people fight the idea.
I've been talking about campaign finance reform that would severely limit contributions for a long time, and I hear Constitutional arguments from one side and "but campaigns are expensive!" from the other.
Everybody complains about the influence of money in politics, but if you talk about actually shrinking or stopping that money, all of a sudden those same people defend it.
Posted by: scharrison | July 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Ahhh...Bernie will fit right in here in NC.
Posted by: brandonB | July 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM
"I was treated on one blog as if I had 3 eyes."
And just which blog was that, Roger?
Was it one whose proprietor has contributed a comment to this thread?
Posted by: Bubba | July 14, 2009 at 03:39 PM