My Turn Column
December 29, 2006
Public Corruption Op-Ed
The recent prosecutions of former State Treasurer David Petersen, State Mine Inspector Douglas Martin and Maricopa County Schools Superintendent Sandra Dowling have led some to suggest that I am trying to set a new, higher standard for public official conduct.
I am not. My job as Attorney General is to enforce the laws, not write them. The standards of conduct for public employees have been set by statute. These laws define conflict of interest and other legal and ethical standards for public officials.
These legal standards of conduct place strict obligations on public officials and hold them accountable for violations of public trust. During my first term as Attorney General, my Office has prosecuted a total of 20 state and local public employees for violations of that trust. Those charged include seven elected officials and 13 other public employees.
Arizona citizens have a right to be confident that public employees are working for them – not putting personal considerations ahead of the public interest. Arizona law places a bright line between personal gain and public good. The Arizona Supreme Court has written, "It is, we believe, accepted without dissent that public officers must have no personal interest in transactions with the government which they represent." Our laws properly reflect the importance of not allowing a public employee’s personal advantage to influence official decisions. It is not necessary to actually take money to violate the law in Arizona – an intention to personally benefit, or to use public resources as if they were personal property, could constitute a violation of law.
Vigorous enforcement helps maintain the efficient operation of public services. The impact of official conflict of interest often extends well beyond the official or employee and becomes disruptive to an office or department. This negative effect can divide staff members – some will remain loyal to their boss, while others will not tolerate the violation of law. The result can, and often does, disrupt the business of the State and waste taxpayer dollars.
The case against the former State Treasurer for knowingly filing a false or incomplete financial disclosure statement raised serious concerns about staff disruption in the Treasurer's Office.
I hold to a public sector version of the “broken windows” theory. Simply stated, more serious crimes evolve from less serious ones. If the first broken window in a building is left unrepaired, the people who are breaking windows will assume that no one cares and more windows will be broken; other laws are more likely to be broken as well. Similarly, if smaller violations by public employees are overlooked, we send a message that more serious violations might be tolerated.
Arizona officials who have been found guilty or pleaded guilty in the last four years have confused personal with public interest and disrupted their public offices. These problems are by no means unique to Arizona. Last week, New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi resigned as part of an agreement that included a guilty plea to one fraud count. The agreement came as prosecutors were preparing to charge him for improper use of state employees as chauffeurs and aides to his wife.
Although the Legislature and the courts, not the Attorney General, set the standards for official conduct, it is my job to make sure the standards are clear and public officials are held accountable. Our prosecutions during the past four years should leave no question about the rules. I fervently pray these actions will prevent future misconduct.
Overall, public officials in our State work hard and are committed to serving the public interest. The citizens of Arizona deserve nothing less.
Attorney General Terry Goddard
Sidebar (Optional)
Elected officials prosecuted by the Arizona Attorney General’s Office (2003 – present)
DOUGLAS K. MARTIN, the Arizona State Mine Inspector, was indicted in December 2006 on three counts of theft, three counts of fraud and three counts of procurement code fraud. He is scheduled to be arraigned on Jan. 10, 2007.
DAVID PETERSEN, former State Treasurer, pleaded guilty in October 2006 to one count of knowingly filing a false or incomplete financial disclosure statement. He also agreed to resign from office. Petersen received a sentence of three years of supervised probation and a $4,500 fine.
SANDRA DOWLING, Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools, was indicted in November 2006 on 25 felony charges. They include two counts of theft, 10 counts of misuse of public monies, four counts of procurement code fraud, five counts of conflict of interest and four counts of prohibition against acquisition of certain interest by public officials. Dowling has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Case is pending.
ROBERT CANCHOLA, former Santa Cruz County School Superintendent, was indicted in November 2005. He pleaded guilty to one count of conflict of interest, a felony, and was sentenced to 60 days in jail, three years of probation with 250 hours of community service and $41,000 in restitution. The agreement also required him to resign from office.
BRIAN HOUNSHELL, Apache County Sheriff, was indicted in May 2005 on two counts of misuse of public monies, one count of fraud and one count of theft. The charges were dismissed when the Maricopa County Superior Court determined Maricopa County was not the correct venue in which to bring charges. The case is currently on appeal.
KEVIN ROSS, former Maricopa County Assessor, was indicted in May 2004 on conflict of interest and obstruction of justice charges. In January 2005, following his conviction by a jury of conflict of interest, a Class 6 Felony, the Maricopa County Superior Court ordered Ross to leave office and placed him on probation for three years, with an $18,000 fine, and revoked his real estate license.
JUDETH BADGLEY, former Yuma County School Superintendent, was indicted in April 2003. Badgley pleaded guilty to one count of conflict of interest, a felony, which required her to resign from office, and was sentenced to one year of probation.
