Norfolk Commissioner: “She broke the public trust”

So says Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim of Commissioner of the Revenue Sharon McDonald.

“Sharon felt once she had a travel budget, it was an entitlement,” he said.

“There is no logical justification for the … hundreds of hotel room stays, hundreds and hundreds of meals, gifts, et cetera. The council no longer has faith in the commissioner’s ability to exercise sound judg ment over her budget.”

[…]

“She misses the point,” he said. “No one expected to find that Sharon broke any criminal laws.

“What’s clear to us is she broke the public trust. We all expected as a public servant she would exercise sound discretion and protect the public purse. In the council’s opinion, that discretion was abused.”

I attended the informal session of council Tuesday evening, where the council was provided a presentation on the audit report. After the presentation, council went into a rather lengthy closed session, ostensibly to deal with “personnel matters.” I guess that is technically correct, since one of the items discussed in that meeting was the elimination of position within the office, but it seems to me that much of the conversation revolved around how to curtail the activities of the Commissioner, who is not a city employee.

I had not planned to stay for the formal session and in fact, had left the building but had not gotten out of the parking lot when I received a text that the council was about to vote on a new ordinance. Although I missed the vote, I did get a copy of the ordinance, which reads:

AN ORDINANCE TO BRING THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE’S TRAVEL POLICY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Norfolk:

Section 1:- That the funds budgeted for the Commissioner of the Revenue for travel may only be expended after approval by a process determined by the City Manager or her designee, which process shall be essentially the same as required by city department heads.

Section 2:- That this Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its adoption.

I guess the council has finally figured out that the only control over constitutional officers is local ordinance. Why I’m pleased they finally learned this, I’m disappointed that it has taken so long. Now perhaps they will fix a couple of other ordinances to further rein her in.

In addition to the new ordinance and the elimination of the position of her personal assistant, council also continued the hiring freeze previously imposed.

McDonald has scheduled a press conference for Wednesday morning. I understand she also had planned a reception – billed as a vindication party – to be held after the conference. I’m guessing she doesn’t have much to celebrate now.

In a separate editorial, written and posted online several hours before the news story, the editorial board comes to virtually the same conclusion as the mayor.

If a politician asks people for their vote, there are things she must do in exchange.

She must do her job fairly and to the best of her ability. She must make only promises she can keep. She must respect the office she holds and do nothing to dishonor it. She must take care with taxpayer dollars. She must do all of that openly.

Sharon McDonald has violated at least one of those expectations, and arguably more. If voters disapprove, their ballots in November 2013 should reflect their displeasure.

I’m not convinced that the voters should have to wait that long. If McDonald won’t resign, the options provided by the code for removal should be explored. And between the General Assembly and the City Council, more effort – as hinted at by the mayor – should be undertaken to curtail the potential for abuse that these offices have. One thing that was quite clear from the audit report: constitutional officers have no bosses, save the voters themselves. There are few, if any, rules governing their behavior.

And the scariest part of all of this? McDonald was the president of the Commissioners of the Revenue Association!

The best course of action, in my opinion, is the elimination of some – if not all – of these constitutional offices, or at least make it easier  should a locality choose to do so.