City of Auburn officials have expressed frustration at times with the public and media criticism of their handling of the Department of Public Works theft scandal.
They point out that the city recovered taxpayer property and money through the offer of amnesty to workers who returned city equipment they had taken for personal use without authorization. Without this program, the chances of successful prosecution were minimal because police said the only evidence they could gather was rumor, innuendo and hearsay. And as a result of the entire matter, improved procedures have been put in place that should protect taxpayer-owned property in the future.
All of this may be true, though it's certainly subject to debate.
But the bigger problem the city brought onto itself with its handling of this matter involves public trust.
It started weeks before the story of the amnesty program broke when certain city officials denied that anything had happened at all. They later admitted they were trying to keep the story from the public because they wanted to move on.
Later, when some details of the story emerged, the city engaged in what we consider a stonewalling campaign to prevent disclosure of documents with names of city workers involved. City officials shifted their reasons for denying records three times. First, they asserted a blanket exemption because names were included in police records. When the limitations of that exemption were pointed out, they stated that the police records contained confidential sources whose identities could be protected, and they said the records would reveal secret police crime-solving techniques.
Last week, finally, the city released investigation records along with recent correspondence between the city and two of the individuals who were targets of the investigation. This disclosure came after The Citizen and The Post-Standard newspapers jointly informed the city of their intention to take the Freedom of Information matter to court.
City officials may be proud of their handling of this matter, but we hope they also have learned some lessons about dealing with the public. To truly earn the trust and appreciation of the people they serve, city leaders need to be honest and open all the time.
All of this may be true, though it's certainly subject to debate.
But the bigger problem the city brought onto itself with its handling of this matter involves public trust.
It started weeks before the story of the amnesty program broke when certain city officials denied that anything had happened at all. They later admitted they were trying to keep the story from the public because they wanted to move on.
Later, when some details of the story emerged, the city engaged in what we consider a stonewalling campaign to prevent disclosure of documents with names of city workers involved. City officials shifted their reasons for denying records three times. First, they asserted a blanket exemption because names were included in police records. When the limitations of that exemption were pointed out, they stated that the police records contained confidential sources whose identities could be protected, and they said the records would reveal secret police crime-solving techniques.
Last week, finally, the city released investigation records along with recent correspondence between the city and two of the individuals who were targets of the investigation. This disclosure came after The Citizen and The Post-Standard newspapers jointly informed the city of their intention to take the Freedom of Information matter to court.
City officials may be proud of their handling of this matter, but we hope they also have learned some lessons about dealing with the public. To truly earn the trust and appreciation of the people they serve, city leaders need to be honest and open all the time.
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 1 comment(s)
anonymous wrote on Mar 22, 2009 2:59 PM: