Audits and Obstruction
Subject: Audits and Obstruction.........
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:42:35 -0500
From: Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of
California, Department of Pesticide Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/editorials/index.ssf?/newsstory/giveitup06.html
Bob Odom's motives for refusing a public records request by the legislative auditor are unfathomable.
The state agriculture secretary refused to give two auditors access to the documents on Monday and then had security personnel escort the pair out of the building.
And while Mr. Odom denies it, Legislative Auditor Dan Kyle says that Mr. Odom "became irate and . . . began to yell at our auditors using vulgar and threatening language."
If this showdown was an attempt to stall the legislative auditor, who is investigating Mr. Odom, his department and his political campaigns, it only bought a week's time. The auditor went to court to force the secretary's hand the very next day. And Mr. Odom's attorneys agreed in Judge Curtis Calloway's chambers to turn over the documents by next Tuesday.
That was inevitable. The documents in question are public records, after all. Denying them to anyone would have run afoul of the state open records law. But stonewalling auditors in the middle of an investigation isn't just wrong, it's maladroit. They are the last people who would be put off by such a refusal.
Mr. Odom said that he decided not to give auditors the documents they were seeking because the legislative auditor already had copies from annual financial audits. "I'm not going through the effort to have employees go in and copy when they already have the records," he said.
Mr. Kyle says otherwise. Financial auditors would only have copied those sections of board minutes that they needed at the time. In any case, that attempt at a justification is irrelevant. It's not his place to decide whether someone needs a public record or not.
Mr. Odom paints himself as the defender of his staff, protecting them not only from unnecessary work but verbal abuse. He says that one of the auditors was "hollering" at an employee, although Mr. Kyle disputes that claim.
Complying with requests for documents is part of life for those who work for government agencies, and Mr. Odom wasn't doing anyone a favor by trying to prevent compliance.
This smacks of obstructionism, and far from generating sympathy for Mr. Odom, it tends to arouse suspicion.
That's the last thing that the agriculture secretary should want. His activities and those of the Agriculture Department are the subject of an East Baton Rouge grand jury investigation as well as the one being conducted by Mr. Kyle's office.
A former warehouse owner has accused Mr. Odom of rigging a contract for storing commodity food for the state in favor of political contributors, something Mr. Odom denies. The grand jury has heard testimony from warehouse owners as well as current and former department employees.
But the probe has involved other issues as well, from the purchase of championship 4-H cattle by Mr. Odom's campaign to the use of department employees to build a house for his son, which he says was voluntary.
Court records indicate that Mr. Odom and his family have been asked to turn over personal financial records and Mr. Odom's campaign finance records.
In light of that, it's puzzling that the request for board and commission minutes struck such a nerve.
What is clear, however, is Mr. Kyle's right to pore over what will no doubt be a thick and tedious pile of documents. Mr. Odom had no business trying to stop him.
12/06/01
© The Times-Picayune.
Well Mr. Helliker, I believe a lot of "rights" are stopped by "regulators" like this one.
Respectfully, Stephen L. TvedtenIf you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, Email Us. with "subscribe" in the subject line.