Submitted by Jeff Buster on Fri, 04/10/2009 - 14:03.

After hearing Mr. Timothy Hagan tell us that he can operate as a multi million dollar shill for his friend Chris Kennedy – as long as Mr. Hagan “doesn’t benefit financially” - and avoid any public procurement bidding - I thought I would read the Ohio Ethics Rules.  

Frank Lewis of The Cleveland Scene writes about Mr. Hagan's interpretation of a public official's ethics responsibility this week:

"Last year, when The Plain Dealer was still cheerleading for the project, Hagan sniffed at Free Times’ suggestion that there might be something unseemly about his close personal relationship with Kennedy’s family. “A conflict is when I benefit financially from a decision I make. That’s what the state statute says," he said, adding: “How do people think decisions are made?” How indeed."

I don’t believe Mr. Hagan is correct in his overly simplified interpretation of the Ethics Rules.   
Part way through the Rules I came on this paragraph - which I believe clearly applies to Mr. Madden.  Roldo mentions Mr. Madden's new employment here on Realneo.
“Section 102.03
(A)(1) No present or former public official or employee shall, during public employment or service or for twelve months thereafter, represent a client or act in a representative capacity for any person on any matter in which the public official or employee personally participated as a public official or employee through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or other substantial exercise of administrative discretion.”
What is the interpretation from the larger Realneo audience re: Mr. Madden, who left the County employ and immediately went to work for MMPI on MEDCON.   
While we consider Mr. Madden, I’m going back to finish reading the Ethics Rules, and then look at a little case law…



( categories: )