TODAY

Friday, August 1

Gapers Block
Search

Gapers Block on Facebook Gapers Block on Flickr Gapers Block on Twitter The Gapers Block Tumblr


The Mechanics
« Tearful Words from Downstate AppointmentWatch! »

Chicago Mon Jul 13 2009

Homero Tristan and Scandal Fatigue

A well-reasoned (and researched) post by EveryBlock (and Chicago City Payments) co-founder Daniel X. O'Neil plunges into the Homero Tristan affair, separating fact from narrative and going to the heart of exactly why we should care about things like this, even when we're all scandal fatigued. If you've read James Merriner's great book Grafters and Goo Goos, you know that the modern era's reform efforts have become institutionalized and prone to make-workism. This has the dual effect of boring the general population, and eliciting backlash from the political class who see "reform" as just a cover for political ambition by outsiders. O'Neil's exploration of what the actual ethical lapses were in the Tristan "scandal" is instructive: it was a failure of protocol as a symptom but not an example of power politics, and our reaction to it should be calibrated as such (and, we should also think about why we have these protocols in the first place).

On June 26th, the city's inspector general, David Hoffman, put out a report criticizing the behavior of Human Resources Commissioner Homero Tristan, and calling for him to be sacked. Tristan subsequently resigned. The news reports focused on the fact that a "former top aide" to Mayor Daley has resigned in a "hiring scandal". But, as always, it's important to know exactly what happened, before a scandal turns into A Scandal, where everybody knows the personalities but not the facts. Tristan's resignation and reporters' questions about it caused much Mayoral huffing and puffing, with the Mayor claiming Tristan had done nothing seriously wrong, and insinuating that the IG was running wild.

The Mayor sounding a note like that means something, and there has been a subsequent pushback against Hoffman from several quarters. Tristan's lawyer, Bill Coulson (husband to state Representative Elizabeth Coulson) wrote a publicized letter to the Mayor defending Tristan's conduct in the matter and accusing the IG of being irresponsible in making his report public and playing fast and loose with the facts (Hoffman didn't respond). Rumors of Hoffman's political aspirations, always the best way to cast doubt on a civil servant ("He just wants to be one of the cool kids, like us!") have begun to leak.

The Tribune ran an edging on asinine op-ed accusing Hoffman of being overzealous:

it seems Chicago's inspector general, David Hoffman, is intent on turning everyday networking into guilt-by-association, as well as casting clouds of suspicion on those engaged in the civic arena as if it were a criminal act. My intention here is not to defend the commissioner, but to sound the alarm on the death of civic participation.

Hoffman's most recent report is the latest example of an investigator run amok. Never mind him tarnishing the career and damaging the reputation of Tristan, his newest target. Hoffman is a reformer's reformer. Democracy be damned!

This op-ed is a good place to start, because it was written by Juan Rangel, head of the powerful and influential United Neighborhoods Organization (UNO), a once-independent voice for working class Latino neighborhoods. UNO was once a radical Alinsky-ite organization that fought the powers that be; they are now an accommodating organization that is on the forefront of privatizing public education, with Mayor Daley chairing that particular effort. UNO's privatization effort recently received $100m in public money for private-operated schools..

UNO, in other words, is an important part of the Daley coalition in Latino communities, one that thrives on its access to, rather than confrontation of, power and the status quo. So maybe Mr. Rangel's grave concern about democracy and fear of the disruption of "professional networks" has more to do with the influence and power of his organization than about providing fair and open services to the people of Chicago (in fact, he kind of says that himself). Rangel's eye-roll-inducing editorial even tries to bring President Obama's campaign into it, accusing of Hoffman of not wanting people to get involved in politics to avoid the appearance of bias. Rangel's op-ed is an example of the backlash against "reformism", characterizing it as elitist and opportunisitic, as an effort by phony moralist Borgias in cloistered institutions to attack the "people's government" while cloaking their ambition in reform-hued vestments. It's a seductive worldview that many, myself included, entertain at one point or another. But it's not a realistic one.

It is important not to play into that interpretation of reform by unreasonably blowing ethical lapses and transgressions into world-shattering "scandals". This isn't a scandal on par with Hired Truck or dozens of yet-unreported scandals we may soon learn about O'Hare contracting or in the Water Department. We joke about "scandal fatigue" but it is a real problem, and one that has probably unnaturally elongated the life of a political establishment that should have collapsed years ago.

Essentially, all Tristan is accused of doing is failing to follow a federally required protocol:

1. An alderman wrote a letter to the city's human resources to keep an employee from being reassigned;
2. Federally-mandated protocols, through the Shakman decrees, required that such contact from elected officials to the city's personnel management agents be reported to the Inspector General and the Shakman Monitor (the much-maligned Noelle Brennan, Berny Stone's arch-nemesis);
3. Tristan is accused of not reporting that contact immediately and, later, lying to investigators asking about it.

This was the breach that Hoffman's office thought merited termination. The infraction Rangel discusses in his editorial--failure to alert the monitor to (what appears to be an appropriate) contact from City Clerk Miguel Del Valle--was less serious and Hoffman only recommended a short suspension.

Tristan is obviously no patronage criminal mastermind. But these rules were put in place for a reason (Cf., last eighty years of Chicago political history) and there is more to lose by lax enforcement than by over-strict enforcement.

O'Neil's piece should be read in its entirety (if for no other reason than it will make clear what was in the IG's original report), but here's an extended excerpt (by permission of the author) to give a good sense of the subtleties of the issue:

It seems certain that a whole bunch of City employees did their jobs here

One last bit about the nature of the firestorm of defensive defense of the former Commissioner doesn't sit right with me. There's been much "but their requests were denied" talk, but no discussion of the process and people that led to those decisions. This is a long snip, but worth it:

The Monitor discovered that the job duties of Administrative Assistant III's ("AA III") in the City Clerk's Office were very different than the AA III job description. This prompted a "reclassification audit" by DHR. The DHR Analyst assigned to the audit analyzed what the AA III's did in the Clerk's Office and concluded that the proper title / job description for these positions was License Enforcement Aide, a lower-graded position. The DHR Commissioner then sent a letter to the City Clerk informing him of this conclusion. The City Clerk wrote a letter back disagreeing with the audit and arguing that the proper title / job description was closer to that of a Revenue Investigator, which would have been a slightly higher-graded position. Although the City Clerk is an elected official, this was obviously a step taken by the City Clerk as a department head and would be a typical step for a department head in this situation.

A few days later, the DHR Commissioner emailed one of his top deputies (with a cc to the DHR Analyst) stating that the Clerk "is upset regarding a reclass[ification decision]. [C]an we address it and make it happen for him, and if we can't please let me know what the problems are." Later that day, the DHR Analyst wrote a memo to the Commissioner explaining why the City Clerk's suggestion was not possible and why her original analysis was correct.

The DHR Commissioner continued to question the DHR Analyst about the findings in the audit, and the DHR analyst was asked to write another memo analyzing the pros and cons of the City Clerk's proposal. She wrote that there were no pros and explained the cons. A meeting with the City Clerk, the DHR Commissioner, and relevant staff followed. The Clerk's Office said that the AA III's were now doing additional duties which were more consistent with an equal or higher-graded position. The DHR Commissioner directed a second DHR analyst to do a "re-audit" in light of this new information. The second analyst reached the same conclusion as the first DHR Analyst. Ultimately, the DHR Commissioner sent another letter to the City Clerk reaching the same conclusion as his initial letter - that the AA III's would need to be downgraded to License Enforcement Aides.

What I see in those three paragraphs is a whole bunch of people doing their jobs:

  • The Shakman Monitor, reviewing the job description of an obscure but important role in City government and finding it different than the actual job duties performed in that job. This is a central role of the Monitor, since juking job duties is a time-honored method of corruption
  • The City Clerk, Miguel del Valle, going to bat for his employees during tough economic times
  • A DHR Analyst who listens to the arguments and makes reasoned decisions and is able to back them up when questioned by superiors
  • A second DHR Analyst doing another independent audit and coming to the same conclusion
  • The DHR Commissioner, Homero Tristan (credit where it's due), who accepts the analysis of his employees
  • Other employees of both departments spending time trying to honestly define the job for every City worker who holds it

I'm really grateful to these people for this work.

This analysis is what makes Rangel's op-ed so disingenuous and, in fact, dangerous. True, Homero Tristan shouldn't be burned in effigy as a machine hack out to clout jobs for the connected--at least, that's not what he was accused of and there's no evidence that that's what he was doing. At the same time, we shouldn't go ahead and start attacking the motives and character of an Inspector General just doing his job, and trying to make sure that the letter of the federal order is followed exactly. There's a reason the order errs on the side of less discretion for the city in these kinds of situations; it was that very discretion that allowed for shenanigans. Accusing the IG of hating democracy and holding bizarre potlucks in support of Tristan sends the message that "community groups" supposedly in the business of advocating for the people are opposed to independent oversight of government affairs.

 

disgusted / July 13, 2009 9:51 PM

If anyone has ever checked Homero Tristan's past, they would know that he was a liar, as well as unethical, long before he was ever introduced to Mayor Daley or had anything to do with with the Daley Administration. The guy is a **** . The fact that 200 members of the Latino community stood up for him, especially when he broke the rules that he was responsible for enforcing, is repulsive. Too bad they don't know, or don't care to admit, who he really is. The guy got exactly what he deserved. I only question why in the world the Mayor would defend his actions.

Nice Slander / July 17, 2009 9:33 AM

To Disgusted:

Nice for you to hide behind anonymity while hurling blanket insults at a person with absolutely no proof or example of why you are making such accusations. Don't slander a person unless you have soething to back it up. It is absolutely useless to anyone that reads it. Insted of ranting to the public that reads this blog, why not write something useful or keep your typing to yourself.

And if you think I am a friend of Tristan's, you would be dead wrong. I don't know the guy from Adam, and the last person that would defend Daley or any part of his corrupt administration. But slander is wrong no matter what.

Observant / September 30, 2010 11:30 PM

I have read blog pages that ask why Juan Rangel is so hated by so many Chicagoans. On the surface it appears he heads a major network based organization that admittedly only works for the Latino community, (and in Chicago it grows exponentially each year), but with his myriad of small businesses like janitorial, snow removal, probable contracts for the Chicago Park District (since he is now on the board) it would appear he is creating jobs for all of his neighborhood friends.

The UNO Charter School Network, beginning with its ever-morphing first school, Octavio Paz has been the source of almost unaccountable revenue for the organization, including $100,000,000.00 from fellow Democrat, Governor Pat Quinn and the taxpayers of Illinois. Juan's connections extend to the White House, as the American taxpayers sent Juan Rangel to Copenhagen as an envoy to best explain why Chicago's near southwest side would be the ideal location to build an Olympic game complex. Think how the city, UNO, and Juan Rangel could benefit from that Real estate deal.

Speaking of real estate, let's not forget De La Cruz elementary school, and how that was acquired from the city for a year for the rent of one dollar. It is true that the school had inadequate facilities for special education programs, no appreciable learning technology and an extensive lack of materials for students, but that should not be cause for alarm. Community painting and wallboard companies received contracts for interior remodeling. UNO janitorial services got contracts too, and Juan Rangel grossed more income than the Chicago Superintendent of Public Schools.

Juan Rangel is ever vigilant of new opportunities to innovate. For example, a new agreement was reached with Josh Anderson, Board of Education insider, head of Chicago's Teach For America program, to put young and inexperienced recent college graduates in UNO classrooms for their very first year, and for many, only year, of learning to teach with little more than on the job training. They are all non-union and salaries are determined by UNO so Juan Rangel is getting what he pays for, as are UNO students getting what Juan pays for.

So why is Juan Rangel the recipient of so much criticism?

Add a Comment




Please enter the letter y in the field below:



Live Comment Preview


Notes & Tags

Items marked with a * are required fields. Please respect each other. We reserve the right to delete any comments borne out of douchebaggery or that deal in asshattery.

Permitted tags and how to use them:

To link: <a href="http://blahblahblah.com">Link text</a>
To italicize: <em>Your text</em>
To bold: <strong>Your text</strong>

Feature

How Lawsuits, Lobbyists and Parking Meter Deals Led to Ventra

By Jason Prechtel / 1 Comments

Cubic learned early on that if you don't win a contract through bidding, there are other ways to prevail. More...

Special Series

Classroom Mechanics Oral History Project



About Mechanics

Mechanics is the politics section of Gapers Block, reflecting the diversity of viewpoints and beliefs of Chicagoans and Illinoisans. More...
Please see our submission guidelines.

Editor: Monica Reida, mr@gapersblock.com
Mechanics staff inbox: mechanics@gapersblock.com

Archives

 

 Subscribe in a reader.

GB Store

GB Buttons $1.50

GB T-Shirt $12

I ✶ Chi T-Shirts $15

Newsletter

Sign up for our free email newsletter I Star Chi and get a weekly round-up of the best of Gapers Block, plus our picks for must-do events each weekend!

istarchi

Preferred format    Preferred format