For years, Secretary of State Bill Galvin has a led a charmed life on Beacon Hill. Galvin gets mostly positive press in the Globe and Herald. He frequently appears before local news cameras, and he’s had an impact on legislation and maintained a comfortable budget through strong relationships with State House Speakers, from Charlie Flaherty to Tom Finneran to Sal DiMasi.
Now, Galvin’s between a rock and a hard place. The problem is Richard Vitale. Vitale, an accountant and close friend of DiMasi, gave the Speaker a mortgage loan, lobbied for ticket brokers without disclosing it to Galvin’s public records office, and now refuses to explain himself at a hearing Galvin ordered for today. In fact, Vitale’s lawyer argues that Galvin has no authority to conduct such a hearing, implying quite clearly that the long-time Secretary of State is a toothless tiger.
How does Galvin rise to the challenge? Passing the matter to Attorney General Martha Coakley would only confirm his powerlessness. So would backing down. But any further escalation risks alienating the powerful Speaker.
I have worked with Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin on a number of projects – many involving public records issues. When city and state agencies have failed to respond to legal public records requests, Secretary Galvin’s office has been in the mix supporting my Union’s rights to public documents and full disclosure of information.
<
p>As for refering something to the AG, that is the correct avenue for his office. When then Middlesex DA Tom Reilly failed to respond to a public records request from my Union, Secretary Galvin’s office went to the AG and started legal action against DA Reilly.
<
p>Far from showing that his office is a “toothless tiger” Galvin’s willingness to initiate legal action through the AG, shows he will take action and swiftly.
<
p>Not sure how Secretary Galvin is between a rock and a hard place. He is continuing his office’s investigation into Vitale. Any attempt by the Speaker to negatively impact Galvin’s budget or powers would be viewed by the media and the public as inappropriate by the Speaker and simply make Galvin into the voice of the people.
<
p>Me thinks Secretary Galvin is doing just great!
But I would hate to think that he doesn’t know whether or not he can legally compel testimony at a hearing- a lawyer or two on his staff should be able to answer this quickly and definitively. He appeared a little bafled in the Globe piece, which would seem to give lawyers like Egbert the upper hand.