Today’s Globe has a first-rate Spotlight Team exposé about the extraordinary — mind-boggling, really — level of patronage and hack hiring that has gone on in the probation department since the legislature gave itself control of the operation a decade or so ago. The article is long, detailed, and devastating (and, as David Whelan notes, creates a significant political problem for Tim Cahill, among others).
Problems of this kind in the probation office are not news — CommonWealth Magazine wrote up some of them earlier this year, and there have been others reports as well. Governor Patrick, to his credit, has been way out front on this issue, proposing a smart plan to move probation into the executive branch. At this point, though, it almost doesn’t matter where it moves (others want to move control back into the judiciary). Something desperately needs to happen. Probation is an important office — surely it is a good idea to have competent people managing the office that is responsible for making sure that recently-released prisoners do what they’re supposed to do. It also has come to represent everything that is wrong with state government. If state government can’t fix it, well, that says a lot.
Kudos to the Globe’s Spotlight Team for this outstanding work. This is what a major daily paper should be doing. Here’s hoping they do more of it.
Patronage is nothing short of stealing. Giving a job to a friend, relative or even worse, a donor is nothing short of a misuse of public funds. It should be, and probably is, criminal. Today’s Globe piece is not new news. A March 28th piece in The Globe exposed Treasurer Tim’s “pay-to-play” antics in an article titled, “Cahill donations raise specter of pay-to-play government.”
<
p>It’s here:
<
p>http://www.boston.com/bostongl…
<
p>Inevitably the excuse making will include the silly “they all do it” nonsense, but those insulting retorts of the past should be dismissed by one and all. After all, one can’t reform if one plays the insulting patronage games of the past.
<
p>Tim Cahill is not a worthy candidate for Governor on many levels. His integrity and honesty are in play. I say he ends his campaign Monday morning.
Well, that would make your day, considering that you’re Charlie Baker’s unofficial representative here at BMG.
<
p>Knocking down Cahill may not have your intended effect in the end for you, though, since with the economy improving and more of Baker’s own record in government and campaign problems coming to light, Deval may just win a head-to-head race with Baker come November.
So is it your position that Cahill should continue as a candidate given his disregard for the taxpayers of the Commonwealth?
But since Baker showed blatant disregard for the taxpayers through his major role in the Big Dig boondoggle, perhaps he should drop out as well.
Cahill’s interference with the Probation Offices is a criminal matter.
The voters will have their say in November if Cahill’s association with this situation requires their taking action against him. Is your position that the voters aren’t qualified to make that decision themselves?
I haven’t seen any numbers.
…then he’s going to have to use it to fill slots. We COULD change the procedure, but I don’t want advice and consent for every civil servant. Maybe a state-level civil service exam is in order.
Removing not only probation, but those who clerk for and work under judges from judicial hire and fire has been a disaster all across the Commonwealth.
<
p>There is no excuse for this kind of patronage, and micromanagement of the judicial branch by the legislative branch of government.
<
p>The problems include not only the demoralizing and degrading impact of patronage on the quality of employees, but also:
<
p>1. Interference with the intended “checks and balances” created by equal and independent branches of government.
<
p>2. Violation of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, especially Article XI
<
p>3. Making a terrible budget worse because allocation of funding is not based on actual need but on buddy-to-buddy politics.
<
p>4. Interfering with the rehabilitation and supervision of those who have been convicted of criminal acts, families in need of mediation in the probate courts, and safety in court houses.
Do you have any concern that the judge would turn the courtroom into his/her private fief, running over justice with all his/her buddies around to stay mum?
<
p>I’d like to see this appointments made by the Governor’s Council, if we’re going to insist on having one…
Let’s just finally eliminate the Gov Council and maybe have the Judicial nominating committee approve hiring of Chief of Probation in the courts and leave hiring of PO with the Commissioners Office–with the commissioner DIRECTLY reporting to someone high up in the judicial branch CJ of SJC?
…I’d rather it be the elected Governor’s Council. Federal judges hire their own clerks and they don’t seem to have a problem.
The Governor’s Council is the worst of both worlds. They operate in complete obscurity and have to raise money for reelection.
<
p>We should be relieving them of their duties, not giving them more responsibilities.
Agreed that this is an excellent (and disturbing) piece by the Globe. Beyond the obvious hackery, this sort of behavior creates a couple of other negative snowball effects.
<
p>First, as the Globe notes, this has a sharply negative impact on agency morale. Imagine you are a competent, hard-working member of the probation department (and there are many). Not only are you in danger of facing career barriers because of the preference for unqualified hacks who don’t understand or care about the agency mission, but the agency you work for is now equated with egregious political corruption in the public eye – meaning that YOU are now equated with political corruption. It gets hard to say you work for the probation department without getting snickers about “how you got your job”, etc.
<
p>Second, this gives more ammunition for the anti-government ideologues who conclude on the basis of this clear corruption to suggest that “government is the problem”. Unfortunately, that means that all of government is equated with the few bad apples, which fits right in with the philosophy of the Tea Party crowd.
<
p>So for both of those reasons, it is clearly in Patrick’s best interest to strongly push his plan to shift the move probation away from the legislature. Not only does this hackery create potential political problems down the road (e.g., the lack of oversight of recently released prisoners leading to unchecked criminal activity by probationers), but it inevitably helps invigorate an anti-government message. In addition to being good policy, Deval can help stamp these political problems out by moving this issue even higher up on his priority list.
Below is a brief description, taken from an issues brief of the FY2011 budget, of the Governor’s plan to consolidate the Probation agency and address the concerns raised in today’s Globe story:
<
p>Benefits of Unification
Unification of probation and parole services under the Executive Branch and the consolidation of all supervision of offenders into the Department of Community Supervision under the Executive Branch will create a seamless continuum of services, decrease criminal activity and victimization, and reverse the extraordinary escalation of costs associated with duplication and inefficient administration of existing services within probation. This will improve public safety, reduce existing costs and avoid anticipated expenses associated with the growing prison population.
<
p>The consolidation of community supervision into one coherent organization, with shared services and information, will be more efficient, accountable and less costly to administer. Furthermore, having all correctional, supervision and re-entry responsibilities fall under the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security in the Executive branch (as it is in the vast majority of states) creates a seamless system of public safety. First-time and low-risk offenders would continue to be supervised, as they are now, in the community as an alternative to incarceration (traditional probation). Others will be sentenced to serve terms in the county or state correctional facilities and released through discretionary parole or receive mandatory supervision at the end of their sentence to serve terms of supervision in the community post-prison under the auspices of one oversight administration. This model also creates increased transparency and accountability to the public and Legislature.
<
p>The fragmented structure of the existing criminal justice system in Massachusetts has been highlighted as a central factor in the denial of several federal grants, including the Second Chance Act Prison Re-entry Initiative and the Transition from Prison to Community. This has resulted in the potential loss of millions of federal grant dollars and technical assistance.
<
p>Cost savings could be realized in several areas, including merging and consolidating the 21 community correction centers and 8 parole regional re-entry centers that duplicate services. To realize savings while improving services, the Commonwealth can:
<
p>
These reforms are long overdue. As far back as 2002, MassInc noted in its report From Cell to Street that Massachusetts had a bifurcated system that was inefficient and redundant and concluded that a single agency should have both the authority and responsibility to supervise released inmates. The report recommends that agency should be under the Executive Branch, as it is in most states. [ Piehl, Anne (2002). From Cell to Street: A Plan to Supervise Inmates After Release. Boston: MassInc. (The Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth). ]
Has he spoken to state representatives on this? The governor’s council? Has he encouraged sponsors to stand up for this provision?
<
p>I here a lot about the governor proposing things, and them dying a quiet death of neglect.
At least he said so himself in Boxboro today.
Marian Walsh!!
Harvard Pilgrim
thanks
Thanks for checking in. Here’s an easy question. You say “Gov Patrick proposed initiative in FY2011 Budget to solve Probation problem.” I say what took him so long? Is patronage all of a sudden an issue at the probation department? I am aware that he was not working on a fix to chapter 70, so he wasn’t exactly too busy. So why now? It feels like he’s taken a few years off. Patronage existed in the probation department in fy08, fy09, fy10, and still exists.
<
p>You say there are cost savings. Do tell! Could we have used the money in fy08, fy09, and fy10?
<
p>Thanks for checking in.
reforming transportation, some pension reform, some reform of police details, competitive auto insurance…things Rep Govs talked long and hard about but NEVER accomplished a thing…besides, it was under a Rep Gov that the reorg of Probation occurred that made it such a haven of patronage.
I am not as enthused about Deval’s so-called “reforms.” For instance where is the reform to school funding? I’d also appreciate a Rubin response. He posts here but when challenged he disappears.
but he does participate vigorously here. I think you know that. At any rate, the rest of us do.
He disappears when the questions get difficult. Maybe he’ll call. 🙂
After 16 years of Repbublican Governors, there were a lot of important reforms and issues facing Governor Patrick. Despite your dismissals of his work, it is true that he has successfully passed major reforms in auto insurance, transportation, pensions, ethics, and education, along with managing a state budget in the midst of a global economic crisis. I know this doesn’t address your one issue, but that fact doesn’t make these achievements any less important.
<
p>The fact is, the Gov put reform of the probation department in his FY2011 budget, and it is one of the issues he is working on to pass this year – well before today’s Globe story.
<
p>And honestly, I hope that I have proven to the BMG community that I not only post but welcome an aggressive back and forth on the issues.
<
p>On top of all the issues mentioned above, the Gov has set about to make real investments in our infrastructure as well as industries to help create jobs in the middle of this recession. We are starting to see results – nearly 30,000 new jobs in the last three months, all three rating agencies re-affirming the state’s credit rating and Gov Patrick’s fiscal management, and reports from the Fed Reserve, NEEP, and UMass saying that the MA economy is recovering faster and stronger than the rest of the country.
Still wonder why now and not a few years ago on the probation reform. It’s getting tiring blaming the GOP govs when the legislature was run by the Dems. Isn’t it time to move on?
<
p>BTW, how are we doing on the chapter 70 reform?
<
p>You know the drill. Go to 1 min 20 secs of the video.
<
p>
<
p>And this from Gov Patrick on BMG..July 8, 2008
<
p>
David, I understand you are passionate about this issue, and don’t agree with the Gov. But there are many other issues that any Governor must deal with on a regular basis, and that are equally important to other people.
<
p>My argument is that on a lot of important issues, Governor Patrick has achieved meaningful progress and reform – in particular, on a number of issues that previous Governor’s talked about but never delivered on. And that on many of the issues that the people of MA care about, Governor Patrick is a much better choice to continue that progress than either Charlie Baker, Tim Cahill or Jill Stein.
<
p>But I respect that you care deeply about ch. 70 reform, and to you that issue trumps all the others.
And yes I am passionate because my community is getting screwed. As are many others due to a formula that most honest folks in MA government would agree sucks.
<
p>For openers, this from Rep David Linsky (D-Natick):
<
p>
<
p>So Natick gets a $1.3 million increase in 2011? Huh??
<
p>Then this from Jeff Wulfson, Deputy Commissioner, DESE:
<
p>
<
p>Then this from Deval:
<
p>
<
p>Then there was the broken 17.5% promise that was suppossed to bring all communities to 17.5% of foundation budget by fy 2011. That promise was broken. 50 plus communities screwed.
<
p>You have Reps, Senators, and the Governor all agreeing with the DESE that the formula is flawed.
<
p>So yes I have passion and I am pissed, but your boss continues to talk about all the swell things that he has done. Well none of them are anymore important than the education of kids, two of which live in my house. The problem is that those kids live in the suburbs. Remember the ‘burbs? That’s where the property tax relief was suppossed to help solve our issues.
<
p>By the way, as I said previously, the excuse that you use over and over about 16 yrs of GOP govs is crap. You had a Democratic Legislature and during those 16 years and still nothing. This Governor has nibbled at the edges of reform and you have the unfortunate job of having to defend half assed change. You must be paid well.
<
p>Take a look at ch 70 sect 4 sometime and ask Deval why they have not conducted the REQUIRED study since 2000.
<
p>
David, happy to engage in the debate with you over issues, but its too bad you can’t do it without the cheap shots about being “paid well” and disappearing when “the questions get difficult”.
<
p>For the record, I support the Gov because I have three daughters growing up in MA, I care deeply about making MA a great place for them to grow up, and I strongly believe he is the best person to lead this state over the next four years.
Cheap shots are like broken promises. As the Governor about the 17.5% broken promise and ask Rep Linsky how he get Natick a $1.3 million increase in ch 70 aid while the rest of us regular folk get 4% reductions.
“David, happy to engage in the debate with you over issues”
Maybe the “paid well” comment was unnecessary and not all that relevant to the discussion, but I missed where you were engaging the issue —
<
p>David may well be a Baker supporter and therefore easier to dismiss, but I’m not — I’m a progressive Democrat who is pretty upset that the Governor has ignored (what I consider to be) a huge issue for the past four years – especially after making it such a talking point of his first campaign. You may not like the delivery, but David’s right.
<
p>Gloucester continues to get abused by the Chapter 70 formula. Everyone knows it doesn’t work and yet no one will touch it. Couple that with the flaccid response to the inappropriate granting of the Gloucester Charter School and you’re looking at a pretty tough row to hoe in this neck of the woods…
<
p>We all want our state to be a better place for our kids, and I do appreciate your efforts to help achieve that, but unless yours are in a public school system that has been on the short end of state funding for as many years as ours, perhaps your perspective on this particular issue may be a bit more academic than practical.
Doug. When do we convene the ch 70 sect 4 Foundation Budget Review Commission? Its the law and its been ignored.
This is a thread about the probation department, not about Dave Whelan’s personal pet peeve, Chapter 70. It’s he who is off topic, not Doug.
In my view, the continued discussion of “Chapter 70” is interfering with this thread. Meanwhile, the simultaneous boorish and hostile comments directed towards other participants demean all of us.
<
p>I think this Chapter 70 material, together with the rude comments, should be relocated to its own thread or removed altogether.
This is a discussion forum. It is not a picket line.
<
p>If every discussion of the Governor has to be hijacked by concerns over Chapter 70, this forum is diminished.
the best laws in the world – and the best organizational structure do not protect the public if the courts are eviscerated and access to justice is lost.
<
p>Failure to support an independent judiciary, and eviscerating the 6th Amendment Bar are not tolerable. Both actions show a basic lack of understanding of the doctrine of separation of powers, lack of respect for the rule of law, and place those without power and influence at high risk of loss of rights, and undue influence by the powerful – just like the closing of Fernald and how this is being handled demonstrates.
<
p>Those of us who love the rule the law and hope for democracy rather than class rule by an economic elite have hard and unhappy choices in this election, and little joy in the process.
screws up the right margins
<
p>It’s fine once in a while, but it’s said far too often. It sounds self-satisfied that the job is done, and now we can rest on our laurels.
<
p>Perhaps we are recovering faster and stronger but no-one is feeling it yet. As a matter of fact, what people are feeling right now is the impact of cuts in school programs from reduced state funding. Currently, we are fighting to get the music program re-instated for 2011, after it was cut because of reduced funding. It not funny at all and doesn’t feel like it merits any sort of dance party or celebration. This type of loss in our school system has an impressively negative impact on our children and their entire future.
<
p>Governor Patrick has to stop looking out at the forest and take a few moments to check out the trees. Saying the rain is coming soon does not help at all when the last vestiges of moisture were used up yesterday.
Spin this one. 4,000 teachers losing their jobs next year. I think its time for some comprehensive ed reform.
Every May and June we hear of teacher layoffs. Every September, they’re back at work.
…that there is still work to do. He is seeking a second term, as he says, not as a reward for the first, but to finish what was started.
The Republicans have their story down. It’s called tax cuts. Cut taxes and — poof! — excellent economy.
<
p>The state has had to increase taxes.
<
p>Unless the governor makes his case, we’ll have a new governor.
Judges don’t hire executive branch employees.
<
p>The Executive Branch doesn’t hire the legislatures employees.
<
p>The legislature doesn’t choose the Governor’s employees, either.
<
p>For each branch to be truely independent and co-equal, that branch has to be able to manage its own affairs.
<
p>I am just as opposed to the Executive choosing clerks and probation officers as I am to the legislature’s undue influence over what John Adams designed to be an independent and coequal branch of government.
<
p>The rule of law and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts both require an independent, equal judicial branch. Period.
<
p>I know that civics hasn’t been taught in the schools in this state for at least two decades. Sadly, it shows.
It’d be a good idea to merge the Probation and Parole functions under the Executive branch, provided the judicial power to manage courthouses and to issue binding orders would not be impeded. Sadly, the Globe’s Probation Department story could have been written about countless other state agencies and authorities. It’s really a reflection of the culture of corruption and cronyism that pervades our One-Party state. In the spirit of solving the problem rather than trashing state employees (most of whom are hard-working and perform important missions with little fanfare and less thanks), I have proposed seven steps to improve the Probation Service:
<
p>1. The Probation Commissioner and Top Managers Should Serve a Fixed Term, Coterminous with the Chief Justice for Administration and Management, and At the Pleasure of the Chief Justice. Under current law, the Chief Justice is subject to review and reappointment every five years, while the Probation Commissioner has no limit on the term of his appointment;
<
p> 2. The Judicial Branch budget should be a single lump sum by the Legislative Branch, with appropriate Performance Measures to Assure that Public Monies are Responsibly Spent. Under current law, the Legislature controls the internal management of the Trial Court by line-items for every courthouse and specific functions within the Judicial branch. Aside from the likely constitutional problems from such violation of the separation of powers, the Probation Department example shows that Legislative micromanagement of the Judiciary leads to waste, lack of accountability, and abuse of power;
<
p> 3. The Trial Court Should Immediately Accept Payment by Checks and Credits Cards Instead of Requiring Cash Only. Most courthouses in Massachusetts do not accept checks or credit card payments, leaving court employees to handle more than $100 million in cash each year. A cash-based system has led to corruption and waste, especially since Probation Officers (whose time would be better spent assuring that defendants remain clean, straight and sober) are responsible for chasing payments that easily could be made by credit cards. Payment for routine matters, such as fees and fines for non-defaulting defendants, also should be handled over the Internet, rather than requiring people to miss a day of work to pay money to court in cash in person;
<
p> 4. The Probation Department Staffing Levels, Including Management, Should be Indexed to Caseloads and Benchmark Years Such as 2000. The number of Full-Time Equivalent Employees (“FTE”) in the Probation Department has increased even as the volume of criminal cases in Massachusetts decreased. While some of that increase can be attributed to a fundamental and positive mission shift (for which Jack O’Brien deserves credit) to get Probation Officers into the community instead of sitting behind their desks, the Legislature should base budget decisions indexed to the FTE count as of 2000, before the legislative changes that led to the explosive growth of patronage hires.
<
p> 5. Massachusetts Should Use the Internet, Similar to USAJobs.gov, to Create a Transparent and Objective System to Evaluate the Threshold Qualifications for New Hires and to Create Equal Opportunity for Persons to be Hired for Probation Jobs on Merit. The federal government uses a public website, http://www.usajobs.gov, to advertise new positions and to accept resumes from interested applicants. If an applicant fails to meet the minimum requirements for education and experience, the website automatically rejects such applications. Massachusetts has no such one-stop, transparent internet-based system to accept and screen applications for employment at the state, county, authority and local levels. Ironically, the usajobs.gov website is operated by a Massachusetts company, monster.com.
<
p> 6. Eliminate the Probation Department’s Exemption from the Public Records Law for Performance Metrics, Such as Recidivism Rates and Caseloads, To Ensure that Tax Dollars are Being Effectively Managed. The Probation Department is exempt from the state’s Public Records law, as part of the state Judicial Branch. The Legislature has a proper role to ensure that state government is effective and accountable to the people, and should define non-defendant specific metrics to assess Judicial branch performance. The public and legislators need to know what programs work and which do not work in the Probation Department, so that best practices can be replicated and wasteful and ineffective programs can be terminated.
<
p> 7. Provide Management Training and Oversight to Correct or Weed Out Non-Performing Employees and Eliminate the Conflict of Interest of Managers in the Employee Union. Many Probation Department staff with management responsibilities are members of the same union as the employees they supervise. Some top managers even retain “drop back” rights to rejoin the union in the unlikely event their management jobs are eliminated. The single greatest impediment to an effective workforce is ineffective management. The Trial Court should develop and train all management employees in progressive discipline and management skills to prevent politically-connected employees and others from no show or low show work habits.
do you support the Governor’s proposal? And if you do, will you back it if you’re elected?
And will continue to support this and other reform ideas, regardless of who sits in the Corner Office, if elected to the House. I’m a Baker booster, but good people need to work across Party lines to get things done.
Really appreciate your ideas and your willingness to work together to try to make things better. These are really interesting proposals – I will review them with the Governor and the rest of our team.
Thanks Doug. I’m running for the House because there are so many opportunities to effect positive change for the Commonwealth. To that end, Proposals 1, 2, 4 and 6 all require legislative enactment (although the Governor certainly has a leadership role in that process.) Proposal 6 is a Trial Court action item. Proposal 3 could be done by the Treasurer tomorrow, by leveraging the state’s deposits in banks to receive free credit card transaction capabilities for all courthouses. And Proposal 5 could be done by the Governor tomorrow by forbidding any Executive agency from spending public funds to advertise positions other than via a “MassJobs.gov” website, and using those savings to fund the site acquisition.
They sound like good starting points.