The travelogue of the world's Corrupt Cities includes DC, what does that say about us?

Speaking of corruption, because I had been away and not reading the Washington Post, I was unaware of the issue of $86 million in construction contracts being given to people especially connected to Mayor Fenty, contracts let without Council approval--DC law requires that all contracts of $1 million or more be approved by the City Council. See "Housing Authority contracts 'illegal': PROJECTS MUST BE RESUBMITTED 'This was not something that agencies can just do'."

Of course, the fact that the "Attorney General" says the contracts are legal, see "D.C. parks contracts are legal, official says: Nickles had said housing group broke law in approval process" from the Post, only reiterates the need to have the Attorney General position be popularly elected. Peter Nickles proves that it is difficult for the holder of the position as appointed by the Mayor to be able to balance the responsibilities "to the people" as well as to his boss.

You don't transfer monies to an under-transparent unit of the government, technically independent with a 501(c)3 status, because you are trying to speed things up, but because you are trying to do things under the table. Directors of the Parks Department, Clark Ray and Ximena Hartsock, had to know that this smelled--and was illegal, a violation of contracting procedures. But they did what they were told to do.

Interesting that the Post put this on the front page of the Metro section and not the front page. And the editorial, Mr. Fenty's end run: The D.C. Council needs some answers on $82 million in contracts" is so even handed it's pathetic.

From the editorial:

Mr. Fenty denied any involvement in selecting any of the firms. Administration officials said the practice of using the housing authority to award contracts started in the administration of former mayor Anthony A. Williams because of longstanding problems in the city's procurement process and the authority's expertise in getting work completed. Moreover, they said that all 20 contracts, including the one to Banneker to manage the projects, were competitively bid and that they will conduct a review to ensure that proper procedures were followed. They note that if they wanted to conceal the contracts, they wouldn't have invited council members to groundbreakings for the projects.

The "coincidence" of someone connected to the Mayor getting some of these contracts, see "The New Cronies: Adrian Fenty, some frat buddies, and $86 million in city spending" from the Washington City Paper, is hardly coincidence. And the Post editorial page, the Mayor's biggest cheerleader, is being cute and indirect in order to ignore the obvious.

If this was done in the federal government, or another government agency, heads would roll. Look at how much coverage the Post has given to the shenanigans of the Director of the Montgomery County Office of Planning, Rollin Stanley, and improprieties of his administration. The amounts of money, $3,000 in one case, were minimal, although the mistakes in judgement ("Montgomery Planning Chief Gives Up Government-Issued Credit Card" and "Montgomery Planner Tried to Hinder Audit, Report Finds" from the Post, and also see "Montgomery planning chief blocked probe of computer failures from the Examiner) were significant.

Still, the behavior pales in view of what the Post takes in stride every day coming from the halls of municipal government in DC--the Wilson Building.

If we were to count the column inches devoted to the Rollin Stanley story, vs. the Parks contracting story, I bet more space has been devoted to the MoCo story so far, despite the reality that the amounts of money in question are thousands of times greater in DC.

I don't see how this kind of behavior is any different from what happened during the Barry Mayoralty. See "A dream deferred; a black mayor betrays the faith" from the Washington Monthly in 1986. This article, by then Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Chuck Stone, was about black mayors Wilson Goode of Philadelphia, with a sidebar on the Washington situation. (This article came out more than one decade before the book I frequently tout, Dream City.)

It's as if the Post's historical memory only goes back a couple weeks.

But it is the flip side of what I wrote about yesterday in terms of Fred Siegel's discussion of the municipal entitlement economy. And yes, it's but another example of how the levers, and in particular the spending, of government are used to build fortunes by rewarding friends.

I guess with those community campaigns sponsored by libraries ("ONE BOOK" READING PROMOTION PROJECTS (Center for the Book, Library of Congress), where they promote everybody reading one particular book, and coming together in a variety of events to discuss it, well, I recommend Corrupt Cities: A Practical Guide to Cure and Prevention.

From the description of the book

Corrupt Cities is a practical guide to assist in the diagnosis, investigation and prevention of various kinds of corruption. Bringing together both a conceptual and practical framework, the publication is designed for citizens and public officials, especially at the municipal level. The approach presented discourages more controls, more laws and more bureaucracy, while focusing on systematic corruption and its preventive measurers. It encourages consideration of the economic costs of corruption, rather than moral or ethical factors, as the driving force behind anti-corruption efforts. It also emphasises that "fighting corruption should not be considered an end in itself, but an orienting principle for reforming urban administration."

The arguments put forth are supported by examples of anti-corruption strategies, particularly from Hong Kong and La Paz. The publication also includes practical tips to adapt these strategies to difficult scenarios, for example, in cities/communities characterised by political indifference, bureaucratic inertia, and where citizen support may exist but is yet to be mobilised.

Ironically, coming back on the plane I was talking with a college student sitting next to me. She is studying business, at a university in Michigan. I opined that there is something to be said for "competition" in government, given how the oligopolistic "Democratic" control of municipal government in DC leads to terrible behaviors and actions. I didn't even know about this most recent example that decisively proves my point.