As an ethics motivational speaker and ethics consultant, I am particularly disappointed whenever I encounter a scandal involving those who are presumably supposed to be in the public trust. Yet, the numerous violations we see in state and municipal governments across the nation, seems to go on unabated under the cover of a lack of oversite.
The Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
The Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission has been involved in an investigation of Michelle Estabrook, who is the Register/Recorder for Susquehanna County.
According to Staci Wilson, staff writer for the Susquehanna County Independent (June 2, 2022):
“Michelle Estabrook violated the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act when she contracted with her daughter to perform an audit of the office’s books.”
As the contract was valued at more than $500, it was subject to review by the public.
Said the ethics commission when the results of their investigation were completed on May 24, 2022:
“When Estabrook entered into a contract valued at $500 or more with her daughter on behalf of the County Register and Recorder’s Office without an open and public process, and when she had supervisory and/or overall responsibility for the implementation and/or administration of the contract.”
To make matters worse for Ms. Estabrook (According to Staci Wilson):
“Another violation occurred when Estabrook authorized payments to her daughter by issuing and signing checks…Estabrook has repaid the amount taken ($12,000) from the office’s Records Improvement fund.”
However, it would appear that Estabrook has not made restitution to the fund as yet.
Too close for comfort
The ethical rules governing nepotism in government are well defined in virtually every municipality in the nation. In the case of Susquehanna County, those rules made it clear that no contract in excess of $500 may be blindly awarded, and the contracts must be open to public review. The award of a $12,000 contract for auditing was not only in violation of the ethical rules set up by the county, but it violated policies in regard to nepotism. Obviously, we don’t know if another bidder might have charged less.
However, larger issues loom. In hiring her own daughter to conduct an audit, might there have been irregularities that Michelle Estabrook wanted no one to see? It could be the perfect scam in that a family member, auditing the books for another family member, covered up irregularities and no one would be the wiser.
Argument for an outside ethics consultant
The point in this discussion is not the amount of the contract ($12,000), but the lack of oversite and the apparent disregard for consequences. There are pictures of Michelle Estabrook taking an oath, hand placed on a bible, but who taught her to behave in that office with a sense of ethics?
Granted, Susquehanna County in Pennsylvania is not the same as being head clerk and recorder of Los Angeles or New York City. Then again, does it make a difference? If no one allegedly noticed that Estabrook gave her daughter a fat contract, what other unethical behaviors were ignored?
Without a sense of ethics and on-going ethical training, what do smaller municipalities do? Clearly a system of checks and balances should have been established. It does not appear that was the case in Susquehanna County. Aside from the lack of oversite, what was the need that led to this political scandal? Was it simply money or, as I suggested, was there an arrogance in place where Estabrook felt she needed no explanations made to anyone?
Then we come to rationalization. As Register/Recorder, Estabrook knew about the “$500 Rule.” She ignored it; how did she rationalize ignoring it?
With a set of reinforced, ethical guidelines this, and numerous other municipal violations could be avoided. It is often wondered why there is so little faith in government? It starts locally and builds. Unethical behavior is to blame.
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS!
