Ethics board shouldn’t include political payback
He has helped propel many New Mexico Democrats to victory, the most recent being Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller.
But accomplished political operative Alan Packman will put on a different hat Thursday and preside over an ethics case filed against Republican Wayne Johnson, one of Keller’s fiercest opponents in the 2017 mayor’s race.
The idea that Packman — who serves as chairman of Bernalillo County’s Code of Conduct Review Board — could be impartial on this matter is absurd. Even if that weren’t the case, there is clearly an appearance of a conflict of interest, and that is reason enough for Packman to recuse himself.
Absent that, the other members of the board should sideline him and prohibit him from having any additional say on this matter — if they want the system to retain its integrity.
The ethics case in question revolves around a $2,500 campaign contribution Johnson’s mayoral campaign received from the CEO of a company that entered into a nearly $14 million contract with the county. At the time, Johnson was a Bernalillo County commissioner, although he now serves as state auditor. Johnson and the other four commissioners voted to award that contract in December.
The ethics complaint alleges he violated the county’s code of conduct by accepting more than $1,000 from a “restricted donor.” Restricted donors are defined, in part, as individuals or companies doing business with or seeking to do business with the county. Johnson denies violating any rules.
To be clear, we’re not saying that the complaint filed is without merit. That’s for the review board to determine.
But having Packman involved in this case taints the board’s work and raises the specter that the county’s ethics process can be used by political operatives to bloody their enemies. Who does that serve? Certainly not the tax-paying public. Packman has already crossed the line, presiding over an earlier hearing. The board’s attorney says the board received no formal objections by the March 9 deadline, but Johnson contends his attorney did raise the issue during that February hearing, to no avail. Besides, Johnson says, it’s the obligation of the review board member to reveal conflicts and recuse under the county code that governs the board.
Johnson was hit with a previous ethics complaint back in September. Packman recused himself then; that case was ultimately dismissed after the time limit for dealing with the complaint expired. Packman was right to recuse himself during that case. It’s unfortunate he chose not to do it again.
Our concern about Packman’s impartiality isn’t just the fact that his company, Rio Strategies, ran Keller’s mayoral campaign, although that would certainly be enough.
Johnson filed two ethics complaints of his own against Keller during the mayoral campaign, complaints that were handled by the city’s Board of Ethics & Campaign Practices. During one of those hearings, an attorney representing Johnson called both Packman and Keller to the stand and grilled them. Johnson’s attorney introduced embarrassing emails, including one from former Democratic Lt. Gov. Diane Denish criticizing Packman for his handling of the matter.
In that case, the city ethics board eventually ruled that Keller and his publicly financed campaign broke the rules by accepting monetary donations and trying to pass them off as in-kind donations, although the board determined Keller didn’t mean to break the rules.
The bottom line here is Keller and Packman were dragged through the mud during that ethics hearing spawned by Johnson’s complaint. Having Packman now sit in judgment of Johnson is just wrong, and leaves the perception that the county’s Code of Conduct Review Committee can be used as a kangaroo court in which political payback rules.
Frankly, given what Packman does for a living, he should focus on his day job, resign from the board and open a spot for a nonpartisan individual. If he won’t, his fellow board members or the commissioner who appointed him, Maggie Hart Stebbins, should give him a much-needed nudge.