BAKER BUDGET COOKS UP LAB QUAGMIRE COVERAGE
Farak, Dookhan cases still costing taxpayers
As they grapple with an evertightening budget, state beancounters are setting aside $2 million to continue covering costs from the fallout of the state’s drug lab scandals, underscoring the stubbornness of a crisis that refuses to die five years after it first broke.
The cash, included in spending plans submitted by Gov. Charlie Baker, the House and Senate, is earmarked for the Hinton Lab Response Reserve, which was set up in 2013 in the wake of chemist Annie Dookhan’s mishandling of thousands of drug samples. But Baker’s budget office says it’s also for costs tied to the Amherst drug lab where chemist Sonja Farak was accused of dipping into narcotics for at least eight years, potentially jeopardizing thousands of other cases.
The proposal would cover “new anticipated costs for the investigation and response related to the allegations of misconduct,” said Sarah Finlaw, a spokeswoman for the Office of Administration and Finance. The office did not describe the basis of the new costs.
It would add to an already stunning amount of time and money spent on corralling the scandals’ aftershocks. The state in 2013 created a $30 million fund to cover costs from the Hinton lab, of which roughly $20.3 million was spent, according to Baker’s budget office. But it also sustained heavy cuts amid the state’s previous budget woes. Then-Gov. Deval Patrick slashed $9 million from it in 2014 and Baker cut another $800,000 shortly after taking office to help close a budget gap. At the time, a Baker spokesman said that the reserve fund “was never intended to be a recurring funding source for routine operations.” No money was allocated for it either last fiscal year or in this one. Yet, it’s surfacing again for 2018, even after it appeared the problems tied to Dookhan had all but been put to rest. Last month, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that more than 21,500 cases tied to the Hinton scandal would be dismissed, and defense lawyers said at the time they didn’t believe there was anyone left in jail with a case tainted by Dookhan. It’s also now been a year since a state probe determined that Farak’s actions were more farreaching than authorities first let on, opening new questions of her actions’ impact. Keep in mind, Dookhan was first arrested in 2012, Farak in 2013. They’ve both already been sentenced, served prison sentences and earned their release.
So, in the eyes of the law, they paid their price. The state is still paying its.
Personal assessment
House leaders turned heads on Beacon Hill last month when they opted to give Baker control of the details of a proposed new health care fee on employers, arguably the most closely watched policy change of this year’s spending bill.
The proposal could ultimately cost the head of the House’s powerful budget committee personally, if albeit minimally.
State Rep. Brian Dempsey, the chamber’s Ways and Means chairman, is himself an employer at the appropriately named Brian S. Dempsey Insurance Agency, where he reported making more than $100,000 last year, according to a financial disclosure.
Last month, he notified the Ethics Commission that he could possibly be impacted by the fee, and in a statement to the Herald, stressed that any decisions he makes on the state’s purse strings “are made based on analysis, research and discussion and in the best interests of the Commonwealth and my constituents,” not any potential personal effects.
But, his office stressed, any hit on Dempsey’s own bottom line would be small. He has just one employee, according to a spokeswoman, and if the assessment proposed by Baker stand as is, he’d pay nothing because his business wouldn’t hit the 10-employee threshold Baker included. (The Senate, in also deferring to Baker, also proposed raising it to 25 employees.)
Nevertheless, the mere presence of Dempsey’s private sector role is notable, given the influence he has on state finances and the few times, if any, it’s reared its head during his time atop the budget committee.