Public soaked by teapot tempest

An integrity commissioner’s investigation of a recent speech by Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig was a complete waste of time and taxpayers’ money.

It’s no surprise that the mayor today stands cleared of any wrongdoing.

It’s no surprise that the integrity commissioner concluded Craig most definitely did not violate the city’s code of conduct when he referred to two female council members, but not a third, at a public gathering earlier this year.

What is surprising — and galling — is that a minor complaint about a few innocuous words spoken by the mayor snowballed into a full report by the city’s integrity commissioner, the firm Agree Inc., and a $3,449.33 bill to city taxpayers. The public got soaked for this tempest in a teapot. It’s ironic, moreover, that the mayor’s praise of two female politicians precipitated the complaint. Talk about letting no good deed go unpunished.

Craig told the audience at an International Women’s Day breakfast in March that he considered Cambridge councillors Pam Wolf and Donna Reid to be mentors who helped shape his values on women’s issues. That’s it.

Most people would class that as a fine gesture, an expression of sincere gratitude from one politician to two respected colleagues.

But Cambridge citizen Uwe Kretschmann took umbrage, even though he wasn’t at the breakfast and only heard about the speech second hand.

Kretschmann alleged the mayor broke the city’s code of conduct because he failed to mention by name a third female Cambridge city councillor, Jan Liggett, who was also attending the breakfast.

We disagree and note the integrity commissioner reached the same conclusion.

Craig singled out Wolf and Reid for praise because he considers them mentors.

Since Craig apparently doesn’t put Coun. Liggett in the same category, he caused neither slight nor insult when he did not refer to her by name. Period.

Beyond this, we can’t see how this minnow of a complaint got caught up in the integrity commissioner’s net.

Cambridge’s code of conduct says city politicians are supposed to behave “with decorum, courtesy, respect, propriety, decency … and with the understanding that all members of the public, other members and staff are to be treated with dignity, courtesy and empathy.”

The mayor’s words did not violate this standard in any way. Moreover, it seems unfair to go after him for what he didn’t say, not what he did.

The unanswered question is: Why did the complaint merit such a comprehensive and expensive response by the integrity commissioner?

As a citizen, Kretschmann has a right to go to the integrity commissioner.

But in this case, a fair and thorough review of his complaint should have resulted in its dismissal in a matter of hours and for a fraction of what the investigation eventually cost.

It’s important that municipal governments are governed by clear codes of conduct that say what politicians can and can’t do.

But integrity commissioners need to have the discretion and discernment to take on the big cases and not sweat the small stuff.

Craig’s omission of a colleague’s name at a breakfast speech is small stuff.