In the La Crosse Tribune, there’s a story about a police dog who found a parole violator after only two hours’ time on the job.

After the unfortunate injuries from a police dog in Edgerton, Wisconsin, it’s reassuring to see that the combination of a good dog and a competent handler will produce good results.

See, NY Police Dog Finds Parole Violator on Dog’s First Day of Service.

The hypocrisy of men who call themselves public servants and public officials while concealing their misdeeds from the public is nearly boundless. Milwaukee County offers a recent example. Since Lynne De Bruin revealed the immoral utilitarianism of Milwaukee bureaucrat John Chianelli, where he exposed female mental patients to risk of sexual assault in mixed gender wards, some Milwaukee County supervisors have wanted to censure her for telling the truth about official policy.

Milwaukee County supervisor Lee Holloway and his ilk have proposed a censure motion against De Bruin for revealing Chianelli’s policy. Since she revealed that policy, reports and inspections have revealed abuse after abuse at the Milwaukee County Behavioral Health Division. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that a possible De Bruin censure advances to full board since a board judiciary committee deadlocked 3-3 on whether to advance the motion:

….De Bruin said she had no regrets over releasing the letter. Closed-door remarks April 14 of behavioral health Administrator John Chianelli were so outrageous they deserved disclosure, she said.

Chianelli suggested in the closed session that dangerous male patients were housed in the same units with female patients as a trade-off, De Bruin’s letter said. The trade-off was acceptance of some sexual violence against female patients as preferable to violence an all-male ward might cause, the letter said.

De Bruin also justified releasing Chianelli’s letter because she said he lied to supervisors during the April 14 session on the extent of sexual assault among patients at the county’s Mental Health Complex.

Chianelli wasn’t at Tuesday’s meeting and has declined to comment on De Bruin’s account. Two supervisors have verified Chianelli’s remarks as reported by De Bruin….Censure actions elsewhere are reserved for grievous legal or ethical violations, not for disclosures like hers, De Bruin said. No censure attempt of a county supervisor has been done for at least several decades, according to county officials.

“I am not a saint, but I have done nothing – absolutely nothing – wrong in this situation,” said De Bruin, an 18-year board veteran….

Supervisor John Weishan Jr. said there were no legal grounds to censure De Bruin, noting that no law or county rule bans disclosure of closed session remarks.

Holloway and other supporters of a closed-door, conceal-from-the public approach surely know that a censure effort is politically risky. It’s sure to generate, at least initially, more publicity and support for those seeking reform of the Milwaukee County mental health system. What they must hope, I’d guess, is that if censure succeeds, they’ll be able to taint De Bruin, and distract people from the many failures, abuses, lies, and excuses under administrator Chianelli.

It won’t work. Too much has been revealed, there’s a pending lawsuit against the county (and more on the way, I’d guess), and normal people see how disorderd and neglectful Chianelli’s leadership has been.

This insiders’ effort will be unavailing. There should be, and will be, no compromise with Chianell’s policy, no turning away from the injuries he’s inflicted, and no end to principled advocacy against his detestable policy and those who have flacked and defended that policy.

I’ve posted about Chianelli’s policy, and the tragedy that is conduct at the MHC, before. See, A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update: A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update 2, Update 3, Update 4, Update 5, Update 6, Update 7, Update 8 and Update 9.

I posted earlier today about a CNBC discussion of financial reporting requirements for federal legislators. I’d not abandon those disclosure requirements, although some libertarians might contend otherwise. (There’s also a difference, by the way, from a reporting requirement and a requirement that legislators divest assets.)

I’m sure of two things. First, legislators and bureaucrats meddle too often in private economic and personal activities. Second, conflict of interest principles are recognized and enforced selectively to the benefit of incumbents.

One need not look to Washington, D.C. to find how officials reap rewards from deals and dealings to which ordinary voters would not able able to participate.

In the Wisconsin State Journal, there’s a special report entitled, DOT official’s company rings up hundreds of thousands of dollars in state business.

(Note that in the Wisconsin situation, there’s not simply an issue of holding assets in a field one regulates, but awarding contracts that favor one’s business. The former implies a possibility of gain; the latter is predicated on it.)

Here’s a description of the story on Wisconsin DOT conflicts:

A company co-owned by a state transportation official has done hundreds of thousands of dollars in business with the state – some of it with the official’s own agency – raising questions about whether he used his government job for private gain, a Wisconsin State Journal investigation has found.

Carl Guse, who manages the radio channels used by emergency responders, and a partner have for years bought rights to frequencies that were later sold to the state, some at an enormous profit.

Several experts questioned the sales, saying the type of frequencies the state buys are normally available to public safety agencies for free.

Guse’s outside work has had the blessing of his bosses at the Department of Transportation, who have made some efforts to insulate him from state purchasing decisions.

But it’s unclear whether his superiors were aware of the extent to which Guse – privately dubbed by some associates “the god of radio” for his considerable knowledge and expertise in the arcane world of emergency communications – profited from state actions over which he had some influence.

The state and a private group charged by the Federal Communications Commission with coordinating public-safety radio frequencies are reviewing Guse’s official actions in light of his extensive private business interests. Guse, whose salary is $59,833 a year, has been the State Patrol’s frequency specialist since 1997.

If you had a business, and wanted to sell your services to the state, how would you feel if a competitor was advising the state on the choice of a supplier?

Over three-quarters of a million dollars has been spent on radio spectrum for projects over which Guse had influence.

Some of Guse’s supervisors may not have known he extent of his businesses interests, but others surely did. This isn’t a matter of mere disclosure; it’s a matter of alleged misuse of influence, amounting to large sums for radio-frequency purchases.

One other point — a conflict or the appearance of a conflict can be damaging to the public interest and the public trust. That’s why abandoning disclosure requirements strikes me as mistaken idea — better to see officials’ interests openly.

Insiders typically say the same things when confronted with a possible conflict: That’s not what I intended, I would never do that, of course I would always exercise good judgment, etc. They assume that they should be trusted based on their self-professed rectitude. (It’s mostly self-professed, by the way, and often professed vehemently at the slightest challenge.)

Explaining an arrangement like the one Guse had — explaining it with a straight face — is almost impossible. That’s one good sign that he never should have had such an arrangment.

Congratulations to John Chianelli, administrator of Milwaukee County’s Behavorial Health Division, who has now earned an entry in Chuck Shepherd’s famous “News of the Weird” column. Here’s the entry (accurately) describing Chianelli’s mental health policy for Milwaukee County:

Questionable judgments

— Standing firm under severe local criticism, John Chianelli (the chief mental-health administrator of Milwaukee County, Wis.) has begun housing aggressive males and vulnerable females together in the same unit. Chianelli defended his decision with research showing that, in similar facilities, female patients provided a civilizing influence that reduced males’ propensities to violence — at least males’ violence against other males.

Questionable and reprehensible, both.

I’ve posted about Chianelli’s policy, and the tragedy that is conduct at the MHC, before. See, A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update: A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update 2, Update 3, Update 4, Update 5, Update 6, Update 7, and Update 8.

There’s more, this morning, in the news about Milwaukee County’s Mental Health Complex. A MIlwaukee Journal Sentinel story reports on a state inspection of that county’s Mental Health Complex, revealing all manner of deficiencies. See, State inspectors’ reports find shoddy conditions at Mental Health Complex. Should anyone be surprised that the “[r]eport finds ‘ceilings, walls and floors in disrepair, broken fixtures, insufficient lighting, poor ventilation?”

John Chianelli has disgraced his profession, county, and state with a disordered policy that trades male on male violence for male on female sexual assault. For that alone, we should have been fired. It’s no surprise though, that a man who overlooks patient safety by implementing an immoral policy might also overlook basic needs of his facility and patient care.

The Journal Sentinel describes the state inspection findings:

Milwaukee County comes under fire by state inspectors for shoddy conditions at the Mental Health Complex, including a series of fire and other patient safety violations, in three reports released Monday.

The inspection reports also found the county psychiatric hospital had further erred by failing to properly maintain patient records, failing to get the proper OK for administering medications and not having complete records on physical restraints and drugs used on patients. The reports also found poor oversight of private contractors responsible for food safety and medical records.

Inspectors found moldy shower areas, standing water in a hospital laundry and dirty food service areas, with an infestation of fruit flies around foul-smelling garbage, a state report found. Clean and dirty towels were intermingled in laundry rooms, a report said.

The county has 45 days to correct the problems or could face a possible cutoff of federal funding, which comes to some $40 million a year.

Otis Woods, administrator for the state Division of Quality Assurance, called the findings “very serious.” His division conducted an unannounced licensure survey starting May 11. Those findings were the basis for separate state and federal reports laying out deficiencies at the Mental Health Complex….

Inspectors touring the complex found “ceilings, walls and floors in disrepair, broken fixtures, insufficient lighting, poor ventilation” and locked storage rooms for which no one had the keys, the state report said.

The federal inspection reports found that the county’s Mental Health Complex failed standards for overall management of the hospital and its physical condition, based on the lengthy list of shortcomings….

[County Executive Scott] Walker couldn’t be reached for further comment. John Chianelli, the administrator for the county’s Behavioral Health Division, also couldn’t be reached.

I’ve posted about Chianelli’s policy, and the tragedy that is conduct at the MHC, before. See, A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update: A Milwaukee County Bureaucrat’s Immoral Utilitarianism, Update 2, Update 3, Update 4, Update 5, Update 6, and Update 7 more >>