|
|
|
The Art of the Deal
|
Business New Haven
9/11/1995
By: BNH
|
Because our pals at the New Haven Register booted this one, you may not before now have been aware of last month's breathtaking example of conflict of interest at the highest levels of state government.
Earlier this year Arthur H. Diedrick was appointed by Gov. John G. Rowland to head the state's Department of Economic Development (DED). In that capacity he is ex officio chairman of the Connecticut Tourism Council, which annually oversees the publication of the Connecticut Tourism Guide. It's a major project: This year's guide, published by Parker Media Inc. of Hartford, is a glossy, four-color 148-page magazine praising the marvels of the Nutmeg State to potential visitors. The publication run is 450,000 copies.
That's a big job, one which went out to bid this year. Following the recommendation of the tourism council, DED awarded the contract to Connecticut Magazine, which is based in Bridgeport, but owned by the New York-based Communications International. And the president of Communications International is - who would have guessed it? - Arthur H. Diedrick (see related stories, page 1 and page 10).
The state will pay Diedrick's company $292,000 in 1996 and a commensurate figure the following year. (That bid, it is worth noting, was the second-highest among the four finalists, although cost was not the sole criterion.)
Diedrick defended his position by telling the Hartford Courant that he was “not involved” in the decision-making process. He said the final call was made by deputy DED commissioner Peter N. Dibble. Even if that is so, what employee would purposely displease his boss? It is surpassingly cynical to suggest that Diedrick's role as owner of Connecticut Magazine did not influence the contract award.
Speaking August 10 to radio attack dog Tom Scott on WELI-AM, Diedrick defied credulousness in defending the decision because the job might otherwise have gone out of state to a company such as the New York Times Custom Publishing. In this instance, Scott was not fast enough on his feet to point out, Your own company is based out of state, Mr. Diedrick.
Asked whether, in the face of withering criticism on the editorial pages of the major dailies, he would reconsider the decision, Diedrick told this publication “absolutely not.” That does not alter the fact that only two satisfactory outcomes recommend themselves as a result of this brazen act: 1) The Connecticut Magazine bid should be withdrawn; and 2) state ethics laws should be amended to prohibit state agency heads to privately profit from public contracts over which they have decision-making authority. The mercurial Scott in fact last week filed a complaint under current Ethics Commission guidelines.
One final point: If we can privatize the state lottery, why are we spending taxpayer dollars to create a tourism magazine in the first place? Shouldn't a vendor be paying us for the privilege of producing it exclusively, and recoup its investment through advertising sales?
Connecticut business people have taken hope in Rowland's pledge to make the state a friendlier environment in which to do business. That pledge should include fair and forthright behavior in the way the state itself conducts business - and swift, sure rectification when obvious improprieties ensue. Only then will his administration command the moral authority to garner support for the broad changes in state government Rowland seeks to effect.
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
