Muzzling a city watchdog would fuel broad public distrust

In the 1990s Miami-Dade added an independent inspector general to uncover county government fraud, waste and abuse. The office proved so useful that, to prevent commission meddling, voters in 2020 made it part of the county charter by a 78.4% vote.

In April the City of Miami began the same confidence-building process, with commissioners unanimously passing in a preliminary vote a vital ordinance for a totally independent inspector general, and 79.3% of voters then approved.

But that’s where similarities end – at least, for now. 

When it came time this month for city commissioners to put their seal on the ordinance that voters requested, three demanded commission control of the rules under which a supposedly independent office could operate.

Commissioners are now looking at overruling what 79.3% of the voters who elected them have mandated. They want to limit what an inspector general could do by putting the watchdog office on a commission leash.

That became evident as commissioners were simply to formally approve their own ordinance and follow the voters’ mandate. As Miami Today reported last week, Commissioner Miguel Gabela asked to discuss first details of the inspector general’s operations.

“I want to know how, what, who, when,” he said. “In other words, I want to know how the mechanics of this thing is going to work. For example, who will say to the inspector general, investigate this?”

Of course, nobody tells a truly independent inspector general what to do – who or what to investigate, what could be investigated, how an investigation could be conducted or when to investigate. Once someone tells an inspector general what to do or how, it’s not an independent investigator but a puppet.

Next, Joe Carollo, no stranger to allegations, declared “you can’t have a situation where anybody anonymous can lodge a complaint.” He demanded sworn complaints from everybody, including specifically city employees and elected officials. Commission Chairman Christine King wanted to have anyone named in a complaint be able to confront an accuser.

Mr. Carollo then sought to outlaw complaints from “bloggers or tabloids.” (In fair disclosure to digital readers, Miami Today for 41 years has been printed in the easier-to-hold tabloid size and would presumably be included in a ban.)

That round in the fight to restore sagging confidence in city government through independent investigations ended when Mr. Gabela, Ms. King and Mr. Carollo prevailed in a 3-2 vote to ignore the voters’ mandate until next month and decide then whether to honor the will of the people.

Clearly, the three have major concerns about allowing fully independent investigations. It could be useful to them to learn how the county inspector general works.

The county office has on its home page a complaint form labeled “Report Fraud” with an explanation: “If you believe you’ve witnessed County government fraud, waste, abuse of power or mismanagement, report it to the office of the Inspector General. You may choose to remain anonymous.” That’s an invitation to the anonymity that Mr. Carollo seeks to ban in the city.

And the results? In 2023, the inspector general’s office – which, again, is entirely independent – got 508 complaints. Of those, 218 came from that online form, 141 from the office’s hotline, 79 by mail (signed or anonymous), 15 from people who just walked in, three on referrals, and just two initiated by the media (presumably including bloggers and tabloids). All 508 were considered and not excluded, and none required names or affidavits.

Now, what happened to those complaints? The inspector general referred 41% to county departments or agencies to look into and report back. The office either helped complainants or took no action on 31%. Another 22% were simply closed. 

Then came what the commissioners seem worried about – 3% of the complaints, or 15 in all over a full 12 months, turned into preliminary inquiries and investigations and, yes, some of those turned into prosecutions and some into convictions, including a county vendor who cheated taxpayers and some fraud by government workers. 

Exactly zero complaints led to charges against elected officials, including commissioners. And because the county inspector general does not disclose any investigations that don’t lead to legal action, nobody’s name was dragged through the mud because of the hundreds of anonymous complaints – they were never disclosed.

That’s how the county inspector general works – and nobody tells him “how, what, who, when.”

So, what are three commissioners afraid of if they haven’t personally done wrong? Is it, as some bloggers might say, that the city is rife with corruption? That can’t be it.

The fact is, having an independent inspector general’s office that will look at any and all complaints can build public confidence that swirling rumors of rampant corruption are baseless. At the same time, it can pull out pockets of waste or fraud and sew them shut. 

The county office builds confidence in government while improving operations. The city can have the same, and voters at the unanimous invitation of Miami’s commissioners have said they want exactly that. Commissioners are to take a final vote next month. 

Denying full and complete investigative independence would show a City of Miami fearful that complaints would in fact unearth corruption. It would add to current voter distrust rather than dispelling it. No conscientious commissioners could vote for that, could they?