|
Anna Massoglia, editor of MuckRock’s Sunlight Research Desk,
said voters need to know about elected officials’ potential
conflicts of interest.
“It’s important for members of the public and voters to know
what conflicts of interest that people representing them and
making policies have,” Massoglia said. “Not putting that
information out there creates an issue for transparency.”
Jackson was sentenced to six months in federal prison after
being convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in a case
involving his relationship with businessman James Bracken and a
dispute over waste management services in Riverdale.
Prosecutors said Jackson and his wife were listed as the owners
of Centennial Holdings, a trucking company, but businessman
James Bracken actually financed and ran its operations,
including paying for trucks, fuel and insurance. Bracken also
was behind Riverdale Materials, a waste and recycling business
that received village approval despite objections from Tri-State
Disposal, a competing company.
The case also examined Bracken’s role in connecting Jackson with
Flood Brothers, which handled Riverdale’s 2018 spring cleanup
instead of Tri-State Disposal
Massoglia said having financial ties to a business is not
automatically evidence of wrongdoing, but failing to disclose
those relationships can prevent the public from scrutinizing
government decisions.
“The ties themselves aren’t necessarily evidence of wrongdoing,
but it’s important for them to be disclosed so that people can
go into these types of situations with knowledge of those
conflicts of interest,” she said.
She said officials should disclose relationships that could
affect their decisions, including business interests, financial
benefits and campaign funding.
“It’s important for elected officials to be forthcoming about
any conflicts of interest and anything that could potentially
impact their judgment,” Massoglia said.
Massoglia said disclosure requirements must be paired with
public access to records and mechanisms to identify incomplete
or inaccurate reporting.
“Just having that information is really important and having
that accessible to the public, to journalists and others so that
they can get a complete picture is very important,” she said.
She added that proving corruption can be more difficult than
proving an official lied about a relationship.
“It’s oftentimes harder to prove that someone actually engaged
in a pay-to-play scheme, that there was some sort of quid pro
quo,” Massoglia said.
|
|
