The basic tenets of public administration

DuPage County clerk’s non-defense of no-bid contracts defies the reasoning against them

DuPage County Clerk Jean Kaczmarek appears to be pitching her defiance of county policy requiring a bidding process for major business contracts on the technicality that a state attorney general's opinion gives her unfettered autonomy in how she runs her office. And she's willing to go to court, she says, “to carry out my office's duties.”

She misses some key points.

One, of course, is just how awarding questionable no-bid contracts amounts to “carrying out a duty.” Paying for contracted work, yes. Contracts establish obligations. Awarding significant public contracts without seeking bids to assure the best deal for taxpayers though? That is the very opposite of a public official’s duty.

And the DuPage County auditor this week tallied close to $400,000 in work authorized by Kaczmarek’s office without following the county’s established bidding procedures.

This cavalier dismissal of government policy suggests either a fundamental misunderstanding of why the county requires expensive projects be subjected to bids from interested contractors or an arrogant willingness to ignore taxpayer interests.

In the full spirit of capitalistic competition, bidding procedures are intended to ensure that taxpayers get well-qualified work transparently and at the best possible price. No-bid contracts are open to concerns about favoritism, oversight, lack of transparency, inadequate work standards and more.

As DuPage County Board Chairwoman Deborah Conroy said during a board meeting this week, “This is about public trust … Just saying ‘trust me’ is not enough.”

Indeed, it is not.

At minimum, Kaczmarek owes the board — which, by the way, is dominated by Democrats, her own party — and the public explanations for how and why the no-bid contracts she has authorized serve the public interest better than would contracts based on the best and most-qualified bid. So far, Kaczmarek’s “explanations” have been limited to emails and surrogates repeating the mantra that the no-bid deals are OK, essentially, “because the attorney general says I can do whatever I want.”

That, by the way, is even more inadequate than saying, “Trust me.”

All this is exacerbated by Kaczmarek’s willingness to take up an expensive court battle to uphold her right to independence, a question that sidesteps the central issue here.

Again to quote Conroy: “No one is ganging up on the clerk’s office or trying to diminish what she’s accomplished. But, her lack of concern and commitment to the basic tenets of public administration diminishes all of us.”

That is what Kaczmarek should be concerned about, a commitment to the basic tenets of public administration. If she showed some respect for that notion, she might be surprised at how little she would have to worry about threats to her independent operation of her office.