Keep Your Nose Out of It!                            May 2002

The February column reported a story about what, if anything, should be done about an MPA student (nicknamed Charlie) who is indicted and convicted of a felony. Should the program faculty give the student the "boot"? Should they write letters of recommendations for the student when seeking employment? Should they turn their head and keep their mouths shut? Mark Monson (mdmonson@DCE.state.va.us) writes: "Frankly, I don't see that it's of anyone's business that Charlie was convicted of a felony. Unless there can be a direct and compelling link between Charlie's crime and the MPA program or there is a solid reason to think that Charlie may represent some kind of physical threat to persons on campus, the university, its employees, and its students have absolutely no business getting involved.There's no question that the university needs to have a strong and strictly enforced integrity policy with respect to its educational programs. But, that's it. If university integrity policies excluded individuals convicted of felonies, a good number of schools would have to close from the loss of students. Plus, if we're going to worry about Charlie, what about all of the football players in colleges across the country who are still playing every Saturday with felony convictions? How many tenured professors are still teaching with felony convictions?"

Disclosure Yes!

The March column carried a story about mixing romance and housing in Tampa--a situation in which the city housing chief and his top aid who he was romantically involved with were building a 4,200 square foot home for $120,000 thanks to a builder who had received more than $1 million in housing contracts with the city's housing department. Should the city have a policy that requires employees to disclose financial relationships such as this with firms that do business with the city? ASPA member Harry W. Bullerdiek (bullerdiekharry@netscape.net) writes: "Should there be disclosure? Yes! But not just for the employee. Anyone submitting a bid on any contract should disclose any and all relationships with city representatives. There should be no real personal gain allowed for any city representative. By that I mean a $30 gift certificate to a restaurant once a year to say thank you and keep a good relationship going would not be reason for dismissal or a company being banned from submitting bids, as long as it was listed on the public disclosure form. Some people will think even that is too much but that is for the City Council to decide. But all should agree, except maybe the city housing chief, that getting a house for (I assume) considerably less than the appraised value is another story. It appears that personal interests and values of the city housing chief are not in line with that of his position nor that of the city, and that they have superceded same. At a minimum there needs to be some counseling so that the city housing chief has a clearer understanding of his role as a servant of the people."