In a July 21 column, The (Stamford) Advocate‘s Angela Carella highlighted a little-noted provision in the 2015-17 budget-implementer bill the Connecticut legislature passed in late June. This measure removed 32 state-government positions from the civil-service process. Starting July 1, occupants of these positions serve at the direct pleasure of the governor, whomever that happens to be at a given moment. Ms. Carella noted the provision “did not come up during the five months the state legislature was in session. It was not aired in hearings at which the public could weigh in. It was not put up for a vote.”
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy‘s administration supported the measure. Benjamin Barnes, Gov. Malloy’s budget director, said governors “will be able to put people in roles in whom they have confidence and trust.”
It is no great surprise that the Malloy administration backed this change. Since Gov. Malloy took office in 2011, one of his distinguishing features has been his desire to have as much control over state functions as possible. Allow me to present a few of his un-greatest hits on this front.
In 2011, the governor and the legislature established the Board of Regents for Higher Education, to run the state universities, community colleges and the online Charter Oak State College; the Board of Regents replaced the Department of Higher Education. Gov. Malloy was charged by statute with appointing the system’s president in consultation with the full board, which was tasked with establishing the president’s terms of employment. However, as this November 2012 Connecticut Mirror story makes clear, Gov. Malloy gave the presidency to his friend Robert A. Kennedy without consulting the board, and granted Mr. Kennedy an absurdly generous contract. As Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton, Senate ranking member of the legislature’s Higher Education Committee, told the Mirror, “Everything was iron-clad and taken care of before the regents were even in place.” With the governor so eager to disregard state law to get Mr. Kennedy on the job, the reasonable conclusion is he was desperate to control the board.
Mr. Kennedy later became infamous for improperly granting pay raises to 21 board employees, which forced him to resign in October 2012. As we noted on the editorial page July 20, the board still is tainted by the Kennedy appointment process and the raise scandal.
In February 2013, Gov. Malloy unveiled a proposal that would have given the governor’s office unprecedented control over state government’s watchdogs: the State Elections Enforcement Commission, the Freedom of Information Commission and the Office of State Ethics. News reports at the time cast doubt on Gov. Malloy’s and Mr. Barnes’ claims that the proposal would save money, so the effort seemed “to be nothing more than a disturbing power grab,” as we put it in a March 3, 2013 editorial. Fortunately, the watchdogs proposal died in the legislature, after being slammed by open-government advocates and legislators of both parties.
Last January, Gov. Malloy went on a mildly unhinged rant when commissioners of the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) recommended that their outfit operate independently of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. The only plausible explanation for the governor’s defensive and arrogant manner – he made no serious effort to consider the PURA commissioners’ recommendation – is he was peeved that people had the audacity to suggest PURA not report to him.
Based on his record, it is more than fair to call Gov. Malloy Connecticut’s control-freak-in-chief. I don’t know why the governor is so obsessed with control, but in a state that has seen its share of corruption, his tendencies are quite worrisome. The state’s news media are wise to pay close attention to the governor’s moves.
