|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After resisting, the Senate plans to provide financial information that Auditor Diana DiZoglio has long requested as part of a probe of the Legislature authorized under a 2024 law.
The Senate voted 33-6 last week to pass a resolution saying it will “promptly” provide records discussed in recent litigation. The resolution also lays out the history of the Senate’s dispute with the auditor and reserves its right to object to an audit as unconstitutional.
New Bedford Sen. Mark Montigny was the only Democrat to vote against the resolution. In a written statement to The Light, Montigny said he supports releasing the financial documents immediately so that “a fully transparent audit can begin right away.” But he couldn’t support the resolution “in good faith” because it didn’t settle the question of whether the audit is constitutional, he said.
“The balance between the public’s clear demand and any constitutional bounds should have been swiftly put before the [Supreme Judicial Court], and we can still do so in order to prioritize the public’s trust and finally end the ongoing legal disputes,” Montigny said.
Sens. Cindy Friedman and Paul Feeney said the branch is voluntarily handing over the records.
“We are taking the affirmative step of providing those documents forthwith,” Friedman told reporters. “These are documents that are not difficult for us to put together, because they are — they exist publicly. And because they are public documents, we do not feel that there is any issue, because this is our work and what we’re doing.”
All five Republicans — Sens. Kelly Dooner, Peter Durant, Ryan Fattman, Patrick O’Connor and Bruce Tarr — voted against the resolution, along with Montigny.
While the Senate was voting, Speaker Ron Mariano’s office released a letter to House members declaring that the House “is working with leading transparency experts to craft comprehensive legislation that will provide long-term solutions to the concerns that we continue to hear from our constituents.” The effort is partly due to an advancing ballot question that would apply the public records law to the Legislature and governor.
In 2024, Massachusetts voters approved an initiative law allowing the state auditor to audit the Legislature. The House and Senate have resisted DiZoglio’s efforts to audit them, arguing that the law violates the state constitution.
Senate Minority Leader Tarr said the documents covered by the Senate resolution could have been provided a “long time ago” and could be provided today without the passage of a resolution by the Senate.
Senate Democrats have long raised concerns about the constitutionality of the audit but have resisted calls from Republicans to seek an advisory opinion from the Supreme Judicial Court on that question. Tarr called the continuing resistance by senators to seeking that opinion “unfortunate” and noted senators had “expeditiously” sent the court requests for advisory opinions on legislative stipend and public records ballot questions.
“We shouldn’t pick and choose when we ask for an answer based on what we fear would be the reply,” said Tarr, who cited the failure to seek an SJC opinion as his reason for voting against the resolution.
Senate Democrats said Thursday’s action stems from clarity gained at the SJC earlier this month, as Attorney General Andrea Campbell intervened in a lawsuit DiZoglio filed against top lawmakers.
The four document requests that Campbell has cleared DiZoglio to pursue cover the official budgets for each chamber of the Legislature for fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024; copies of official audits of each chamber for the same fiscal years; a listing of all transactions related to each chamber’s balance forward line item for those fiscal years; and a list of all monetary settlement agreements entered into by each chamber with any current or former employees or elected members during the same timeframe.
Feeney said the documents will be handed over in a “matter of days.”
The resolution speaks to continuing concerns among senators regarding constitutional issues.
”The Senate, in providing said records, does so voluntarily but does not concede that it may be audited … without violating the Constitution of the Commonwealth,” the resolution says. “And be it further resolved, that the Senate reserves all its rights to object to any such audit, present or future, and on any grounds, including, but not limited to, that Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 violates the Senate’s constitutional rulemaking authority, separation of powers, legislative immunity and privilege.”
DiZoglio has accused Campbell of boxing her in to a limited audit, with the auditor signaling she’s interested in seeking additional records in the future. Friedman, asked how the Senate intends to handle future requests from DiZoglio, said, “We can’t answer that question right now.”
“We have a court decision,” Friedman said. “We are responding to that. We can’t imagine or predict what the auditor is going to ask for.”
The records will be submitted as documents to DiZoglio’s office, rather than links to information already available on the Legislature’s website, Friedman said.
“We’re not leaving anything out, we’re not being cute, we’re not moving stuff around,” Feeney said. “She requested certain documents, the scope was clarified. I’m thrilled that now the Senate will be moving forward to reply and respond to that.”
In floor remarks, Tarr said the independent audit that Senate Democrats have cited to promote transparent operations is limited to seven pages and the most recent one available is from fiscal 2023.
“You can understand why folks might want a little bit more,” he said.
Fewer than half of senators were present in the chamber for the afternoon floor debate on the resolution, which was unveiled at 1:48 p.m. and introduced for discussion at about 2:30 p.m. More senators arrived in the chamber once the voting began.
In his message to representatives, Mariano wrote that the House would not adopt the Senate’s approach. “Following extensive conversations with the Senate about this issue over the past few weeks, House leadership concluded that a resolution would not be the appropriate method of affirming our legislative prerogative as a coequal branch of government — nor would it allow us to address future inquiries or resolve the endless legal disputes that have come to define the audit ballot question.”
Mariano also briefly outlined the House approach to its forthcoming “comprehensive” transparency legislation.
“House leadership will continue to engage with the Membership, experts, and advocates as we work towards reforms that will meet the moment and allow the Legislature to refocus on addressing the issues facing Massachusetts residents,” he wrote.
Jamie Perkins contributed reporting for The Light.
In 2024 voters overwhelmingly voted for this audit and it’s a shame that over a year has gone by and still nothing has been done.