TERRE HAUTE — A week from Monday, the Terre Haute Board of Public Works and Safety is expected to hire a legal consultant for upcoming negotiations with the union that represents city firefighters.
In doing so, the board will take an action that’s absolutely necessary to protect the interests of the city’s taxpayers in crucial union negotiations. But board members also will be able to make a statement on behalf of good government by rejecting any appearance of a conflict of interest over the selection.
The latter issue will once again require strong judgment by the board, which last month rejected a low bid from an Indianapolis law firm that had family ties to City Attorney Chou-il Lee and political ties to Terre Haute Mayor Duke Bennett.
The Board of Works has been in this situation before and dealt appropriately with the issue when two of its four board members rejected the bid from Bose, McKinney and Evans on the grounds that hiring the firm created the appearance of a conflict of interest.
The contract has been re-bid, and the review process will begin this week.
We previously commended the board, and Lee, for acknowledging the potential for conflict and taking steps to make sure the process was transparent. We went so far as to suggest if the Bose law firm once again submitted the low bid, perhaps it would be wise to hire the firm.
Upon further reflection, however, it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the appearance of conflict will not continue to exist. Lee’s brother-in-law is employed by the law firm, although that connection is a minor issue. However, Bose’s representation of Bennett in his political dispute with former Mayor Kevin Burke over the 2007 mayoral election is a far more serious matter.
In the last round of bidding, six firms, including Bose, McKinney and Evans, submitted bids. All were out-of-town law firms, which is no surprise. No local firms submitted bids because of the potential for conflicts to arise. What’s more, local lawyers often do not want to be involved in firefighter union negotiations because of their contentious nature in the past.
While Bose, McKinney and Evans may again submit the low bid, it may be wise — and money well spent — to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest for the city and select another bidder, even though the price tag is higher. These negotiations are too important to get sidetracked on an issue that can easily be avoided.
It is of utmost importance for public entities to maintain integrity in their governmental processes. Conflicts of interest — or even the appearance of them — can have debilitating effects on the credibility of government boards and officials. When a conflict can be avoided — and it most certainly can be in this case — it is the best course to follow.
If Bose, McKinney and Evans submits the low bid among many, we urge the Board of Public Works and Safety to reject it and go to the next, best bid.
