Official
investigations have begun - on two fronts - into
University of Connecticut Professor Kenneth Dautrich's $220,000,
taxpayer-funded contract with Gov. M. Jodi Rell's administration to do
a
government-efficiency study that produced controversial political
research and
advice for how Rell should tailor her stances to please voters.
In
interviews Friday, officials confirmed two
investigations:
*A
joint investigation by the bipartisan auditors of public
accounts and state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal into whether, as
Auditor
Kevin Johnston put it, "state tax dollars have been used for other than
strictly state purposes."
*An
inquiry by UConn's Office of Audit Compliance and
Ethics, which university spokesman Michael Kirk said is "examining the
research associated with this project to determine if it may have
violated any
aspect of UConn's code of ethics." That code includes at least one
prohibition against political activity on the job.
In
her first comments to reporters on the controversy, the
Republican governor said Friday that none of the study money was used
for
political purposes.
"Zero
of that was political," Rell said during an
appearance at a firehouse in Torrington. Rell said, "I'm very proud of
the
work that Ken Dautrich and the University of Connecticut did."
One
key official reviewing the material will be Rachel
Rubin, now UConn's director of compliance, who served as Rell's
ethics
counsel starting in 2004, when Rell took office. Rell appointed Rubin
to that
new position while proclaiming ethics and good government as her
watchwords.
Rubin left the governor's office for UConn after about a year and a
half.
The
two new investigations appear to guarantee that the
Dautrich study will continue as both a legal and political issue for
weeks, if
not months.
One
question is whether Dautrich's contract with the budget
office has any provisions that allow for the public opinion sampling
that he
did in a 2008 "focus group."
Rell's
office and Dautrich both denied any politics were
involved in the study Thursday when the issue arose in a story by The
Day of
New London.
However,
The Courant has obtained copies of May 6 e-mails
between Dautrich and Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody, that have a
distinctly political ring to them. Here is the exchange:
*Dautrich,
on his personal e-mail account, at 5:28 p.m.:
"A few things I've gathered over the past day or two: OFA [the
legislative
Office of Fiscal Analysis] has done an analysis that says there are
substantial
cost savings by combining the back office functions of the SS [social
service]
agencies. Dems love the idea - and for good reason. You might want to
come out
with it first (risking, of course, that the Dems may then be against
it). With
the help of a few people, I think I can put a plan together on this
pretty
quickly . . ."
*Moody,
in reply, on her state account, at 7:02 p.m.:
"I think you should pursue - give Bob G. [state budget director Robert
Genuario] a call on this - he can give you some folks to help. This is
a focus
of the Democrats, and, as you say, I would rather we frame it than they
frame
it."
Friday
night, when asked how those e-mails could not be
considered political, Rell spokeswoman Donna Tommelleo declined
comment.
The
study by Dautrich, a polling expert, came under
immediate fire Thursday by Democrats who said Rell had used taxpayer
money for
personal political purposes to produce what constituted political
advice -
including a "focus group" on Dec. 16, 2008, that covered subjects
such as whether citizens hold the governor in "high regard."
The
"focus group" of nine people in Wethersfield
discussed opinions of the relative leadership qualities of Rell and a
potential
2010 Democratic opponent, Blumenthal.
Observing
from behind the one-way mirror were three Rell
aides, including Matthew Fritz and Moody.
"When
asked if Governor Rell or Attorney General
Blumenthal fit these [leadership] characteristics" such as
"principled" and "consistent," "many of the
participants agreed that Blumenthal fit the characteristics well. . . .
Most
held the governor in high regard. . . . We recommend emphasis not only
on
solving the budget deficit by eliminating waste, but also on the
governor's
vision for the future of Connecticut," Dautrich wrote to Moody and
Fritz
after the focus group.
Dautrich
said the discussion of Rell's and Blumenthal's
leadership emerged spontaneously during the focus group, intended to
help the
administration deal with budget deficits, adding that it was legitimate
to find
out what citizens want from leaders.
Blumenthal,
a Democrat, since then has taken himself out of
the running for his party's 2010 gubernatorial nomination.
Documents
show that in June 2008 Dautrich crafted a
27-question poll that included questions to determine voter preferences
in
matchups between Rell and Blumenthal, and Rell and then-House Speaker
James
Amann, also a Democrat, for the 2010 election. Dautrich said the poll
idea was
dropped. Still, his poll proposal, with its political questions, was
among his
communications with Moody.
Moody
has been controversial in the past. Her improper
fundraising activities on the job at the Capitol in 2005 drew a
two-week
suspension. In recent weeks, Democrats have blasted Rell's office over
its
recent failure to produce a potentially embarrassing Moody e-mail
requested by
The Courant. The e-mail was released only after sources said it had
been
withheld. Now, her involvement with Dautrich's study has again drawn
criticism
- but so far Rell has refused to criticize Moody over the recent
missing-e-mail
episode or this new issue.
Rell's
exploratory campaign committee for 2010 did a poll
earlier this year, and Dautrich looked over the questions and results
before
and after it was performed by a New Jersey firm he has used in the past
for his
own research. Democrats suggested that Dautrich's actions amounted to
an
illegal "in-kind," or non-cash, campaign contribution to Rell. He
said his discussion of the partisan poll - with someone he wouldn't
identify -
was unrelated to his state study.
On
Friday, Rell said that her campaign treasurer will ask
state elections officials if the campaign should pay any expenses.
"I do
not believe that there was an in-kind
contribution," Rell said, but "if there is in any way a cause to say
there was an in-kind contribution, then what I'm going to do is ask our
treasurer to amend the report. If there is any fine, we will pay that
fine."
More
than $100,000 of the $220,000 in state money has been
spent, and the 30-month effort is scheduled to end around December
2010.
"I think the state got more than its money's worth," Rell said.
"I do
not believe that there was an in-kind
contribution, [but] if there is in any way a cause to say there was an
in-kind
contribution, then what I'm going to do is ask our treasurer to amend
the
report. If there is any fine, we will pay that fine."