Showing posts with label Vince Lintz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vince Lintz. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

The (scape)goat at the bottom of the hill

They say that “shit flows downhill”. They also say that “scum rises to the top”. Both were proven today with todays verdict at the Tom Wheeler trial. Tom Miller, the prosecuting attorney threw everything he had at Tom Wheeler but the jury only aligned itself with the prosecution for one count - “Felonious Misconduct”.

Throughout the trial Miller tried to paint Wheeler as the “inside man” and as someone “with an inflated sense of self-importance”. The “inside man” charge simply didn't fly given the evidence. Given the background of Tom Wheeler – him having a low level Production Assistant job at Fox Animation, and then having to return to Iowa to work such jobs as landscaping and the photo Department at Walgreens, it isn't surprising that he might display a bit of puffed up pride when he finally gets a title (Director of the Iowa Film Office) and a decent salary for a change. What for Tom Wheeler was pride in an important position was for his higher ups “arrogance” and you just know they can't stand someone who is uppity – especially in an office that they consider unimportant and just for “fun”. He was a “maverick” according to them, a regular loose cannon and when things went sour it was him who was to blame. Tom Wheeler was the one to throw under the bus.

And who instigated the whole mess? Mike “Teflon” Tramontina. He brought up the issue of the cars and then simply resigned and floated down gently to another cushy, well paying job. He blithely skipped off, leaving the mess to those who were left. Of course he made no mention of denying Tom Wheeler additional staffing for the Film Office because it was just there for “fun” or that he had denied a request from the Iowa Department of Economic Development's Legal and Compliance section to help Tom with the avalanche of contracts and make sure the producers were complying with the terms of the agreements.

It wasn't the first time that Mike “Teflon” Tramontina had left trouble behind while nimbly avoiding the fallout as this item in CityView's “Civic Skinny” column points out:

The hurried “resignation” of Iowa Economic Development Director Mike Tramontina surprised folks who have watched his career. A lifelong bureaucrat, Tramontina had a survivor’s instinct almost unparalleled in the state. The single biggest screw-up in the not-very-many-screwups administration of Tom Vilsack was the hiring — for millions of dollars — of A.T. Kearney to find efficiencies in state government. It was ill-conceived and badly implemented, and it accomplished little if anything. Tramontina, who was then running the Iowa Department of Management, was “driving that bus,” in the words of one guy who followed it closely, but when the shooting and the shouting were over, it was Mollie Anderson of the Department of Administrative Services who eventually left.Most folks assumed Tram would leave at the end of the Vilsack reign — the Culver people have little use for anyone associated with Vilsack — so it was a surprise when Tramontina ended up with the plum $145,000-a-year job at Economic Development. He wasn’t the first choice — UNI’s Randy Pilkington, and perhaps others, were sounded out — but he got the job, and Culver called him “a proven leader.” It was under Tramontina’s watch that the IDED was roundly criticized by the state auditor for failing to monitor, verify and assess a jobs-training program the community colleges run to help lure and keep businesses. It was fraught with, at best, sloppiness — at worst, negligence. But he sidestepped that one, too. Last week, the nimble Tramontina did his best to shift blame in the mess over film tax credits that led to his resignation late Friday. On Wednesday, he sent a cover-your-ass memo to his board and the Governor’s office noting that he had discovered these irregularities and laying out his plan of action. But it was too little, too late. By Friday evening, he was toast.

The lesson, says one pol: 'If you’re going to fuck something up, don’t do it in an election year.' Even if you’re Mike Tramontina.”

And then there is Vince “hear no evil, see no evil” Lintz who rubberstamped everything Tom Wheeler put on his desk without checking much of anything – who essentially said during testimony at the Wendy Runge trial as well as this one “I just let Tom do everything”.

And finally we have the prosecutor himself, Tom Miller. He was alluded to during the trial of giving no help at all to the Film Office. If anything lately Tom Wheeler is certainly not the defender of Iowans and the public purse but has eagerly taken on the role of the protector of the wealthy and the powerful. Think about it. Who had more power and connections within state government – Tom Wheeler or Mike Tramontina? Who has the Attorney General's Office gone after for “felonious misconduct” and on who's urging? So far Miller's office has wasted lots of tax payer's money on this perscecution and witch hunt while the man who made all of this possible, Mike “Teflon” Tramontina sits comfortably in a new job. And, to go off on a tangent, there is Tom Miller letting subprime lenders get away with fraud and siding with these people rather than Iowans losing their homes. But I digress.

A quote from one of the latest articles on the verdicts of the Tom Wheeler trial:

"Fraud in state government, whether perpetrated by those outside of state government, or enabled by those within state government, cannot and will not be tolerated," said Deputy Attorney General Thomas J. Miller.

Yes, that's right. Tom Miller won't tolerate fraud unless it is by subprime lenders and he won't tolerate felonious misconduct unless it is by someone well-placed and well-connected such as Mike “Teflon” Tramontina.

A great injustice was meted out today at the trial and Tom Miller was able to bring home the trophy to the powerful people he serves. Yes, today Tom Wheeler became the sacrificial goat so that those above him could escape all personal responsibility and any bit of tarnish on their images.

Monday, August 22, 2011

An Afternoon at the Tom Wheeler Trial

Since I had the day off today, I went down with Jay Villwock to the Tom Wheeler trial. We were able to join the proceedings in the afternoon.

The defense attorney for Tom Wheeler was cross-examining Vince Lintz, the former Deputy Director of the Iowa Department of Economic Development (IDED). From the way the questioning was going, I had guessed that it was the defense's witness, not the prosecutions because for the most part the answers couldn't have been more favorable to the defense's case.

The judge from what I could tell appeared to be the same one who had presided over the Wendy Runge trial. I got a vibe from his of being fair and impartial and that his mind wasn't made up in support of either side. Wheeler's attorney, Angela Campbell, was a very sharp lawyer during what I saw and there was a lot more action during this portion of the trial than I had expected.

The main thing that was established through the questioning was that Wheeler was overwhelmed and overworked and that the people above him at the IDED were in many ways clueless or asleep at the wheel. Many examples of what he had to do, what he was expected to do, and what kind of support he received from his higher-ups was given with thorough, respectful questions asked to confirm things.

Even early in the film program, Tom Wheeler was overwhelmed and needed assistance but was not provided the additional staff that was needed. And then the onslaught happened after a cap was set and a total of 122 applications were submitted to the office. As an example of the number of documents required for just one film to establish expenses three bankers boxes of receipts were brought onto the courtroom floor. And this was just for one average film. It was emphasized how long it would take to go through all of this and how unreasonable it was to expect one person to do this alone. (I recall it took a team at the Attorney General's Office at least 6 months before they could even start to bring any charges.) There was mention of phone voice message boxes being full and unanswered, both for Tom's office and cell phone (that's a LOT of messages). Wheeler's attorney recounted all of the various jobs he was supposed to do and it sounded like enough for at least 3 people to keep busy to me. Practically every question the defense attorney asked about responsibilities ended with the answer "Tom".

There was evidence presented to show that Tom Wheeler was not the "inside man" the prosecution has claimed him to be but rather that he was making strong efforts to tighten the program and to identify and eliminate the loopholes. It was established that Tom tried to work with people to make changes in the rules to make the program run better and that he worked with legislators. It also established that he did not write the law. In fact it was made clear that he had neither the legal training nor the training in accounting that was needed for what he was asked to do.

The issues of the cars was brought up. You remember those, don't you? The Land Rover and the Mercedes - the vehicles that started this whole scandal? It turns out that there was nothing in the law as it had been written nor in the contracts made with producers that excluded these purchases - the ones that got the press and the Culver administration into such an uproar. It was shown beyond a doubt that leasing and purchasing of motor vehicles was allowed under the terms of the law and the contracts. There was no mention of how they were to be used or what kind of vehicles could be purchased. Have you ever wondered why no charges have ever been brought up concerning these vehicles? If you didn't before, you do now.

Toward the end of the session the prosecution tried to counter some of the arguments of the defense. A job review form was exhibited that showed that Tom Wheeler had not filled in an area where it asked if he needed additional staff to do his job. After the evidence in emails from earlier in the program, this omission didn't seem to carry as much weight. Given the work load it certainly seems possible that Wheeler could have either forgotten to fill it in or was at the point of throwing up his hands and not bothering because of the futility of asking. That is at least my impression.

I'm sure I've probably have left some things out from the afternoon's proceedings but that's the gist of a lot of it. Tom Wheeler's trial is set for three weeks and this is the second week. I'll be off work again next Monday and will try to attend and see what I can give as an eye witness report.

-Dave