The IG vs. ICJI
I read the Indiana Inspector General’s report over the weekend concerning former director Heather Bolejack and the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute. As you know Bolejack was fired earlier this month for awarding a $417,000 contract to a family friend, Michael McKenna. In addition, ICJI Deputy Director Kate Gullans was also terminated. The report paints a very disturbing picture at the ICJI. And while Bolejack’s spokesman calls the report a “public lynching” I have to ask who brought the rope? Allow me to explain.
As I’ve written earlier, the report reaches four essential conclusions.
1. The primary purpose of the SKIP grant was to benefit McKenna.
2. Bolejack was personally and substantially involved in awarding the grant.
3. Documents were falsified to make it appear the grant was awarded properly.
4. Bolejack attempted to direct two more grants to McKenna, which the staff refused to process.
The IG report shows McKenna apparently contradicted himself in a May 17 interview with the Indianapolis Star when he said he never had any knowledge of any program similar to the SKIP (Saving Kids of Incarcerated Parents) program, but the report says he met with members of the Ten Point Coalition and city-council member Ike Randolph on setting up such a program.
The IG also says McKenna’s grant application did not conform with agency guidelines by the August 1 deadline and his grant did not get the approval of three necessary agency groups, the Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group (JJSAG), IJCI Youth Services Subcommittee, and the full board of trustees. So how was the award granted? The IG says records were altered to appear the JJSAG gave its approval.
On page 14 of the report, the IG writes that Bolejack claims she never attended any meeting where the SKIP grant was discussed, however on September 8 the IG says Bolejack attended a meeting and participated in the discussion.
The report also says Bolejack tried to get two other agencies involved in awarding McKenna the grant. Under federal guidelines, the legal applicant for the grant must be a governmental body. The report says Bolejack tried to get the Department of Corrections and the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office to be the legal applicant. She was frustrated, the report says, with the delay on behalf of the MCPO and told the office their delay was a “disincentive” for future funding of MCPO projects. Because of the delays, the ICJI made itself the legal applicant for the grant, which the IG reports caused an issue because the local government agency applying for the grant had to come up with some of the money for the grant as well, in this case, $100,000. And under federal guidelines, federal money could not be used as a matching grant.
In addition, to the original grant award the IG report says McKenna was sated to receive a number of other grants totaling $336,000. This was in addition to the $417,000. He would have also been paid a salary of $165,000, which includes the $90,000 he was paid from the original grant.
The report also mentions that Deputy Director Kate Gullans admitted to falsifying records in order to be reimbursed for $500 in alcohol purchases for a seminar in January 2006. And Bolejack repeatedly requested subordinates put her expenses on their credit cards when traveling.
As I stated earlier, much of the report contradicts many of Bolejack’s and McKenna’s assertions. For example, Bolejack stated she did not find out about the charges against her until the day before the hearing, however according to the IG, they presented her with their preliminary findings and allowed her the opportunity to respond to them.
It was very disturbing that once again race rears its ugly head. In a statement released to the media Friday, Bolejack’s spokesman released this statement. “Ms. Bolejack adamantly denies the substance and implications of the Inspector General’s report, and wholly rejects its conclusions as erroneous, misleading and greatly exaggerated. Ms. Bolejack committed no crime or ethical violation, yet she has been subjected to what can be candidly if not tactfully described as a public lynching through the news media. It is now clear that there has never been even a tacit presumption of innocence in this case on the part of investigators, and it is my position and many others in this community that the public execution of her case has been nothing short of shameful. Instead of more venomous sound bites from her accusers, she should be given an apology. We will have further comment on the contentions outlined in the report after it has been more thoroughly reviewed, and look forward to sharing all the facts pertinent to Ms. Bolejack’s case.”
Terms like “public lynching” and “execution” are being used here to invoke some disturbing images to incite one segment of the population and intimidate another segment. Hopefully, by exposing this for what it is that ploy will not work. Bolejack is innocent until proven guilty and deserves due process. This is a serious matter that should be decided on its merits, not on race-baiting language.
