It Was An “Oversight?”

January 20, 2010

Why did it take 30 months for the Public Finance Authority to approve the “reprogrammed” funds that paid for the renovations at Governor John deJongh’s private residence?

It was an “oversight.”

Six hours of testimony in the long anticipated “Mafoliegate Part II” hearing ended with Sen. Neville James telling members of the PFA board who testified that what they classified as an oversight was at best gross negligence and worst, smacked of conspiracy.

Nearly 2 ½ hours into the hearing held Tuesday by the Committee on Financial Services, Infrastructure and Community Affairs, members of the PFA board were called to account for the delay in addressing the appropriations of Act 6917, the road repair funds appropriated in March, 2007, that ended up funding the renovations at the Governor’s Estate Mafolie.

Under questioning by several of the Committee members, current and former members of the board unanimously agreed that the lack of action on the resolution was simply an “oversight” and that their decision to act on the matter in October of 2009 was a result of an inquiry by their legal counsel, Jim Hindels, who brought it to their attention last fall. By then, they said, it was a “housekeeping” matter, an assertion that left the Committee nearly speechless, and Sen. James said that explanation was not sufficient.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

 

Representing the PFA board were Angel Dawson, Jr., executive director and Commissioner of the Department of Finance; Debra Gottlieb, secretary and Director of the Office of Management and Budget; board members Pablo O’Neil and Keith O’Neale; and former members Claudette Watson-Anderson and Austin Nibbs. 

Senators Nellie O’Reilly, Terrence “Positive” Nelson, Usie Richards , Adlah “Foncie” Donastorg and Chairman James sharply questioned the board members on the delay in acting on funds that had been appropriated in March 2007 and had been spent by the time the board met last October to formalize the resolution. Sen. Celestino White asked whether they knew the funds were being used for anything other than road repair projects.

O’Reilly focused on the apparent lack of knowledge the board had when approving the resolution, even though the public controversy around the use of public funds for the Mafolie residence was wisespread by the time action was taken.

Donastorg’s questioning focused on the fact that the Governor is Chairman of the PFA and entertained the motion to approve the resolution knowing that public funds from that appropriation had been used to renovate his home and that although the vote approving the resolution was reported as unanimous; there was no record of individual votes, just a “chorus of ayes.” Legislative Legal Counsel Yvonne Tharpes stated that the method of voting violated the rules of procedure for the PFA and that the “chorus of ayes” approach might render the resolution invalid.

Richards, Nelson and James all questioned the board on the delay in action and their professed lack of knowledge by October, 2009, that any of the funds had been used to enhance a private residence. Nelson also spoke strongly about his concern that the Virgin Islands treasury, through actions like those being investigated, is being “raided as we speak” and also questioned the involvement of the PFA board with Sen. Carlton “Ital” Dowe, who was copied on correspondence on these matters that was not shared with other members of the Legislature prior to their vote on Act 6917.

The Committee encountered an unexpected obstacle with the first testifier, Cherrie Wallace-Cole, PFA Bonds Proceeds Manager, who refused to testify on advice of her personal attorney. Ms. Wallace-Cole, who is not a party in any litigation pending in this matter, repeatedly refused to answer questions, including neutral inquiries about her salary and job responsibilities. Her behavior was classified as “arrogant” and “disrespectful” and Chairman James said the advice of her attorney was “weak, pathetically weak.”

Dawson, who was asked late in the hearing if he approved of Cole’s behavior, quickly said she was not acting in her role as a PFA employee when refusing to testify, but that she was protecting herself as an “individual.”

Shortly after midnight, James said he would determine whether any further testimony was necessary but that he was ready to “take action” during the next committee meeting.

At end of its proceeding, on Sen. Nelson’s motion, the Committee voted to submit their ultimate findings to the US Attorney’s office. Senators N. James, Nelson, Donastorg and O’Reilly voted yes. Senators White, W. James and Michael Thurland were absent.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Share on Facebook

51 Responses to It Was An “Oversight?”

  1. Wolf Expert on January 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm

    Those wolves that pretend to be sheep are the most sly. They are difficult to detect, since they smell, sound and walk like sheep. The royal-thinking deWolf is clever, but he is not sheepish. Francis is strongly suspected;watch him! Foncie should trick Francis into being his running mate. Remember the Trojan Horse. Do your research. The key to the trick is to learn deWolf’s strategies. Get a she-fox as a Mafoliegate guard.

  2. XYZ on January 21, 2010 at 8:57 pm

    How and what did Governor DeJongh win on Tuesday night? I guess I was looking at a different hearing because it looked like the PFA lady has everybody on the street ringing mad.

  3. Soldier Crab on January 21, 2010 at 10:37 pm

    Got you,’Expert’.Speaking of doing research,something tells me
    one shouldn’t put too much stock in those ‘horses’ now chomping at the bit.The race has hardly begun and,political prudence being what it is,something (call it intuition if you will)tells moi I should lay low in the event,a dark horse comes dashing to the fore.Seen it before.Could happen again.Will see what develops
    in a few.

  4. ENOUGH! on January 22, 2010 at 5:10 pm

    Soldier Crab,

    Something tells me (call it intuition) that you know a lot more about the upcoming election than your willing to presently divulge.

    You have my attention! Don’t keep us in the dark for too long (wink).

    Like I heard an individual say last night on 1340 AM ‘Ideas and Issues’, “This election will be a blood bath”.

  5. Soldier Crab on January 23, 2010 at 12:59 am

    ‘ENOUGH’-My good friend,you give me far too much credit than I deserve.I’m just an avid observer trying to pick sense out of nonsense.But this much I’ll tell you,my crystal balls (I happen to have more than one)are hindicating (they were made in Jamaica
    hence the weird pronounciation) a few dark horses (well,one isn’t all that dark)dilly-dallying and trying to decide whether or not they should get involved in such a contentious debacle.
    A blood bath,you say? Oh dear,I don’t think the horsey I’m waiting for likes the sight of blood…although it can be deceptively aggressive at times.Will have to massage my balls tonight and see what gives.By the way,when will our governor be
    giving his State of The Territory Address? Don’t want to miss it.
    Thanks.

  6. Sojourner Truth on January 23, 2010 at 1:39 am

    6:45pm, Monday is the Gov’s spin on his misdoings.

  7. Anonymous on January 23, 2010 at 10:12 am

    The PFA lady would have incriminated herself, if she had not plea the Fifth. Her signature appears on documents. She can still plea the Fifth in a criminal court. This is a constitutional right. She may lose some friends and gain some supporters. She won my support!

  8. Soldier Crab on January 23, 2010 at 4:01 pm

    Thanks,’Sojourner’.Will be tuning in.

  9. EyesWideOpen2010! on January 23, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    Won your support where and on what?

    Are you speaking of your support of the “public money” spend unlawfully on “the governor’s private residence?”

    Well, the IG Report support neither you nor your your governor!

    Do you want the IG to audit the PFA as well?

  10. EyesWideOpen2010! on January 23, 2010 at 4:38 pm

    Anonymous,

    Since you still don’t get it on the Mafoliegate IG report maybe you will get it with the lotterygate investigation.

  11. Anonymous for now on January 23, 2010 at 9:29 pm

    Big Money says no lotterygate. Follow the big money.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.