Tainted officials should be removed from public payroll

We say it every time a public of- ficial is indicted, and far too seldom does the message resonate: If you’re on the public payroll and have been indicted in connection with your official performance, you should resign.

Mahoning County Treasurer Lisa Antonini wasn’t indicted; she agreed to be prosecuted on a federal charge, which carries an obviously higher likelihood of culpability. Still, to her credit, she tendered her resignation immediately. We’ve seen other elected officials refuse to resign even after being convicted, claiming a presumption of innocence that they believed to enjoy pending appeal.

When indicted officeholders refuse to resign they fall back on the “innocent until proven guilty” rationale. The principle certainly applies to their right to defend themselves in a court of law against criminal charges. But holding public office is not a right, it is a privilege. When elected officials have conducted themselves in such a way as to give the state or federal government grounds on which to indict them, we believe they should lose the privilege of serving (and collecting a public pay check, accruing pension benefits and enjoying health coverage on the taxpayer’s dime).

Regardless of Antonini’s resignation, there is anew the spectacle of a Mahoning Valley public official being accused of betraying the public trust. Her acknowledging that betrayal helps, but it does not erase the wrongdoing.

And while contrition is a small step toward redemption, cooperating with the Justice Department to root out others who have bought and sold favors would be a giant step.

Time will tell how many of our influence peddlers and buyers had reason to lose sleep last night. It is one thing to face the prospect of fighting state criminal charges, quite another to face federal charges. Few can outgun the Justice Department, and weak federal cases are less likely to be taken to a grand jury.

Finding a replacement

It now falls to the Mahoning County Democratic Central Committee to sort through the applicants and choose Antonini’s successor. The committee would be wise to consider only those applicants who are as pure as Caesar’s wife.

In the meantime, two Mahoning County elected officials who have been indicted on state charges in what is referred to as the Oak-hill Renaissance Place criminal-conspiracy case remain in office. And something that one of them did illustrates why that shouldn’t be.

The Oakhill case involves the alleged efforts of Anthony Cafaro Sr., former president of the Cafaro Co., to prevent or delay the relocation of the county’s Department of Job and Family Services from the Cafaro Co.-owned Garland Plaza to the former South Side Hospital, which the county had purchased.

One of those indicted was County Commissioner John A. McNally IV, who faces charges of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, two counts of conspiracy, three counts of perjury, bribery, disclosure of confidential information, two counts of conflict of interest and soliciting or accepting improper compensation.

Ousting an enemy

Last week McNally joined the newest county commissioner, Carol Rimedio-Righetti, in a 2-1 vote to fire County Administrator George Tablack.

Tablack was one of the driving forces behind moving Job and Family Services from Garland to Oakhill. He argued persuasively that it made good economic sense for the county to develop Oakhill into a multi-use complex.

While there are some in government who will fault Tablack on his people skills, few are equipped to challenge him in doing the math of government finances.

It is beyond unseemly for McNally, who is facing trial on corruption charges with Cafaro, to participate in the firing of Tablack, an obvious political enemy of Cafaro. Whatever Rimedio-Righetti’s motives in ousting Tablack may be, McNally’s are suspect.

Mahoning County voters should rise in indignation over elected officials who not only remain in power after being indicted, but feel free to vote on issues that are at least tangentially tied to the cause of their indictment.

Perhaps the evolving federal case will be the new broom that sweeps more cleanly.