Talk about a classic case of abuse of power by an attorney.In one of the sleazier examples of multitasking, Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz sent 30 racy text messages to crime victim Stephanie Van Groll and referred to her as a “young, hot nymph,” while prosecuting her boyfriend for nearly strangling her to death. Facing heavy public pressure, Kratz has now said he’ll resign. But still unsettled is the question of why the Office of Lawyer Regulation declined to pursue any discipline against Kratz after the issue was brought to its attention.
The state’s OLR uses district committees mostly made up of lawyers who make recommendations on cases referred to them. But the system is problematic, as writer Geoff Davidian reported in a March 2006 feature in Milwaukee Magazine. As Greg Keating, University of Southern California Law School professor, told the magazine, “self-regulating disciplinary systems are more like guilds, and guild members tend to protect each other.” Attorneys tend to go easy on their peers.
The issue is a national one, but there is some reason to believe the problem is worse in Wisconsin. Davidian found Wisconsin led the Midwest, with complaints against 10.3 percent of licensed lawyers filed in 2004, compared to a range of 4.6 percent in Minnesota to 9.8 percent in Michigan.
Yet if Wisconsin had more complaints against lawyers, it issued formal charges less often: That same year, just 1.6 percent of complaints investigated in Wisconsin resulted in formal charges against attorneys, compared to 4 percent nationally.
Not every state’s attorney oversight board is organized like Wisconsin’s, and not every state board keeps its proceedings secret, as Wisconsin’s OLR does. In most cases in Wisconsin, the complaint results in no action being taken and the complainant is given no access to any records of the proceedings or any explanation for the lack of action. Thus, Van Groll was given no explanation of why Kratz’s harassment of her did not constitute attorney misconduct. That had to be galling.
The case, the Racine Journal Times editorialized, “has raised disturbing questions about the processes, secrecy and effectiveness of the Office of Lawyer Regulation.”
Adding irony was that Kratz served as chairman of the Wisconsin Crime Victims Rights Board. He was the classic insider, the respected lawyer who had clout with his peers. After the Van Groll case hit the news, four other women stepped forward to say they had also been harassed in e-mails from Kratz. Clearly, the district attorney thought he was invulnerable to discipline from his peers. Apparently, he was right. It’s long past time for the state to consider changes in how the Office of Lawyer Regulation is run.
MATC’s Gravy Train
Back in 2006, I wrote a column called “Gravy Train,” which reported that the average pay for a full-time Milwaukee Area Technical College professor was $91,000 – or $20,000 more than the average MATC administrator. This was also $23,000 more than the average professor at UW-Milwaukee earned at the time, I noted.
This helped trigger a study by the Legislative Audit Bureau a year later. The bureau found that MATC had 169 faculty members earning more than $100,000 and just 19 administrators earning that much.
On Sunday, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel did a story that updated this data, finding that 40 percent of staff earn more than $100,000, while the top 10 instructors earned more than $134,000. MATC teachers earn more than professors at all UW System institutions, except UW-Madison.
MATC union President Mike Rosen argued the latter comparison was unfair, because university professors teach less than technical college instructors. But university professors are expected to do research that adds depth to their instruction. University professors get a doctorate and are supposed to be experts in their field. Technical college instructors typically have a master’s degree and teach at a more basic level. One of the top-paid MATC instructors, the JS story found, earned more than $136,000 preparing students for their high school equivalency diploma. GED instructors at community-based groups in town probably earn less than half this in salary and benefits.
The real reason technical college salaries are out of line compared to university salaries is because of two factors. The UW System budget is overseen by elected legislators who have some concerns about taxes, whereas MATC and other technical colleges are overseen by appointed boards that need not worry about voter outrage over taxes. Secondly, the UW colleges have no ability to levy property taxes, whereas Wisconsin’s technical colleges do.
At MATC, the unions have traditionally done a good job of getting labor sympathizers elected to the board, and they have been happy to hike property taxes to pay for ever-more generous salary and benefits.
Longtime MATC instructor and union activist Charlie Dee responded to the JS story with an impassioned defense of his school’s salary structure and an attack on the paper for union bashing. I’d argue it’s good reporting.
Bice’s Bizarre Barroom Report
JS reporter Dan Bice operates as a one-man, bipartisan dirt patrol. I have never seen any evidence of political bias on his part. He’d probably report bad things about his mother.
But I have at times questioned his judgment. A case in point is his recent story disclosing a union worker’s alleged plot to bring down Republican Scott Walker through a coordinated campaign with Democrat Tom Barrett. This plot was revealed by John-david Morgan, a union operative who was secretly taped in a bar by a Walker supporter who also used a fake name while engaging Morgan in conversation.
Needless to say, it would not be acceptable for Bice to use a false name or secretly tape someone. So why is it OK if someone else does it for him? And if it is OK, does that mean it’s acceptable for any JS reporter looking for dirt to find someone to do the false name/secret taping trick for him or her? That seems to open the door wide to journalistic malpractice.
But beyond that is a more basic issue. Why should we believe someone mouthing off in a bar? Much less a person mouthing off to someone he doesn’t even know. Call me a cynic, but I’ve noticed a lot of blather and exaggeration spoken by customers at bars, often fueled by drink. Do we really want to start reporting these comments as gospel in a reputable newspaper?
What Bice reported may be true. But I’m dubious. Morgan sounds like someone who seemed to think the entire election hinged on his actions. One more beer and he might have been predicting his appointment to become Gov. Barrett’s chief of staff. The barrooms are full of such boasts. But when sober and speaking to a reporter, the boasters are likely to become far more modest – and far more accurate.
Clarification, 2:45 p.m., September 28: Bice contacted me to note that the taped conversation took place on the sidewalk outside the bar. “My guess is that (Morgan) was headed to the bar or just stepped out of it,” Bice says, adding that Morgan would not say.
The Buzz
-Why is the FBI targeting activists at UWM? NewsBuzz reports.
-And was the Journal Sentinel’s recent series on the child welfare system completely misguided? Pressroom Buzz considers the issue.
