The U.S. Senate’s chief oversight committee is questioning whether Metro’s internal watchdog, the Office of Inspector General, has the independence to properly perform its job — writing to Metro this week that possible censorship by the agency’s board or staff, along with the OIG’s lack of separate lawyers and funding are hindering its autonomy.
The criticisms came in a letter to Metro General Manager Paul J. Wiedefeld on Tuesday, written by Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. In the letter, they concluded Metro’s inspector general is “not sufficiently independent” from the rest of the transit agency.
[Read the Senate committee’s letter to Metro GM Paul J. Wiedefeld]
“[The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s] apparent control over the OIG appears to limit the OIG’s ability to act independently,” the senators wrote, “and may ultimately hinder effective oversight and transparency of the agency.”
The senators’ criticisms echo complaints raised nearly two months ago by the Inspector General himself, Geoff Cherrington, who wrote to the panel on Sept. 26, saying a lack of resources is one of the “challenges the OIG faces when attempting to carry out its duties to oversee WMATA.”
In the four-page letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post, Cherrington included a laundry list of shortages, obstacles and potential conflicts of interest that he believes compromise the office’s independence.
[Read an excerpt from Cherrington’s letter]
The correspondence from the Senate committee and Cherrington outline some of the ways the OIG is beholden to the transit agency it is intended to monitor. For example, the IG’s office must rely on Metro’s human resources department to compile and vet candidates for investigative jobs — a role that theoretically could allow HR staff to weed out candidates with the experience and know-how to aggressively investigate the agency.
The OIG does not have independent legal counsel and “relies on WMATA’s General Counsel for legal advice” — individuals who also have a legal responsibility to protect Metro.
The OIG must go through Metro’s procurement department if it wants to buy supplies or hire outside experts, a requirement that became a problem in the past year, when the inspector general wanted to hire an independent mechanic to inspect a vehicle as part of an investigation. Procurement officials initially rejected that request; Metro managers ultimately had to step in so the investigators could bring in their own expert.
And the Inspector General’s office must obtain approval from the Metro board before it can publicly release an audit or internal report — in effect giving the panel authority to decide whether to release information that might be embarrassing to the transit agency.
Cherrington said the letter “speaks for itself” and declined to further comment. But according to members of the Metro Riders’ Advisory Council, Cherrington aired similar concerns at a closed-door meeting with the group last week, expressing frustration with Metro attorneys’ interference with the release of IG reports.
RAC member Colin Reusch described the conversation, which was intended to be private, but said he was compelled to disclose it because of the nature of the Cherrington’s concerns.
“He did say that he had at least one report that was [so] heavily redacted by the general counsel’s office . . . that it would not make sense to release it in that form,” Reusch said. “I think he was frustrated by it. I think he very much wants to be as independent as possible.”
[Metro operators were using an emergency alarm that no one was listening to]
Reusch’s account was confirmed by a second RAC member who attended the lunchtime meeting.
On Wednesday, Wiedefeld said he had not had a chance to delve into the specifics of the Senate committee letter, but said generally he believes the inspector general’s office has the autonomy necessary to perform its job unfettered.
“Anything that has been investigated by the IG’s office, we stay out of the way, and [Cherrington] has access to anything and everything,” Wiedefeld said.
The Senate letter also expressed concerns that Metro might be monitoring the OIG and its investigators. The letter mentioned an incident five years ago, when a Metro employee secretly installed keyword tracking software on OIG computers.
The OIG operates on the same information technology system as the rest of Metro. Critics say giving the office its own server could lessen the threat of hacks and other electronic intrusions.
Metro confirmed Wednesday the keystroke tracking incident took place, and said the employee “inappropriately monitored communication of the OIG.” When then-Inspector General Helen Lew discovered the unsanctioned monitoring, she raised the issue with General Manager Richard Sarles. The employee was fired.
Metro spokesman Dan Stessel stressed the 2012 incident was “the action of a single rogue employee.” Still, he acknowledged that Metro continues to have the ability to monitor the OIG with network security technology that comes standard at most major companies or organizations.
Cherrington’s September letter to the Senate makes several requests. He wants to boost staffing levels “to include hiring special agents, criminal analysis and forensic auditors” and he asks for “fixed and independent” funding that management could not cut.
Further, to carry out certain covert investigations, he asks for confidential funds “located in a local bank to use for cameo roles and undercover operations where cash is needed immediately.” And probably drawing on concerns about Metro tracking the office’s moves, Cherrington asks for IT independence, including an independent Metro IG email address.
Finally, he asks the Senate to give the IG’s special agents law enforcement authority.
“These positions require surveillance and other dangerous operations, particularly in investigation of overtime and workers’ compensation fraud,” the letter reads. “This also provides OIG with investigative tools and databases not currently available.”
The Senate oversight panel asked several questions about the operations and funding of Metro’s Quality Assurance, Internal Compliance and Oversight department — a division of the agency that also is tasked with conducting internal audits and spot-checks of worker activities, but is directly responsible to Wiedefeld.
The Senate letter suggests that office and the OIG are performing duplicative tasks — a notion Cherrington raised in his private meeting with the Riders’ Advisory Council. Some say such audits are a task better performed by an independent group, like the OIG.
Cherrington, one RAC member said, “seemed to be surprised that there was such a similar division within the organization to his own,” the rider advocate said, in an exchange confirmed by Reusch.
In its letter to Wiedefeld, the Senate asks Metro to disclose QICO’s annual budget — and if the amount is more than the Inspector General’s budget — explain why.
Jim Corcoran, chair of the Metro board’s audits and investigations committee, said he sees the value of having dual offices — a unit that can act at Wiedefeld’s behest to investigate issues he feels are important, and a separate and independent office that can dive into systemic problems the general manager may overlook.
“You need to have a little separation of power,” Corcoran said.
Corcoran also said he agrees many of the issues raised in the letter are legitimate concerns — but fixing them costs money.
Cherrington asked Wiedefeld to increase funding for the OIG from $4.7 million to $10.4 million for the coming fiscal year, but the amount was not included in the general manager’s recently proposed budget.
“It shouldn’t be news that Metro doesn’t have enough money to do everything they want to do. It really does come down to limited resources,” Corcoran said.
“It would absolutely help them to have all the resources we’re talking about. But it’s something we’re going to have to build in gradually over time,” he said.
Metro board chairman Jack Evans applauded Cherrington’s efforts to root out corruption and wasteful spending, and he asked Congress to step in to provide the funding Cherrington seeks.
“What I would say to Congress is, ‘Give us more money,’ ” he said. “I’m squeezed as it is in every direction, so where am I going to get more money for the Inspector General?”