Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Indiana Secretary of Commerce David Rosenberg withdrew his request to waive job change conflict-of-interest requirements midway through a State Ethics Commission meeting last week. A spokeswoman for his agency acknowledged the commission found his request “premature.”
The commission separately approved two waivers for agency employees under outgoing Gov. Eric Holcomb’s administration. U.S. Sen. Mike Braun, also a Republican, is governor-elect.
As the state’s employees prepare for administrative turnover, many appointees and others are looking elsewhere for new jobs. New governors often swap out predecessors’ appointees.
Rosenberg, whose position includes serving as president and CEO of the Indiana Economic Development Corp., sought permission to take a vaguely defined executive role at Indiana University. It would relate to workforce and the economy, according to the application.
On the campaign trail, Braun was critical of the IEDC and its actions, specifically in netting large business commitments in which Rosenberg has played a prominent role.
Governor’s Office General Counsel Joseph Heerens said Rosenberg submitted the application “out of an abundance of caution”—“just so that Indiana University and Secretary Rosenberg could move forward with high confidence that there would be no issues or questions about this move from IEDC to Indiana University.”
Indiana conflict-of-interest law can limit employees’ next moves. It can permanently block former state staffers from helping their new employers on “particular matters” related to past state work. Applications, claims, contracts, lawsuits and more count.
And it may mandate a yearlong ban on accepting a job or receiving compensation as a lobbyist; if the state employee negotiated or administered a contract with their prospective next employer while having discretionary decision-making power over negotiations or administration; or if the state employee made regulatory or licensing decisions that impacted their prospective next employer within the year before their departure.
Heerens said Rosenberg wouldn’t trigger the “particular matters” restrictions because the potential job wouldn’t involve “assisting” or “representing” anyone connected to work in which he “personally and substantially” participated while at IEDC.
He also argued that Rosenberg’s new gig would involve no lobbying, that he wasn’t involved in negotiating or administering IEDC’s single contract with IU—providing a state match to the university’s successful federal microelectronics grant—and that he made no regulatory or licensing decisions related to IU.
But some commissioners were skeptical, critiquing Rosenberg for being too vague about what duties he’d handle for IU.
“We would be establishing a new program in an industry sector that is aligned with IU and their focus areas, building a team to do that,” Rosenberg said, as Commissioner Corinne Finnerty interrupted: “To do what? Building a team to do what?”
When Rosenberg said he couldn’t answer, Finnerty asked, “Because you don’t know, or because you’re trying to hide something?”
Rosenberg denied that allegation, but Finnerty said the commission couldn’t ensure no overlap between Rosenberg’s roles if members didn’t understand his new duties.
Commissioner John Krauss, appeared more sympathetic. He reasoned that the role hasn’t officially been established and doesn’t have a set description, which Rosenberg confirmed.
“What you are going to do is something that is still in the proposal stage at IU,” Krauss later said. “… So we almost have an issue where it might’ve been wiser that you didn’t ask us this question.”
Heerens emphasized that he and Rosenberg didn’t believe a waiver was needed, but sought one just in case. He cited a meeting with the Inspector General’s Office.
The commission, which is housed within that office, said it doesn’t decide whether a waiver is required—it just approves or denies them.
“The alternative is that maybe you withdraw your request … therefore we have nothing to decide,” Krauss said. “What I’m trying to say is: we don’t want to damage opportunities for you.”
The parties went back and forth for several more minutes, with Rosenberg remarking that he “did not think we needed to be here” for a waiver and Krauss replying, “I wish you weren’t!”
That’s when Rosenberg pulled out.
“For the official record, we do not think there is a violation … In the interest of transparency in government, we wanted to be here. With the discussion today, I will formally withdraw this application. Thank you for your time.”
It’s unclear what that means for Rosenberg’s next job.
IEDC spokeswoman Erin Sweitzer wrote, in a comment to the Capital Chronicle: “In order to get clarity around his future career options, Secretary Rosenberg approached the State Ethics Commission in the spirit of transparency and out of an abundance of caution. He was told his request was premature, so he withdrew it.”
“In terms of next steps, the Secretary remains focused on finishing another record-breaking year at the IEDC,” Sweitzer continued.
Inspector General’s Office spokeswoman Stephanie McFarland also noted Rosenberg’s efforts at transparency. When asked about what comes next, she highlighted his application withdrawal: “Therefore, the (commission) has no action before it to address at this time in regard to Secretary Rosenberg and nothing further to add.”
Commission approves other waivers
Afterward, Rosenberg remained seated to present a waiver application for Kimberly Hoffman, a vice president of experiential marketing and events at IEDC.
She hoped to return to her previous employer, Accent Indy. That’s although the company has agreements with IEDC and she oversees the “day-to-day working relationship” with Accent Indy, according to an ethics disclosure, including negotiating contract extensions. But, according to the waiver application, she has “no final contracting or budgeting authority.”
At the meeting, Hoffman promised she would remove herself from activities relating to IEDC and pass such duties on to her new colleagues.
The commission approved her request on a voice vote. It did the same for Deanna Dwenger, the Department of Correction’s behavioral health executive director.
Dwenger has given input on the design of a behavioral health unit at a new, massive prison in Westville. She wanted to accept a position with Elevatus, a company that holds a contract for the project, as a consultant. She would ensure the company’s jail, prison and school designs take into account the mental health of those served.
But, she also hoped to finish out her work on the Westville project before leaving state employment. Dwenger promised that, in her new role, she would have no involvement in that project.
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
There is no way that the “industry sector that is aligned with IU and their focus areas” isn’t life sciences, right? Unless IU is pushing to hop on the CS/engineering train and compete directly with Purdue, which I feel is unlikely in Rosenberg’s case.
I think it’s most likely that IU is trying to be a little secretive (what else is new), thus the friction with the ethics committee. His next application should be interesting.
Even Indiana has it’s own version of the swamp, and those that dwell in it continue to be rewarded for past and future deeds. I’m sure Mr. Rosenberg’s past and current connections will simply cease to exist once he leaves his current position.