Massachusetts senators and employees from the State Auditor’s Workplace sparred Tuesday over the scope of an audit into the Legislature, whether or not Auditor Diana DiZoglio may ethically direct the probe, and the constitutionality of an investigation into the enterprise of the Home and Senate.
The voter-approved legislation driving the audit of the Home and Senate has generated widespread disagreement between DiZoglio and lawmakers, and has prompted requires authorized motion to drive compliance. Tempers flared throughout an almost two-hour public assembly between the 2 sides.
DiZoglio’s prime deputies and senators tasked with responding to the Methuen Democrat’s requests discovered themselves arguing from the outset of the assembly, together with when legislators requested DiZoglio’s employees what they have been doing to “maintain an ethical standing” throughout the audit.
Sen. Joanne Comerford, a Florence Democrat, stated a battle of curiosity may come up as a result of DiZoglio had “just left the Senate” after serving as a legislative staffer and member of the Home. DiZoglio was a consultant from 2013 to 2019 and a senator from 2019 to 2023.
“What are the controls within your office that would allow for the kind of objectivity and independence that the Yellow Book standards tell us is imperative in order to produce a quality audit?” Comerford stated.
Employees from the State Auditor’s Workplace tried to distance DiZoglio from the audit course of.
Michael Leung-Tat, the highest lawyer on the workplace, stated investigators conduct audits in accordance with typically accepted authorities auditing requirements — also referred to as the “Yellow Book” — and have consulted with the U.S. Authorities Accountability Workplace concerning the legislative audit.
Government Deputy Auditor Steve Lisauskas additionally stated DiZoglio doesn’t do the audit work herself and a group of rank-and-file employees are as an alternative accountable for conducting probes and writing reviews.
“There is a process there to conflict-check folks,” he stated. “We’ve already had the conversations with regard to the auditor, and the fact that she was formerly a state legislator has already been discussed with the Government Accountability Office and cleared.”
However Sen. Paul Feeney, a Foxboro Democrat, wished to know whether or not there was “an official opinion” from the U.S. Authorities Accountability Workplace or if the impartial federal company had produced any written assertion on DiZoglio’s previous as an elected lawmaker.
Leung-Tat stated he didn’t know whether or not the workplace had issued one thing in writing, prompting Sen. William Brownsberger to push Leung-Tat to expose how the State Auditor’s Workplace acquired clearance from the federal authorities watchdog.
“We’ve reached out to them and we’ve had conversations with them,” Leung-Tat informed Brownsberger.
Lisauskas stated the conversations happened a yr and a half in the past as a part of the preliminary levels of an audit of the Legislature that DiZoglio’s workplace launched in October 2024.
“We’ve done 130 audits since that time,” he stated.
Comerford stated the dialog ought to “stick out.”
“This is the conversation where you presumably would have asked whether or not it would be ethical for the auditor to oversee the body doing this audit when she was just a member of the body,” Comerford stated. “It would to me, anyway.”
Senators and the Workplace of the State Auditor’s Workplace additionally tangled over the scope of the legislative audit.
An argument broke out over language included in a Jan. 3 letter from DiZoglio to the Legislature that stated the legislative audit would “cover all the topics we were unable to fully review in our previous audit, due to your refusal to participate in the audit process.”
The letter stated auditors would “start with a review of high-risk areas, such as state contracting and procurement procedures, the use of taxpayer-funded nondisclosure agreements, and a review” of how unused {dollars} have been pushed ahead every year.
James DiTullio, the lead lawyer for the Massachusetts Senate, stated lawmakers have been “confused” as a result of the letter advised a wider scope, whereas employees from the State Auditor’s Workplace have been outlining solely three matters.
“There’s a little bit of a whiplash going on here,” DiTullio stated.
Lisauskas stated the State Auditor’s Workplace has been clear concerning the scope of the audit — state contracting and procurement, nondisclosure agreements, and the way unused money is carried over every year.
DiTullio shot again.
“That’s not what your boss said on Jan. 3, 2025. We take her at her word and that’s what she said,” he stated. “… Your boss wrote the sentence. Are you saying, today, ignore that sentence, everything else is accurate?”
Lisauskas pointed to the agenda for the assembly, which stated the audit would concentrate on the three points.
“So the auditor’s letters aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on?” DiTullio stated to Lisauskas.
Lisauskas demurred.
“Jim, I know what you’re looking to do. We’re not going there. We’re telling you what the scope of the audit is,” he stated earlier than the room devolved into crosstalk.
Then Brownsberger jumped in.
“Finish that sentence. You know what we’re looking to do? Lay it out. What are we looking to do?” Brownsberger stated to Lisauskas.
Lisauskas stated he had completed his thought.
“This is the scope of the audit is the end of the sentence,” he stated. “There was a period.”
Initially Revealed:
