"Kof-Lee" Holloway. "I Have a Dream...House"

Editorial: Ethics probe for Holloway

From the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Dec. 28, 2004

Eight county supervisors - more than one-third of the Milwaukee County Board - have filed a formal complaint demanding that the County Ethics Board investigate County Board Chairman Lee Holloway’s dealings with a beleaguered social services agency.

An ethics probe is absolutely necessary, if for no other reason than to reassure a citizenry that is still rightly smarting from the county pension scandal only a few short years ago.

The Ethics Board must first determine if probable cause exists to begin an investigation. In our view, enough questions have been raised about this deal, despite explanations offered by Holloway’s attorney, Jeremy Levinson.

Levinson has attempted to explain how it was that a real estate firm, Webb Investments, run by Holloway and his wife, Lynda, was paid $165,000 in public funds from an affiliate of the Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee for a building the firm owned. Despite the payments, the affiliate never used the building and the building never changed hands.

Levinson insists that Holloway did nothing wrong and points out, quite correctly, that neither the Holloways nor their firm was charged by the U.S. attorney’s office as part of a criminal investigation into the OIC affiliate.

Levinson says the couple attempted several times to close on the building and formally transfer ownership to the OIC affiliate but were unsuccessful. The Holloways, Levinson said, believed they were holding the building for the affiliate and consequently never even tried to rent it. The building remains vacant and boarded up.

But that explanation still doesn’t answer all of the questions raised. As the ethics complaint filed by Holloway’s fellow supervisors pointed out, since Holloway continued to hold title to the property and pay taxes on it, why did he fail to list it, as required, on his financial disclosure statements filed with the Ethics Board? And why did he not recuse himself while voting on county contracts and grants for OIC, considering that he had financial dealings with the agency? Last week, Holloway sent a letter to the Ethics Board further explaining his actions while also amending his ethics disclosure statements to add the building in question to the list of properties he owns.

The Ethics Board must attempt to answer these and other questions. In the meantime, the eight supervisors, which, significantly, includes both supporters and critics of Holloway, have every right to wonder whether the board chairman has violated his public trust.

His colleagues haven’t taken a vote of confidence yet, but if they did, it appears that a number of them wouldn’t have to think twice about how they would vote.

An ethics probe is the first step to determine if confidence is warranted.