Des Moines City Councilman and former Central Iowa Employment and Training Consortium Chairman Archie Brooks answered our questions last week despite, as he said, being pretty "beat up." Brooks has been under fire for signing off on some $1.8 million in salaries over a 30-month period for CIETC executives who seemingly spent most of their time whining that the consortium didn't have enough money to run properly. An audit of that entity and its involvement with Iowa Workforce Development shook the very foundation of the statehouse last week and had everyone from the governor on down looking for something heavy to cover their ass with. Brooks, it should be noted, headed up the CIETC board from 1979, when it was called CIRALG (Central Iowa Regional Association Local Government), until 1996 (Brooks was defeated by Gene Phillips who served one term on the Southeast Side seat. Tom Vlassis took over Brooks' spot on the CIETC board at this time), before resuming his role as chairman again in 1999 when he was re-elected to the city council. This is important, because Brooks insists much changed during that period - namely how the consortium's oversight and payroll was dealt with. Prior to 1995, the staff's CEO performed these tasks and answered to the board as a group. From 1999 on, the chairman was a one-man oversight committee. "And," Brooks said, "there was never a problem with it before. I trusted them before I left the board, and I trusted them when I returned."

This does not excuse Brooks. He knows this. He admits it. But he says repeatedly, "There was no criminal action." He says people want to criminalize it, like WHO-TV with its repeated reports on Brooks' signatures on supplemental pay sheets ("They are all mine. If they weren't, someone broke the law, and that's what they want. But I looked at my personal checks online last night and my signatures are all over the place."), but they cannot. "Charge them with being greedy," he said of Ramona Cunningham, CEO, John Bargman, COO, and Karen Tesdell, the agency's chief accountant. "And charge me with being too trustworthy, too na•ve, too busy, not paying attention, whatever. But nobody broke the law."

Brooks, however, knew last summer it was going to get ugly (some insist he knew there was trouble brewing in '04). According to an e-mail sent to Cunningham from eventual whistleblower Kelly Taylor (per recently fired Iowa Workforce Deputy Director Jane Barto's office) on June 30, 2005 at 10 a.m., CIETC had until 4 p.m. that afternoon to spend $200,000 for its Promise Jobs program or surrender the money. Cunningham told Brooks she wanted to give 25 employees a 10 to 15 percent raise with the money but needed his signature. Brooks balked, telling Cunningham that the money had to be used for Promise Jobs. Brooks told us that Cunningham informed him Promised Jobs was covered already. "The money was authorized by Jane [Barto]," Brooks said. "They are or were friends, and there was always money coming in without any contract stipulating what it was to be used for [When Brooks asked about one particularly large sum from IWD, Cunningham explained that agency had 'part-time' employees working at CIETC - something Brooks told us he cannot confirm]. It was becoming a great concern." So Brooks finally spoke up.

He approached the board about his role as a one-man oversight authority and the board was still OK. He told of his apprehension, and, Brooks told us, the board was still OK. "They knew I was concerned, but there had never been any problems before. They fell back on any findings by the RWIB [Regional Workforce Investment Board] and audits commissioned by CIETC (the most recent one last fall by Faller & Kincheloe, P.C.). Beyond that, they wanted their 30-minute lunch and their 15-minute meeting." Brooks laughs when he is asked if no one else on the board could have known what was going on at CIETC. "They were guilty of being too trusting and not paying attention to bad policy, just like me."

Some say the bad policy begins at the top. Brooks' brother, Charles, works at CIETC. Polk County Supervisor John Mauro's nephew, Steve, works there, as does Cunningham's daughter. Mauro's family's insurance company is the healthcare insurance agent for CIETC (after a thorough open-bidding process, Brooks said). "But is getting somebody work a bad thing?" Brooks asked, noting that his brother was hired when he was not a board member - a time period when the consortium's nepotism regulations were done away with, as well. "If it is, then a lot of people out there are doing bad things. Not to mention, CIETC is about getting people work."

However, the jobs of family and friends are not the issue at CIETC, and Brooks understands that while not criminal on his behalf, the charges and careless behavior are serious. "It all looks really bad," he told us. Did he have an affair with Cunningham? He said they dated twice. Twice? "I swear to God." So this wasn't a man looking out for his woman? "Not at all. She came to me last October, right before I went to the board to tell them about the high salaries, and said, 'Archie, we got greedy.'" Barto, in the meantime, was trying to head off a federal investigation. Brooks knew the storm was coming. "I was disappointed that it had happened on my watch," Brooks said. "You have to remember, CIETC had been running for decades doing exemplary work, changing the lives of thousands of people. It ran itself. We got comfortable relying on the fact that it would continue to do so, and do so right - all of us, but me especially." Is that an excuse? "More so than the Register claiming I tried to use my stroke as one," Brooks said. "Jason Clayworth sat right there [a chair in Brooks' office] and pestered me about my stroke until I said, yes, my memory isn't what it used to be and, yes, my speech is off a bit, and now [Dave] Yepsen has me drooling in the paper."

Brooks will not relinquish his city council seat over the CIETC dustup, drool or no drool. "Let the people work it out in the election if they want a change. I have always made a difference for my constituents, and will continue to do so," he said, adding that he could do without the limelight. But he could never expect the CIETC salary scandal to blow over, so he threw in the towel. "No one has bothered to ask me what I had to gain from being so corrupt [he grins, adding 'one sandwich a month'], but I know I'd continue to be the focus." Besides, Brooks said, the entire board - including some of his good friends - tried to distance themselves from him despite "all but two of them approving the payroll and none of them asking a single question about it. That's just a lack of oversight. They don't hang people for that. Castrate them politically maybe, but not hang."

So are there any winners in the CIETC fiasco? One, for sure: Jim Nussle. A top insider on his campaign told us, "[Jim's] in hog heaven while the governor and his wannabes are deep in pig shit." Nussle, as well as Democratic candidate Ed Fallon, spoke out on the debacle last week, lighting up everyone involved, but Chet Culver and Mike Blouin have been conspicuously silent. Neither candidate, thus far, seems personally involved. However, Ramona Cunningham has given Culver's campaign $800, while Blouin's wife, who works with Vilsack, is a South Sider, and "all of Blouin's enemies (both Democrat and Republican) would love to tie him to this," a Republican statehouse source added. "If I were a campaign manager for any of their opponents, I wouldn't let a day go by without bringing it up: Ako [Abdul Samad, a CIETC board member], any of the Mauros who are running for all their offices, all of them. What a mess... And it's going to be a huge Democratic problem from now until November - no oversight from the governor, to his appointees, to their friends and family, to the last guy pushing a broom at CIETC driving a custom Camaro and making 80 grand."

The "Iowa Ear," which is the daily's answer to this column, published a tidbit last week about Blouin's grousing over Culver introducing himself at an Ames debate as the only candidate for governor who has "been in the classroom" in the past 20 years. Both were teachers. And from what we've been told by an attendee, the Register was kind to Blouin, who seemed "close to losing it." "I'm curious to know if people would describe the color of Blouin's face during the exchanges as just beet-red or more of a crimson," this individual told us. "And his general demeanor on stage as fidgety or more ready to explode." The forum, our source said, was certainly contentious, no doubt, but it was clear that Mike came in expecting to batter Chet around, and he was more than a little irritated when the dumb jock gave as good as he got - and without Chet customarily losing his cool. A Culver staffer, when we inquired about the situation, e-mailed us this: "I don't know if you saw this exchange on a Fallon staffer's blog, but I can verify this actually happened to one of our staff at the forum (and, honestly, we didn't even push it to show up on the blog - some Fallon kid apparently decided to do it): 'Blouin was especially pissy. Coming into the Great Hall, he was greeted by a Culver staffer by the door. Rough transcript: Culver staffer: 'Hey, how are you?' Blouin: 'I'm doing better than you, thanks.' Yikes." CV

Comment on this story | Return to top