With House Speaker Christopher Blazejewski using his new influence to back the creation of a state inspector general’s office, debate on Smith Hill now shifts to how much power to give the appointed government watchdog.
And over whom.
Trends Shaping Sale Decisions Across the Manufacturing Sector
In today’s evolving manufacturing landscape, business leaders are navigating a mix of opportunity and uncertainty.…
Learn More
Blazejewski’s bill made its formal debut Tuesday, with a preliminary hearing before the House Committee on Finance Thursday – at the same time a dueling inspector general proposal inspector by Senate Minority Leader Jessica de la Cruz will get its own preliminary vetting two floors up in the Senate Committee on Finance.
And two more versions are already circulating in the State House for a total of four proposals, all seeking to increase government transparency, accountability and efficiency with a state inspector general. Many more have surfaced and faded away over the last 24 years on Smith Hill, buried under competing priorities and hesitation from legislative leaders.
Not Blazejewski.
“It makes the government more honest, more efficient and more worthy of the public trust,” the Providence Democrat said in a May 14 press conference with reporters.
Blazejewski’s legislation offers the narrowest focus of the four proposals, singling out actions and spending by the executive branch while explicitly exempting the legislative and judicial arms of government.
The carveout has already drawn opposition from Republican attorney general candidate John Loughlin, a former state representative, who has centered his own campaign around getting rid of the state office he is seeking and instead turning it into an inspector general position.
“The General Assembly wrote the rules so the new Inspector General can investigate the executive branch and municipalities, but not itself,” Loughlin said in a statement Wednesday. “That is not accountability — that is self-protection.”
Rep. George Nardone, a Coventry Democrat and longstanding champion for the inspector general’s office, said Wednesday he intended to take his name off Blazejewski’s bill after initially signing on as a cosponsor because of the exemptions for the legislative and judicial branches.
“I’m not on board with that,” Nardone said in an interview Wednesday, admitting he had not read the bill before he signed on as a cosponsor. He already has his own inspector general bill, introduced in February, which he envisions would apply to all branches of state government.
Blazejewski, however, said his bill adheres to constitutional separation of powers.
“The inspector general’s office would be able to initiate investigations into state and quasi-state agencies, as well as municipal governments utilizing state funds,” he said in an emailed statement Wednesday. “It would be an administrative agency of the executive branch, and therefore the legislative branch and the judicial branch are not included due to the constitutional requirement of separation of powers. This concept is not novel to Rhode Island.”
The state auditor general serves as the oversight for the legislative branch.
Three more to consider
Blazejewski’s version allows the inspector general to investigate municipal activities if authorized under a town or city council resolution. Preapproval would not be required under the bill by de la Cruz, a North Smithfield Republican.
De la Cruz’s bill, introduced in January, gives explicit authority to an inspector general to probe any public body subject to government spending, including local governments and contractors. It also includes extensive language directing an inspector general to dig into government procurement and contracting for supplies and projects — which is less explicit in Blazejewski’s proposal.
“Look no further than the Washington Bridge debacle,” de la Cruz said as explanation for the focus on contracts and procurements.
The westbound highway’s seemingly sudden closure in late 2023 due to structural degradation has highlighted the problems with lack of coordination and communication between the state transportation department and a string of third-party contractors hired to inspect and repair the bridge over the course of several decades.
“When we have departments like RIDOT who, we recently learned, rely on extreme outsourcing, it’s imperative to have oversight of contracts and procurements, especially active, real-time monitoring,” de la Cruz said in an emailed response Wednesday.
Her bill seeks to avoid “bad procurements” and wasted dollars by also creating education and training, led by the inspector general’s office, for contractors and government procurement officials.
There is also emphasis on procurement and contract investigations in Nardone’s proposal, the only one with a Senate companion, by fellow Coventry Democrat, Leonidas Raptakis.
Nardone’s bill is the only one that seeks to merge the new inspector general’s office with the existing state office of internal audit — a way to avoid requiring more state money for its creation, he explained Wednesday.
Gov. Daniel J. McKee’s fiscal 2027 budget proposal includes $5.2 million for the Office of Internal Audit, housed within the Department of Administration.
Blazejewski estimated his proposal would require $2 million in state revenue while de la Cruz estimated a $1.5 million cost for hers.
“Let’s not forget this is an office that has the potential and probability to pay for itself with a return on investment through the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse,” de la Cruz added.
All three proposals authorize an inspector general to subpoena witnesses and documents, and to recoup state money lost through fraud or mismanagement via civil proceedings — though de la Cruz and Blazejewski’s versions first require the signoff of the attorney general’s office. Evidence of criminal wrongdoing would be referred to other agencies, such as the AG, state or local law enforcement, and the U.S. attorney’s office.
The most expansive inspector general powers belong in a fourth bill submitted in February by Rep. Charlene Lima, a Cranston Democrat. Lima’s version still requires referral to other agencies for criminal proceedings, but lets an inspector general hire police officers with firearm licenses to carry out its investigations, too.
Lima did not immediately respond to calls for comment Wednesday.
All four versions offer some level of public reporting and whistleblower protections, though Blazejewski’s includes the most explicit mandates for both.
Who chooses the IG?
How the inspector general would be chosen, and by whom, also varies. Blazejewski proposes that a five-member commission, including the AG and a representative from the Association of Inspectors General, forward a list of three nominees to the governor’s office, with confirmation by the Senate. Lima’s bill calls for a 14-member commission, including law enforcement and cybersecurity experts, to submit recommendations for gubernatorial appointment and Senate confirmation.
Under Nardone and de la Cruz’s submissions, the inspector general would be chosen through a majority vote of a designated panel of state general officeholders, without a Senate confirmation.
Blazejewski and de la Cruz both address potential removal, with Blazejewski authorizing the governor to remove the inspector general directly for just cause, while de La Cruz requires a two-thirds vote of state general officeholders and legislative leaders, with prospective appeals subject to review and vote by the Senate.
Term lengths and limits, and professional qualifications vary.
Nardone’s bill already had a preliminary vetting before the House finance committee on April 29, where it was held for review in keeping with standard procedure. The companion by Raptakis has not been scheduled for a committee hearing, nor has the bill by Lima.
Nanay Lavin is a senior reporter for the Rhode Island Current.
