State Auditor Diana DiZoglio plans to again ask the Massachusetts Legislature Friday to participate in an audit of “high-risk areas” after she faced repeated rejections from top legislative leaders who claimed an audit law did not formally take effect until this month.
In an interview with the Herald, DiZoglio said she is preparing to send an engagement letter to House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka on the day a successful ballot question takes effect under a timeline laid out by the Secretary of State’s Office.
“We are moving ahead despite the consistent roadblocks and are sending another letter (Friday) which will be very similar to the letter we sent previously, simply with a date change, because it’s the same audit and their issue is simply the date that they were required to adhere,” DiZoglio said by phone Thursday.
The State Auditor’s Office earned the right to probe the Legislature in November after a ballot question championed by DiZoglio earned more than 2.3 million votes or 72% of ballots cast.
But lawyers for the Legislature and Galvin have brawled with DiZoglio over the implementation date of the measure, with the former arguing it takes hold Friday and the latter claiming it was effective early last month.
In the letter expected to be sent to the Legislature Friday, DiZoglio said she would seek to audit “high-risk areas” like state contracting and procurement procedures, the use of taxpayer-funded non-disclosure agreements, and review of the House and Senate’s finances.
DiZoglio has faced consistent resistance to repeated attempts to probe the Legislature, including her most recent attempt in November that top House and Senate Democrats brushed aside as “untimely” because the legislative audit law was not yet active.
Mariano and Spilka have also argued that an investigation into the practices of the two branches could violate separation of powers principles outlined in the state constitution. The two leaders have floated tinkering with the audit law even after residents approved it in the fall.
A spokesperson for Mariano said the House “will review the letter once we have received it” in response to a question about whether the chamber will comply with a formal request to participate in a legislative audit.
A spokesperson for Spilka said the chamber will also “review any letter we receive and respond as appropriate” when asked if the Senate will comply with DiZoglio’s forthcoming request.
“As previously done, any response will be made available to the public,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
DiZoglio said she plans to “absolutely give (the Legislature) another chance” to demonstrate they are willing to work with the State Auditor’s Office before asking Attorney General Andrea Campbell to intervene with legal action.
“I think it’s important for people to understand that we don’t have enforcement authority in the Office of State Auditor, and so we can’t require that any institution follow the law,” DiZoglio said. “When there is a disagreement, our governing statute cites that we are to resolve the issue in court. So really, we do need the attorney general to help to enforce the law.”
DiZoglio called on Campbell in November to greenlight legal action against the Legislature to force the House and Senate to comply with a reignited effort to audit the two chambers. It was her second attempt at pursuing court action.
In a letter weeks later, Campbell said she had no role to play in the dispute until the law took effect. But she said once the audit statute is on the books, the nature of the House and Senate’s response to DiZoglio’s audit attempt will determine if “litigation is appropriate.”
“My office will then evaluate whether any requested litigation is warranted, including by considering both your position and the Legislature’s position on the dispute. As you know, our offices have cooperated on litigation matters in the past,” Campbell wrote in the November letter.
Campbell also said in the letter that her office “recently” approved a request from DiZoglio to “initiate litigation against the subject of an audit that has refused to provide information to which your office is entitled.” Her office declined to name the subject of the lawsuit.
A spokesperson for Campbell said there is a “well-established” process for state offices to make and substantiate a request to start legal action.
“If and when the auditor follows that process, as her office has done successfully in other matters, we will consider the request,” the spokesperson said.
