Closed encounters

Are Almond's backroom negotiations a matter of secrecy -- or practicality?

by Richard P. Morin

Ask any candidate running for a political office if he or she is in favor of more open government -- increased public access to information about government officials, initiatives, and projects -- and the answer almost always is a resounding "yes." And more often than not gubernatorial candidates will rail against an incumbent's lack of openness as a means of winning office. This proved to be a winning formula for Lincoln Almond in 1993, when he ousted then-Governor Bruce Sundlun by criticizing his administration's secrecy and by pledging "to go directly to the people" to bring about change.

But now as governor of Rhode Island, Lincoln Almond is the one being criticized for secrecy. In recent weeks, Almond has been assailed by political foes and gubernatorial candidates alike for his administration's silence concerning negotiations over a Six Flags Amusement Park in Hopkinton, the redevelopment of the Masonic Temple in Providence, and the failed stadium deal with the New England Patriots.

With the next general election a year away, how much of this criticism is politically motivated remains open to debate. "The opposition needs something to chip away at because right now the governor is standing strong," says Joan Quick, chairperson of the Rhode Island Republican Party. In fact, polls indicate Almond has some of the strongest voter approval ratings of any governor in Rhode Island history.

Still, in at least one case and arguably more, Almond has indeed backtracked on just how open government should be when it comes to the flow of information about key economic-development projects in the state.

"Every candidate comes into office talking about open government, but often they discover [once they get into office] it is not always easy negotiating deals in the public's eye," says Darrell West, professor of political science at Brown University. "I think that is what has happened to Lincoln Almond."

The most glaring example of Almond's secrecy, observers say, is the ongoing negotiations for the redevelopment of the Masonic Temple. The hulking building, which sidles up to the State House, has laid vacant for decades. After searching for years for a suitable use for the never-completed building, Almond announced this summer that an agreement had been struck with a New York developer to turn the dilapidated stone building into a luxury hotel with a French Quarter theme.

But although the governor has pledged a potential $500,000 in state money for the project, he has released scant information about it since the initial announcement.

"There has been a deafening silence surrounding that project," says Myrth York, a gubernatorial candidate in 1994 and an expected opponent of Almond in 1998. "Nobody seems to know what is going on with the project. And anytime anyone asks, they get nowhere. He has shown an incredible amount of disrespect to the people of Rhode Island by being so closed."

Indeed, when the local media asked for information about bidders on the project in September, they received a somewhat defiant refusal from the governor's office. The reason: the state needed to maintain negotiating room with potential bidders on the project. Ironically, this was the same rationale Almond assailed in 1993, when then-Governor Bruce Sundlun refused to release bids on a new home for the state's Registry of Motor Vehicles. Then-candidate Almond said the secrecy was not worth the public skepticism it would create.

Almond, however, maintains the two situations are different. Furthermore, he says, once his administration is in a solid negotiating position with builders, they will release all information about the project. "I have nothing to hide," says Almond. "I've told my people that once they can release the information to release it. I don't care if they release it."

But therein lies the problem with Almond's negotiating principles, says Cool Moose Party Chairman Robert J. Healey, Jr. "He wants it both ways," says Healey. "He wants the secrecy of negotiations, and yet he wants the public to participate. Rhode Island is getting mixed signals from the quarterback in this game."

During an interview in his office at the State House last week, Almond said he prefers to initially negotiate deals outside the public eye because of the often-complex nature of such negotiations. "How can the public understand a moving target?" asks Almond, referring to the twists and turns taken at the negotiating table. Rather than confuse the public with trivial issues that are used as give and take in negotiations, Almond would prefer that people concentrated on the final project. "We are trying to help the public process, not circumvent it," he says.

Healey, who also plans to run for governor in '98, disagrees, saying that "every governor who comes into office talks about purges in government, doing things differently, but all too often it is just too easy to slip on that same old comfortable slipper."

One project that particularly disturbs Healey is the proposed construction of a Six Flags Amusement Park on Mashantucket Pequot land in Hopkinton. The project would potentially involve hundreds of thousands of dollars in state money and would require the renovation and construction of several state highways. But both sides of the project -- Six Flags and the governor's office -- have had little, if anything, to say about it. Despite the silence, Healey says, developers are quietly moving forward with the acquisition of hundreds of acres of land in Hopkinton.

"We [the Cool Moose Party] have two council members in Hopkinton, yet they report little contact with the state in terms of its development strategy," says Healey. "If the stadium negotiation is any indication of how this administration is doing business, then Hopkinton is in trouble. The people of Hopkinton are very independent and stubborn. If the governor decides to continue to keep these people in the dark, he could be potentially scuttling an important economic project for the state."

As for the failed stadium deal, Almond has been chastised for his decision not to bring legislative and local officials to the table in negotiating a potential $130 million taxpayer-funded deal that would have brought the New England Patriots to Providence. "The governor should have been a consensus builder on this issue. Instead, he was alone with his people at the table," says Senate Majority Leader Paul Kelly. "If the deal had come to pass, he would have not only had to sell it to the people of Rhode Island but to the General Assembly and the mayor of Providence."

An even more important indicator of the secrecy that has enveloped the Almond administration was the governor's unwillingness to bring the stadium deal to a public vote through a referendum. "And this was from a guy who ran on voter initiative," says Kelly, a key Democratic leader who last week put to rest speculation that he, too, would run against Almond next year.

Almond, however, says his approach to the stadium was not about secrecy but practicality. He says he did not support a public referendum because of time constraints. The next referendum, after all, is scheduled for November 1998, and Almond maintains that a decision on the stadium was needed before then.

The governor also defends his decision not to involve city officials such as Providence Mayor Vincent "Buddy" Cianci in the initial stages of the stadium negotiations. "I don't think city officials would want to be tied up in negotiations involving state issues," he says. "We [also] didn't want to muddy state issues with local issues."

If the stadium had moved forward, Almond says, it would have been brought to city officials and the General Assembly to hash out the remaining details. But since that never happened and specific details of the negotiations were never released, many people are left to wonder why the stadium deal was not consummated. As Almond himself said in his campaign against Sundlun, this silence may not be worth the public skepticism it has created, particularly for a governor facing reelection in a year.

But political leaders are not the only ones critical of Almond for his administration's secrecy. Curt Spalding, executive director of Save the Bay, also has condemned the administration for its silence around plans for the continuing development of Quonset Point/Davisville and for the lack of citizen input into the project.

The project, which has now been several years in the making, is considered to be a potential model for megaports and has been heralded by many as a potential boon to Rhode Island's sagging economy. "If this is such an economic savior for Rhode Island, why haven't we heard more about the project?" asks Spalding, who contends that up until recently, Save the Bay was involved in talks with state officials about plans for Quonset Point/Davisville.

Although the project has slowly moved forward in recent years with additions to the 900-acre industrial park, no final decision appears to have been made on the overall vision for Quonset Point/Davisville. "There isn't any dialogue between the state and the people of Rhode Island as to the future of Quonset Point and Narragansett Bay. In fact, there isn't even a process in place to foster that discussion," says Spalding, who has called on the Rhode Island Economic Development Commission (EDC) and Almond to immediately apprise the public of the status of the project.

But Almond administration officials say they are puzzled by Spalding's comments. They say that all meetings concerning the future of Quonset Point/Davisville have been open to the public and that numerous public meetings have been held to keep residents abreast of developments in the project. "We've met to death with the towns down there," says Almond.

Officials in several of the towns potentially affected by the project back up these assertions. Richard Kerbel, town manager of North Kingstown, says he believes that the public has been involved much of the way. He does concede, though, that several representatives of neighborhood groups in North Kingstown have contacted him to find out about the status of the project and about the changes that have been occurring over the last few months. "The EDC is going to have to work more and more with the people as the project moves forward," he says.

US Senator Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island), a longtime proponent of the project who helped secure federal funds to move it along, agrees. "The sooner all parties engage in constructive discussions, the better off we will be," he says.

According to some political insiders, much of the recent criticism about secrecy in the governor's office also has to do with Almond's personality and style. Almond has been described as a homebody who has become somewhat weary of the political games played by Rhode Island's more seasoned legislators. Unlike previous governors, Almond does not grab headlines or mug for cameras, making him seem remote and distant from the public.

"He's his own man," says Mike Vallante, a local political pundit and consultant who co-hosts a morning talk show on WHJJ. "His years in the [US Attorney General's] office make him see things in a very black-and-white manner. He doesn't have the pizzazz of a Buddy Cianci or the rugged individualism of a Bruce Sundlun."

Almond's appearance of battening down the hatches also may be a result of his being a Republican governor in a state dominated by Democrats. Rhode Island has one of the most lopsided legislatures in the nation, with Democrats holding more than 80 percent of the seats in both chambers. Still, Kelly maintains that the legislature has been ready and willing to work with Almond and that the scant flow of information and communication from the governor's office is what often puts the two sides at odds.

"From the very beginning, the lines of communication have been closed," says Kelly. To illustrate his point, he says that Almond, unlike Sundlun, has little contact with legislative leaders. Sundlun, he says, held weekly meetings with legislative leaders "for better or worse," to ensure that a dialogue remained open. Not so with Almond, Kelly says.

"We have a General Assembly that is willing to work with him to move this state forward, but he doesn't want to reciprocate," he says. "I don't think he has the people skills that are inherent to politics. Because of that, he has become very insular and clandestine."

But the Rhode Island legislature is not without its own critics when it comes to open government. Last year, the General Assembly killed a bill that would have opened up state government -- a bill that Almond supported and hopes to reintroduce next year, according to his spokesman, Eric Cote.

In 1996, House leaders also tried to muscle Secretary of State Jim Langevin out of his State House digs. Fighting back, Langevin went directly to local newspapers and television, portraying himself as a public-information martyr. He accused the legislative leadership of punishing him for improving access to public records.

But despite these examples and others, Almond is the one on the hot seat now for issues of open government. And he sees great irony in his political foes' criticisms.

York and Kelly, after all, stood by while the Sundlun administration pushed through deals on a casino and the soon-to-be-completed Providence Place mall without public input, he says. "Where were those people who are criticizing me today when those two deals were pushed through?" asks Almond. "They just stood by and watched. If that is open government, that is outrageous."