FirstNet special report: Fitzgerald’s openness, transparency claims incorrect
What is in this article?
FirstNet special report: Fitzgerald’s openness, transparency claims incorrect
FirstNet board activity has been sufficiently open and transparent, contrary to allegations made by board member Paul Fitzgerald in April, according to a report issued today by an internal special review committee investigating the claims.
During the FirstNet board meeting in April, Fitzgerald alleged that the board was not being open and transparent in its decision-making process, that information was not being shared adequately with some board members, and that the network planning was dominated by FirstNet members with commercial-wireless backgrounds—without input from the public-safety community and FirstNet’s public-safety advisory committee (PSAC).
But today’s report indicates that the special review committee—supported by a three-person team of attorneys from the U.S. Department of Commerce—found no evidence supporting Fitzgerald’s allegations on these issues.
“The FirstNet Board has engaged in open and transparent decision-making; FirstNet did not withhold information from board members; and FirstNet is still developing its network plan with full consultation and outreach,” the conclusion of the report states.
Although the report included no findings of wrongdoing, it did acknowledge that FirstNet board members who also were acting in managerial capacities—for instance, Craig Farrill, who served as FirstNet’s acting general manager for more than five months until Bill D’Agostino was hired as a full-time general manager—had access to more documents than other board members because of their increased involvement at the time.
According to the report, Fitzgerald claimed that he asked for financial information and contractor information from Farrill and Chief Financial Officer Randy Lyons “on multiple occasions and was rebuffed.” However, the only e-mail request from Fitzgerald was one sent to Lyons on the eve of the FirstNet meeting in April, when Fitzgerald made his accusations, the report said.
Further, both Fitzgerald and fellow FirstNet board member Suzanne Spaulding said they verbally requested financial information in February. But according to the report, that’s when Farrill—as FirstNet acting general manager—was working with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on a new financial reporting structure.
“Due to these activities,” the report stated,“the actinggeneral manager [Farrill] decided that the financial reports should not be immediatelyprovided to the board,because he believed that the reports that could be generated at that time, which were done on a cash basis, needed modifications to reflect obligations and outlays to avoid confusion among the board members. …
“These modifications took some time and some board members expressed concerns about the delay,as the revised report was not delivered to the board until April 2013. Nevertheless, when the format changes were finalized, each board member received reports simultaneously whenavailable.”
As for Fitzgerald’s allegation that the FirstNet board made decisions during briefings that were not open to the public—resulting in the actual board meetings being “well-rehearsed performances,” according to Fitzgerald—the special review committee disagreed, describing them as “informational briefings that did not constitute decision-making.”
FirstNet Chairman Sam Ginn said the findings mean that the FirstNet board again can conduct regular information briefings, which had been suspended for the past several months to let the special review committee complete its investigation.
Fitzgerald’s third allegation cited in this report was a claim that a 400-page document provided to FirstNet board members before the April meeting was the network plan and had been developed without appropriate input from the PSAC and others in the public-safety community. But the report noted that no network plan has been developed—even citing an Urgent Communications interview with General Manager Bill D’Agostino—and that FirstNet representatives have conducted extensive outreach to states, public safety and vendors during recent months.
Recently there has been a run
Recently there has been a run on whitewash at the D.C. Home Depot.
This should have been
This should have been referred entirely over to the GAO or the Commerce Inspector General, rather than FirstNet Board members themselves forming a subgroup to “investigate” themselves. The fact they consulted lawyers and other agency personnel about the letter-of-the-law does not legitimize this report. Where there is smoke there is fire, and there is now near-universal consensus — among the entire vendor/technology/engineering/consulting ecosphere with the expertise in this area that have been following FirstNet — that the issues Sheriff Fitzgerald raised are real concerns. Chairman Sam Ginn’s vague self-congratulatory remarks of how well the Board and FirstNet are progressing are wearing thin. The technology community has become frustrated with the lack of transparency and any real milestones for procurements, build-out, or even a notional date for eventual launch (let alone the lack of any sufficient program management office or function). As a result, many companies have pulled back in the amount of info and know-how they were willing to share (and commitment of time to produce it) in the recently submitted responses to the RFIs. The Board’s late-coming “outreach” efforts have not included the vendor/technology community (no industry days or guidance to those stakeholders) and so it’s possible the FirstNet board and leadership have no clue. Who runs a major watershed program like this? Sadly I may be shaping up to be the next SBInet in terms of failure (see the several GAO reports on that failed program). Still left unanswered in the “investigation” are the conflicts of interest of some of the Board members that have commercial background and continuing business and investment stakes in the industry….
Whitewash has been sold out
Whitewash has been sold out for weeks at the DC Home Depot.
No lack of transparency while
No lack of transparency while they vigorously fight the release of internal emails.