RI Corrections Director Wayne Salisbury explains how he settled an ethics complaint
Salisbury failed to disclose 6 out-of-state trips paid for by third parties
PROVIDENCE – Rhode Island Corrections Director Wayne Salisbury agreed Tuesday to pay $200 to settle a complaint with the state Ethics Commission alleging that Salisbury failed to disclose a half-dozen out-of-state trips paid for by third parties.
The trips included a trip to London paid for by the British Consulate and a trip to Indian Wells, California, for training paid for by the national Correctional Leaders Association.
As he left closed-door meetings with the Ethics Committee on Tuesday morning, Salisbury said he was “embarrassed” that he had made a mistake in filling out the disclosure forms.
“As I said a few months ago, it was simply ignorance,” Salisbury told reporters. “I was very embarrassed that I didn’t know how to fill out the form and what the requirements were. Thanks to the help of the ethics committee staff, we were able to resolve the issue so it won’t be an issue in the future.”
What happened at the meeting?
The complaint was filed by the Rhode Island Brotherhood of Correctional Officers and followed a report by WPRI-TV that Salisbury changed his annual financial disclosures in June only after the station asked why he did not mention the trips in his original filing.
The vote on the settlement with Salisbury ended 4-2, with members Lauren Jones, Holly Susi, Emma Peterson and Matthew Strauss voting in favor and Frank Cenerini and Hugo Ricci Jr. voting against the settlement.
When the Ethics Committee reconvened in public session after the settlement was passed behind closed doors, Ricci attempted to increase the payment to $5,000 “due to the number of violations and the correction of those violations only after a formal complaint.”
“I raise what I believe is appropriate under the circumstances and request an increase in the fine to $5,000,” he said.
However, Commission President Jones rejected the request to increase the fine on the grounds that he was unable to ensure regularity, relying on Commission rules requiring settlements to be negotiated in camera.
Background to the complaint
The United Kingdom spent $3,900 to bring Salisbury and other American prison officials to London so they could learn about British prison policy, which included “a tour of His Majesty’s Wandsworth Prison and meetings with the Warden of Wandsworth Prison in London and her redress and compensation team,” according to the amended filing. The consulate paid for the flight, a hotel room and two meals.
In addition to London and California, Salisbury also made third-party-funded trips to Washington, DC, Cape Cod, Norfolk, Virginia, and Atlanta.
After numerous meetings with Ethics Committee staff, Salisbury ultimately amended his financial disclosure statement four times to include travel, income he and his family members earned outside of their primary employment, and debts.
The prison officers’ union opposed Salisbury’s appointment as head of the prison service this year, arguing that his leadership of the ACI was too lenient towards prisoners and thus did not ensure the safety of officers.
A vote to investigate complaints against Anastacia Williams and Santos Javier
In another item on Tuesday, the Ethics Committee unanimously decided to investigate complaints filed by Representative Enrique Sanchez against his main opponents for the House 9th District seat, Anastacia Williams and Santos Javier.
The lawsuit alleges that Williams did not provide details about her current employment with the Providence Recreation Department or the income from the apartments she owns on her most recent financial disclosure.
Sanchez argued that Javier did not submit the required ethics statement within the 30-day deadline for new candidates.
The Commission dismissed a complaint against Robert Mancini, an employee of Washington Trust Bank and member of the Access to Capital Subcommittee of the Board of Directors of the Rhode Island Commerce Corporation.
The complaint argued that Mancini’s vote in approving the issuance of harbor dredging bonds purchased by Washington Trust constituted a conflict of interest.
The Commission decided that Mancini was not subject to the State Code of Ethics because the Access to Capital Subcommittee was an advisory body and worked on a voluntary basis.
