Sentencing has just wrapped up for former Milwaukee County Register of Deeds John La Fave. After previously pleading guilty to a charge of felony federal wire fraud, he has been ordered to pay $89,000 in restitution to the county and serve two years’ probation.
What appears like a relatively straightforward case of an official exploiting a lack of oversight to line their own pockets ended up showcasing much more interesting motivations. La Fave openly admitted his guilt, but said that he flouted the county’s processes so he could ensure he wouldn’t lose any of his budget and so he could pick his own vendors, circumventing the county’s bidding method.
La Fave had help from both vendors and staff to process inappropriate invoices although the county no longer uses those vendors and has put the employees in question through remediation plans.
There’s an odd air surrounding a case like this because La Fave is paying back the county the $89,000 it spent for bogus project technician fees, so the county won’t have suffered any financial damages and its land records have been modernized to comply with state redaction laws.
There’s probably a bit of a temptation to cheer on La Fave (outside of the misspent $89k) for sneaking his way around bureaucracy to get things done for his department. Frankly, the layers of oversight and transparency that La Fave ignored are more designed to stop embezzlement than worry about bidding efficiency, which may be why he received a light sentence.
Even when officials feel that they’re acting in the best interest of their constituents or departments, incidents like this erode trust. La Fave even admitted that he likely didn’t have to go about things the way he ultimately did, saying, “The irony is that if I had just shown patience and respect for the county’s rules and regulations, eventually all of the goals for improving the Register of Deeds department would likely have been achieved.”
At Extract, we’re all for a good redaction project in the land records space. Proper redaction both protects citizens and increases access to public documents. Just make sure you do it through the right channels and set yourself up for success by understanding what you should be asking your redaction vendor and how you can plan.
If you’d like to learn more about how Extract has automated redaction for counties across the country, please reach out and we’d be happy to answer your questions, chat, or set up a demonstration of our software.
About the Author: Chris Mack
Chris is a Marketing Manager at Extract with experience in product development, data analysis, and both traditional and digital marketing. Chris received his bachelor’s degree in English from Bucknell University and has an MBA from the University of Notre Dame. A passionate marketer, Chris strives to make complex ideas more accessible to those around him in a compelling way.