While trying to stop SB 202 earlier this year in a California Senate committee proceeding, an opponent of Mandatory Continuing Education sent an opposition communication on the letterhead of the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Eastern District of California. As a result, the staff analysis for the committee mistakenly listed the FPD’s office itself as opposed to the bill.
The investigator who sent this letter — and his boss — defended the use of the FPD’s letterhead on the grounds that the letter represented only his personal opinion and therefore it was perfectly okay to use the FPD’s stationary. As far as they were concerned, it wasn’t their fault that the Senate staff got mixed up and listed their agency as opposed to the bill.
If you buy that one, you must also believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
Defending the use of the letterhead on the ground that it was a private communication demonstrates just how far some people will go to defend the indefensible. Since it was by their own contention a private opinion being expressed to a legislative body, not a function of the government agency itself, using the stationary violated Title 5 CFR Section 2635.704. It’s a violation of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to use any government office supplies for a private purpose. That’s just plain common sense; it’s the same thing as stealing stamps, pens, or paper clips from the United States government. It’s less politely called employee pilferage.
But this guy was arguing that the State of California shouldn’t require private investigators to go through 12 hours of Mandatory Continuing Education each year, that would include at least two hours of training in ethics…..hmmmmm……and he wants to be able to use a federal letterhead to express that opinion instead of paying for his own piece of paper to do it with…….hmmmmmm!
Aside from the obvious fact that you can’t just take your employer’s property for your own use, one of the reasons that a CFR regulation even exists prohibiting the use of office supplies is that using federal envelopes or letterheads can cause confusion — just like the confusion that resulted in the Senate staff listing the FPD office itself as opposing SB 202.