Ethics Matters News
UPDATE ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF OBSOLETE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS
On January 12, Ethics Matters asked the County to explain why they distributed the obsolete financial disclosure form based on the repealed 1984 ethics law instead of a disclosure form that incorporates the more demanding reporting requirements of the current law (adopted Nov. 15, 2005).
The Counsel to the Ethics Commission responded:
“The old forms are being distributed now for the 2005 year to report on the activities for 2005. They are being distributed to those who were required to report for 2005. The Report is done after the year passes.
“You cannot hold people responsible for regulations that were not in effect. I am not sure why you believe there is not compliance.” The County should realize that is explanation is not satisfactory. There is a big difference between, on one hand, holding people responsible for <U>violations</U> of a law that was not in effect (which would not be right) and, on the other hand, requiring people to meet the <U>reporting requirements</U> of the current law. The ethics law requires that by January 31 of each year, certain decision-making government officials and employees must file a financial disclosure form based on interests held during the previous year. Those who apply for these government positions or run for elected office are required to file the same financial disclosure form based on information from the prior year along with their job application or their registration as a candidate. There is no reason why these requirements of the current law, the one that is now in effect, should not be adhered to.
Ethics Matters’ attorneys Stephen Sachs and Avery Aisenstark contacted Patrick Thompson, County Attorney and Lynn Knight, Counsel to the Ethics Commission, expressing Ethics Matters’ distress that the County issued obsolete reporting forms instead of the form required by the ethics law. Mr. Sachs also wrote Mr. Thompson stating Ethics Matters’ belief that using a reporting form appropriate to the new law is legally required. Commissioners Koval and Ransom expressed to Ethics Matters their surprise at the issuance of the obsolete financial disclosure forms. At their meeting on January 17, the County Commissioners voted to ask County Attorney Patrick Thompson for an opinion as to which form should be used. It is our understanding that as of today, January 19, the Commissioners request for an opinion has not been transmitted to the County Attorney
Ethics Matters will continue to follow this matter closely. These reporting forms are a cornerstone of ethical governance. They give assurance that government officials and employees are acting in behalf of the citizens and not for personal financial gain. They provide accountability and build trust. The County needs to act in a lawful manner and meet the requirements of the ethics law.
The Counsel to the Ethics Commission responded:
“The old forms are being distributed now for the 2005 year to report on the activities for 2005. They are being distributed to those who were required to report for 2005. The Report is done after the year passes.
“You cannot hold people responsible for regulations that were not in effect. I am not sure why you believe there is not compliance.” The County should realize that is explanation is not satisfactory. There is a big difference between, on one hand, holding people responsible for <U>violations</U> of a law that was not in effect (which would not be right) and, on the other hand, requiring people to meet the <U>reporting requirements</U> of the current law. The ethics law requires that by January 31 of each year, certain decision-making government officials and employees must file a financial disclosure form based on interests held during the previous year. Those who apply for these government positions or run for elected office are required to file the same financial disclosure form based on information from the prior year along with their job application or their registration as a candidate. There is no reason why these requirements of the current law, the one that is now in effect, should not be adhered to.
Ethics Matters’ attorneys Stephen Sachs and Avery Aisenstark contacted Patrick Thompson, County Attorney and Lynn Knight, Counsel to the Ethics Commission, expressing Ethics Matters’ distress that the County issued obsolete reporting forms instead of the form required by the ethics law. Mr. Sachs also wrote Mr. Thompson stating Ethics Matters’ belief that using a reporting form appropriate to the new law is legally required. Commissioners Koval and Ransom expressed to Ethics Matters their surprise at the issuance of the obsolete financial disclosure forms. At their meeting on January 17, the County Commissioners voted to ask County Attorney Patrick Thompson for an opinion as to which form should be used. It is our understanding that as of today, January 19, the Commissioners request for an opinion has not been transmitted to the County Attorney
Ethics Matters will continue to follow this matter closely. These reporting forms are a cornerstone of ethical governance. They give assurance that government officials and employees are acting in behalf of the citizens and not for personal financial gain. They provide accountability and build trust. The County needs to act in a lawful manner and meet the requirements of the ethics law.
Count of comments: 0
Posted on 19 Jan 2006 by admin
Powered by CuteNews