Local elected officials in Maryland and members of boards of education will soon be subject to more stringent conflict-of-interest and financial-disclosure requirements. A law passed unanimously in both chambers of the General Assembly last year (SB315) requires county and municipal governments to amend their ethics ordinances to meet or exceed disclosure laws that have been in effect for state officials for 30 years.
“The biggest change coming with the new law…lies in the financial reporting requirements,” said Easton Town Council President John Ford. “Previously, campaign contributions were required to be reported, but now the annual report that is mandated goes well beyond that and includes information on property ownership, employment, indebtedness, and business associations that may or may not be one’s primary source of income. For those of us who run or have run for elected office, it could give one pause.”
Maryland Ethics Commission Executive Director Robert A. Hahn said some smaller municipalities may be exempted from the stricter law.
There is concern at the local level that reporting requirements could scare away much needed talent and expertise because the disclosures may be too inclusive of personal financial information. Some say it requires disclosure beyond what is needed to guard against corruption. Also, maintaining and tracking compliance of the new law could become too onerous for local governments, that will be burdened with administering the new mandates. Officials will have to file their information with their municipality by April 30 of each year.
“The goal of the new law is to increase transparency in local government – a highly laudable goal,” Ford said. “Whether this law goes too far or not is difficult to see at this point. If I read the law correctly, the local ethics commission will be given significant discretionary powers with regards to determining where the line is between the public’s right to know and an invasion of privacy.”
Ford said he is not sure if new law is more cumbersome than it is intrusive.
“Once the law is implemented, this question will be easier to answer,” he said.
On the issue of political appointees, St. Michaels’ Town Attorney Karen Ruff and Ford agree that disclosures for appointees and employees remain unchanged. Ruff informed the Commissioners in an August 10 memorandum about the changes in local law that must be enacted and approved by the state ethics commission by Oct. 1.
“Previously, municipal conflict of interest standards and financial disclosure requirements that applied to elected officials had to be ‘similar to’ to the state’s,” Ruff wrote in her memo to the Commissioners. “[The new] ‘equivalent to or exceed’ standard applies to elected officials and soon to be elected officials, while the ‘similar to’ standard still applies to Town employees and appointees to Town boards and commissions.”
Ford said administrative burdens could make it hard for municipalities to comply with the mandates.
“A careful reading of the law points to quite a bit of work and responsibility being added to the local Ethics Commission,” Fords said. “Currently, at least in Easton, the Ethics Commission is usually reactive in that it responds to requests from citizen or officials with regards to a specific concern. Under the new provisions, there is a whole host of new responsibilities and reporting requirements that could make it very difficult to find qualified candidates for the Ethics Commission simply because of the time required. Additionally, the record keeping and revenue collection, if applicable, will be handled by staff in virtually all municipalities, adding to their already overloaded work schedule.”
Maryland Municipal League Research Director James P. Peck said there is wide perception that the law goes too far in what it asks of elected officials in small towns to reveal about their personal lives. They will have to reveal personal financial information about themselves that average citizens would not normally share with a neighbor, he said.
“There are people who have expressed concern that the new [financial reporting requirements] are invasive. In small towns in particular, this is not something that everyone else in the community needs to know about them as elected officials,” Peck said. “Peoples’ personal financial information is something that many people are protective of. After passage of this law, people will know quite a bit about the personal finances of their local elected official, who also might be their neighbor. Ultimately, personal finances will be completely transparent, which certainly can be a very good thing, but at the same time, the private financial affairs of local elected officials will be impacted. The law erases the line between transparency and privacy.”
Peck said that the saving grace for really small municipalities will be exemptions granted by the Maryland Ethics Commission.
“The current state ethics law has allowed the Ethics Commission to exempt certain municipalities,” Peck said. “And 30 years ago the Commission exempted about half of all municipalities; they gave them either a complete exemption or a partial exemption, and in many cases, it was for financial disclosure. Those exemptions still stand, even with this new law.”
Ethics Commission Executive Hahn says he’s also hearing the same concerns about financial disclosure.
He said that in presentations made to the Maryland Municipal League and the Maryland Association of Counties, questions have come up about the depth of business disclosures.
“I think it’s a matter of people doing it the first time and seeing what’s involved,” Hahn said. “They can then evaluate whether it’s too intrusive for them to continue to serve. Every year we have lots of people running to be in the House of Delegates and the Senate and they’ve all had to fill out these forms.”
Hahn said that the number of exemptions will probably not change.
“There are 23 counties, Baltimore City and a total of 157 municipalities,” Hahn said. “Many of them have been exempt from the requirements in the Ethics laws since the 1970s. The exemptions were applied 30 years ago and then reviewed 10 years ago, and we’re looking at all of those municipalities again, but generally, the exemptions won’t change much if they are geographically land locked. If a [municipality] hasn’t annexed large portions of land and increased their population significantly, it’s highly unlikely they will not get an exemption if they’ve been previously granted one.”
Hahn said he had no specific information as of yet on which municipalities will be granted an exemption.
The Bridge Troll says
You mean you won’t get to be town manager of Rock Hall AND Counrty Comissioner? Oh the humanity!
StellaL says
They should begin with QAC.