OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH

 

May 13, 2004                                                                             

 2004-R-0434

ETHICS REFORM AND ENFORCEMENT LEGISLATION

By:  Sandra Norman-Eady, Chief Attorney

You asked for summaries of legislation passed (1) in the past few years that tighten the process for enforcing the State Ethics Code and (2) during the 2004 session that reform the state code.

SUMMARY

The State Ethics Code consists of two parts—one for public officials and the other for lobbyists. The code dates back more than 30 years, with the first major reform occurring in 1977. Since that time, there have been numerous changes to (1) those subject to the code, (2) prohibited activities both during and after state service or employment, (3) reporting requirements, and (4) enforcement provisions.

There have been no changes to the law in the past few years that tighten the process for enforcing the codes. The last major reform to the enforcement process occurred in 1994 with the passage of PA 94-132, An Act Concerning Procedures of the Ethics Commission. The act made procedural changes ranging from requiring the State Ethics Commission to investigate every complaint for possible code violations to increasing the maximum fine for such violations.

The General Assembly passed four ethics bills, SB 386, SB 624, HB 5021, and HB 5025, during the 2004 regular session. SB 386 primarily consists of enforcement reforms; SB 624 protects the budgets of the commission, as well as related commissions; HB 5021 increases the penalty for intentional code violations, requires more people to comply with the code, and broadens the commission’s enforcement powers; and HB 5025 subjects more information to the commission’s review.

MAJOR CHANGE TO THE ETHICS CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

PA 94-132:

1. eliminated the requirement for the commission to holf sufficiency of evidence meetings to determine if a probable cause investigation was necessary;

2. granted whistleblower protection to individuals who cooperated in commission investigations;

3. required the commission, instead of a state trial referee, to determine if an ethics code violation had occurred; and

4. increased from $ 1,000 to $ 2,000 the maximum penalty that could be imposed for violations.

Complaints and Notice of Complaints

The act gave the commission five days from the date a complaint was received or issued, instead of from the sufficiency of evidence meeting, to provide the person against whom a complaint was filed with a copy of it and notice of its issuance or receipt. It allowed the commission to report any information in the complaint regarding possible criminal violations to any prosecutorial authority, instead of just the chief state’s attorney.

Whistle-Blower Protection

The act prohibited anyone from taking or threatening to take official action against an individual who gave the commission information regarding code violations. It also prohibited the commission from revealing the person’s identity unless he consented or the commission determined that the revelation was unavoidable during an investigation.

Records

The act required the commission to make a record of any proceedings. It also required the commission to give respondents a list of its intended witnesses at least 10 days before any hearing.

Violations Hearing

The act required the commission by a five-member majority, instead of a state trial referee, to determine if there had been a code violation. The act required the commission, like the referee under prior law, to publish its findings within 15 days after the hearing.

ETHICS BILLS PASSED DURING THE 2004 REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION

The General Assembly passed four bills during the 2004 regular session. Only one of these acts, sSB 386 (PA 04-38), has been signed into law by the governor. The other three, although passed, may be vetoed by the governor and never become law.

sSB 386—An Act Making Certain Reforms to the State Ethics Code

The act:

1. increases, from three to five years, the statute of limitations for filing complaints of ethics violations with the State Ethics Commission;

2. increases the maximum civil penalty for ethics code violations from $ 2,000 to $ 10,000;

3. doubles the time, from 90 to 180 days, the state has to bring an action to void a contract entered into in violation of the ethics code; and

4. raises the penalty and criminal classification for intentional ethics code violations from a class A misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to one year in prison, a $ 2,000 fine, or both, to a class D felony, which is punishable by up to five years in prison, a $ 5,000 fine, or both.

sSB 624—An Act Concerning Expenditures for the State Elections Enforcement Commission, the State Ethics Commission and the Freedom of Information Commission

The act prohibits the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) secretary from reducing the budgets of the State Ethics, State Elections Enforcement, and Freedom of Information commissions’ budgets by requiring him to include in the proposed budget documents that OPM submits to the legislature the estimates of expenditure requirements the office receives from the commissions’ executive directors. It also prohibits the governor from reducing the budgets.

The act increases, from seven to nine, the membership on the State Ethics Commission. It requires the House and Senate majority leaders to each appoint one new member from a list of nominees submitted by a citizen group of their choosing with an interest in government. Beginning October 1, 2004, the act requires one of the governor’s three appointments to the commission to represent such a group of his choosing. By law, the other appointing authorities are the Senate president pro tempore and minority leader (one each), and the House speaker and minority leader (one each). Under the act, the majority leaders’ appointees serve two-and four-year terms, respectively. If they are reappointed, they, like other commission members who are reappointed, serve four-year terms.

The act makes corresponding changes to reflect the increase in membership as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Corresponding Changes Mandated

by Increase in Commission Size

sHB 5021—An Act Legal Defense Funds Established by or on Behalf of Officials or State Employees, Recommended Appropriations and Allotments of the State Ethics, Elections enforcement and Freedom of Information Commissions and Intentional Violations of the State Codes of Ethics

The act increases the penalty for certain intentional State Ethics Code violations. It makes a person who commits two or more violations or violations that provide him with a financial benefit of $ 1,000 or more, guilty of a class D felony, which is punishable by up to five years in prison, up to a $ 5,000 fine, or both. The current penalty for intentional violations is up to one year in prison, up to a $ 2,000 fine, or both.

The act requires employees of the Connecticut Lottery Corporation to comply with the State Ethics Code, which primarily means they must adhere to employment and post-employment restrictions currently applicable to most state officials and public employees.

It requires officials and employees to submit to the State Ethics Commission quarterly reports on their legal defense fund’s directors and officers, depository institution, contributions, and expenditures. And it gives the State Ethics Commission the same authority with respect to violations of the legal defense fund provisions that the law provides for violations of the code of ethics for public officials, including conducting investigations, determining violations, and imposing penalties.

sHB 5025—An Act Strengthening Ethics Laws Concerning Gifts, Financial Disclosure and State Contractors

The act broadens the information public officials provide in their annual statement of financial interest to the State Ethics Commission to include business affiliations between a business with which they are associated and others.

It also requires the State Ethics Commission to (1) develop a plain language summary of state ethics laws regarding state contract bids or proposals and (2) publish it on the commission’s website.

SN-E: ts