Ethics Ordinance
Originally Published: September 17, 2024
Commissioners Consider Changes
The County Commissioners are considering an update to the ethics ordinance after a recommendation from the county’s Ethics Commission (EC). At the August 27th meeting, county attorney Buffy Giddens said the intent of the change is to correct an administrative issue between the EC and the county’s Board of Elections (BOE), which could result in an unqualified candidate being certified to run for office.
A person who intends to run for office must file a certificate of candidacy by a specific deadline during the election year. In addition, the potential candidate must file a financial disclosure form with either the BOE or the EC. If filed together, the BOE collects both forms and must forward the financial form to the EC for review within 30 days. Giddens made clear that the EC only reviews the disclosure for “proper form” to ensure required sections are filled out. However, the commission does not verify the information listed is accurate.
Here’s the issue: if a candidate submits paperwork on the filing deadline, they could be certified by the BOE as eligible to appear on a ballot even though their financial disclosures have not been reviewed. The EC is only required to meet quarterly. Their schedule, combined with the 30 days the BOE has to forward disclosures, creates potential for a significant delay in reviewing paperwork.
David Willenborg, Chair of the EC since 2016, provided more detail. “We had two candidates in the last election who never had their paperwork in order and should never have been on the ballot,” he said. Candidates didn’t respond to BOE requests to fix the paperwork. Willenborg claimed the BOE advised the EC that “it’s not their job to [review the paperwork]. The players knew the paperwork wasn’t done, but the candidacy went forward.”
Having a member of the EC present at the BOE when a candidate files their paperwork “to educate them on how to properly complete a financial disclosure,” was one solution considered according to Giddens’ memo on the subject. This option was presented to the EC “and they declined the suggestion in favor of amending the ordinance,” Giddens wrote.
Changes to the ordinance would require a candidate file their financial disclosure directly with the EC at least 30 days prior to the state’s candidacy filing deadline. Effectively, this would move up the deadline for filing by 30 days. It also creates an additional step in the filing process because the candidate must submit paperwork separately to the BOE and EC, something Commissioner Colvin pointed out. Even with these changes, a candidate could still wait until the filing deadline to submit all paperwork, causing the same issue the EC aims to solve.
The candidate filing deadline is set by state law, so the county’s ordinance wouldn’t supersede it. Commissioners seemed to recognize this during their questions about the proposal. Commissioner Hewitt said “the reasonable person would know how to fill out” these forms, but a more common mistake would be not knowing to list something on the form. Giddens reminded Hewitt that the EC “doesn’t review for accuracy, just for proper form,” implying a mistake like that may not be caught anyway.
A public hearing on September 24th, at 9:30AM (after Hewitt initially proposed a 6:30PM time) in the commissioners meeting room was approved. Those who can’t attend the morning public hearing can email their comments to csmc@stmaryscountymd.gov.
