[T]he executive director of the State Ethics Commission told lawmakers Tuesday he worried fewer ethical complaints were being filed because the organization is viewed as “toothless.”
Larry Novins did not supply figures but said complaints this year were not on pace with 2018, the commission’s first year, when 36 ethics complaints were filed involving statewide public officials, legislators, municipal employees and state employees.
As established, the ethics commission can only refer complaints to other agencies and has no investigatory or enforcement powers. Novins suggested part of the reason complaints were down this year could be because no action was taken on some cases that were referred to other agencies.
“I’m worried that we’re seen as toothless,” Novins told members of the Senate Government Operations Committee. “People think Ethics Commission and they see this dorsal fin coming through the waters and I think at this point the way we’re set up we’re more of a toothless smaller fish.”
The Senate committee is reviewing a bill that would expand the five-member commission’s power and allow it to conduct investigations and levy penalties. The bill, S.157, is in many ways similar to the original ethics bill that lawmakers watered down before passing in 2017.
Novin’s concerns about the dropping number of complaints prompted Sen. Anthony Pollina, P/D-Washington, the original sponsor, to note “the only thing worse than no ethics commission is having an ethics commission so weak that it’s irrelevant.”
Sen. Jeanette White, D-Windham, chair of Senate Government Operations, acknowledged no action was likely this year and that the committee may have to extend its review of whether to expand the commission’s powers until next year. She said more testimony would be taken since “we don’t die in April.” White acknowledged a public perception the commission was “weak” and encouraged supporters of expanding powers to “show us why we need this.”
Meanwhile, the chair of the House committee looking at the ethics commission, signaled she wasn’t interested in expanding the commission’s power until it becomes more established.
However, Rep. Sarah Copeland-Hanzas said her committee, House Government Operations, has shelved a bill that would have “clarified” the role of the commission — a move some saw as weakening the commission and others saw as a rebuke of the commission’s finding that Gov. Phil Scott was in violation of state ethics by having a continuing financial interest in a construction company that does business with the state.
The governor and others faulted the commission for making the opinion involving Scott “political.” The House bill would have made clear “advisory opinions” were to be general guidance and not involve a specific person or complaint. The Vermont Public Interest Research Group had requested the advisory opinion on Scott’s business ties, which VPIRG dubbed a conflict of interest.
Copeland-Hanzas, D-Bradford, said Novins and the commission’s new chair, Julie Hulburd, had assured the House committee that the commission had gone beyond its authority in the Scott decision. Hulburd replaced Madeline Motta, who defended the issuing of the advisory opinion before House Government Operations before she stepped down earlier this year after her election as an assistant judge. Novins confirmed to senators he and Hulburd had reassured the committee they understood its concerns about the commission going beyond its authority.
“We thought we’d give them some time without being under the scrutiny of a moving bill,” Copeland-Hanzas said.
She was hesitant to expand the commission’s powers and worried about creating too big an entity.
“We can give this some time to gel and hit its stride without throwing a lot of money at it,” Copeland-Hanzas said Tuesday.
She added: “How do we do it in a way that’s Vermont-sized? We need to be aware that we don’t have millions of dollars to throw at an ethics commission and give them investigatory authority and staff and all of that,” Copeland-Hanzas said. “We have child care needs and we’ve got health care needs of Vermonters and climate action we need to move forward on.”
