PROPOSAL NUMBER: 006-06

1. Date proposed 10/08/06. Sponsor: Legislative Committee

2. TITLE:
Proposal to support Amendment 41: Standards of Conduct in Government

3. FULL PROPOSAL:
Support Amendment 41: Any ethics standards have to be an improvement until public financing of elections is the norm.

4. BACKGROUND:
Current law prohibits an elected state official from accepting the following gifts in connection with the person's public service: any money; or any equipment, supplies, or services worth more than $50, such as a fax machine, an office computer, a newspaper subscription, or donated office space.

Other gifts are allowed, but some must be reported quarterly to the Secretary of State. The prohibitions and reporting requirements apply to the following elected state officials, as well as candidates for these offices: governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer, state legislators, district attorneys, members of the State Board of Education, and regents of the University of Colorado.

Amendment 41 expands the current prohibitions to cover other gifts and things of value, such as favors or services, travel, meals, entertainment, and honoraria, as well as promises of future employment. Amendment 41 also extends the ban to apply to heads of departments of state government, salaried members of state boards and commissions, county and municipal officials, and most government employees, including independent contractors.

5. Justification/Goals:
Ballot issue in November.

6. PROS:
1) The credibility and integrity of the political process is damaged when public officials accept gifts from lobbyists. When lobbyists give gifts to public officials, the perception is that they gain access and influence that other citizens in the state do not have. Amendment 41 strengthens public confidence by reducing actual or perceived conflicts of interest that arise when public officials accept gifts such as tickets to sporting events, meals, and lodging.

2) Amendment 41 eliminates the temptation for elected officials to make decisions based on the potential of future employment. Requiring lawmakers to wait two years before they can lobby ensures that policy decisions are based upon what is best for constituents.

3) Elected officials may not always objectively judge the ethics of their peers. Instead, an independent forum is needed where citizens can file legitimate concerns about possible ethics violations by their elected representatives. The ethics commission created by Amendment 41 is charged with enforcing standards of conduct for both state and local public officials and employees and provides a central venue for filing ethics complaints from across the state.

Sponsor comments: The Green values most relevant to the Pros are: Grassroots Democracy, Community-based economics, and Personal and Global Responsibility. Mostly this helps create an open process for political processes.

Cons:
1) Amendment 41 does not belong in Colorado's constitution and may have unintended and undesirable consequences. Elected officials can already be investigated for ethics violations, recalled, or removed from office when they run for reelection. Current law already prohibits state elected officials from receiving any money in connection with their public service, and many other gifts worth more than $50 must already be publicly disclosed on a regular basis. Additionally, Amendment 41 may result in requiring the state to provide additional money for elected officials to attend certain educational and other seminars that could no longer be funded by private organizations. Amendment 41 would make gifts, even between any family members of most public employees, potentially subject to a politically motivated investigation that would include subpoena powers. Furthermore, it would prohibit most government employees, including entry-level local and county government employees and higher education faculty and employees, from accepting or receiving, among other things, educational scholarships for themselves, their dependent children, or their spouse.

2) Former lawmakers often have expertise in specific policy areas that can benefit the public. In addition, private companies should be allowed to hire the person they believe will best represent their interests. The responsibility for making policy decisions in the public interest lies with current elected officials, not former officials.

3) The commission may not be able to objectively judge the ethics of government officials because its members are appointed by, and it may actually include, government officials. With only five members to cover all city, county, and state public officials and employees, complaints may not receive a thorough or timely investigation. Procedures already exist to address ethics complaints at every level of government in Colorado. Establishing a new commission adds unneeded bureaucracy that may duplicate the work of existing ethics oversight entities.

Sponsor comments: These objections don't have any equivalent values in our 10KV.

7. Alternatives to the proposal:
Not taking a position on this issue.

8. Supporting statements:
Legislative Committee Report:
Amendment 41: Standards of Conduct in Government

Internet Link:
http://www.elections.colorado.gov/DDefault.aspx?tid=835&vmid=748

Referendum Summary:
Prohibits elected state officials and certain elected local officials, appointed state and local officials, and government employees from accepting any amount of money or more than $50 in gifts in any calendar year from anyone except a relative or a personal friend on a special occasion;

prohibits immediate family members of elected state officials and certain elected local officials, appointed state and local officials, and government employees from accepting more than $50 worth of gifts or other things of value in any calendar year that directly or indirectly benefit the public official or government employee; bans lobbyists from giving gifts or meals to any elected state official and certain elected local officials, appointed state and local officials, and government employees or to the immediate family members of these public officials and employees;

prohibits statewide elected officeholders and state legislators from lobbying certain elected state officials for pay for two years after leaving office;

and creates a five-member appointed ethics commission, with individual members having subpoena power, to investigate and hear state and local complaints, assess penalties, and advise government officials and employees when asked regarding the scope of the law.

Background:
Current law prohibits an elected state official from accepting the following gifts in connection with the person's public service: any money; or any equipment, supplies, or services worth more than $50, such as a fax machine, an office computer, a newspaper subscription, or donated office space.

Other gifts are allowed, but some must be reported quarterly to the Secretary of State. The prohibitions and reporting requirements apply to the following elected state officials, as well as candidates for these offices: governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer, state legislators, district attorneys, members of the State Board of Education, and regents of the University of Colorado.

Amendment 41 expands the current prohibitions to cover other gifts and things of value, such as favors or services, travel, meals, entertainment, and honoraria, as well as promises of future employment. Amendment 41 also extends the ban to apply to heads of departments of state government, salaried members of state boards and commissions, county and municipal officials, and most government employees, including independent contractors.

PROS:
1) The credibility and integrity of the political process is damaged when public officials accept gifts from lobbyists. When lobbyists give gifts to public officials, the perception is that they gain access and influence that other citizens in the state do not have. Amendment 41 strengthens public confidence by reducing actual or perceived conflicts of interest that arise when public officials accept gifts such as tickets to sporting events, meals, and lodging.

2) Amendment 41 eliminates the temptation for elected officials to make decisions based on the potential of future employment. Requiring lawmakers to wait two years before they can lobby ensures that policy decisions are based upon what is best for constituents.

3) Elected officials may not always objectively judge the ethics of their peers. Instead, an independent forum is needed where citizens can file legitimate concerns about possible ethics violations by their elected representatives. The ethics commission created by Amendment 41 is charged with enforcing standards of conduct for both state and local public officials and employees and provides a central venue for filing ethics complaints from across the state.

Sponsor comments: The Green values most relevant to the Pros are: Grassroots Democracy, Community-based economics, and Personal and Global Responsibility. Mostly this helps create an open process for political processes.

CONS:
1) Amendment 41 does not belong in Colorado's constitution and may have unintended and undesirable consequences. Elected officials can already be investigated for ethics violations, recalled, or removed from office when they run for reelection. Current law already prohibits state elected officials from receiving any money in connection with their public service, and many other gifts worth more than $50 must already be publicly disclosed on a regular basis. Additionally, Amendment 41 may result in requiring the state to provide additional money for elected officials to attend certain educational and other seminars that could no longer be funded by private organizations. Amendment 41 would make gifts, even between any family members of most public employees, potentially subject to a politically motivated investigation that would include subpoena powers. Furthermore, it would prohibit most government employees, including entry-level local and county government employees and higher education faculty and employees, from accepting or receiving, among other things, educational scholarships for themselves, their dependent children, or their spouse.

2) Former lawmakers often have expertise in specific policy areas that can benefit the public. In addition, private companies should be allowed to hire the person they believe will best represent their interests. The responsibility for making policy decisions in the public interest lies with current elected officials, not former officials.

3) The commission may not be able to objectively judge the ethics of government officials because its members are appointed by, and it may actually include, government officials. With only five members to cover all city, county, and state public officials and employees, complaints may not receive a thorough or timely investigation. Procedures already exist to address ethics complaints at every level of government in Colorado. Establishing a new commission adds unneeded bureaucracy that may duplicate the work of existing ethics oversight entities.

Sponsor comments: These objections don't have any equivalent values in our 10KV.

Sponsor Position: Support Amendment 41: Any ethics standards have to be an improvement until public financing of elections is the norm.

Vote results;
Tanya Ishikawa (co-chair): Support
Charlie Green (cochair): Support