Ethics panel backs disclosure change

• By MARSHA SHULER
• Advocate Capitol News Bureau
• Published: Oct 31, 2008 - Page: 13A - UPDATED: 12:05 a.m.

• Print
• Email
• Save
• Reprints
• Twitter
• Share

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Reddit
• 

If the Louisiana Board of Ethics gets its way, public officials will be able to avoid providing taxpayers with estimates of their business interests when they fill out personal financial disclosure reports.

The disclosure forms recommended by the Ethics Board would require officials to report the percentage of ownership interest they have in businesses instead of estimating its value in financial ranges.

The decision to go the percentage route prompted the first split among new Ethics Board members as they reviewed the documents.

It also led one member to wonder how the panel could alter what he said is required by state law.

The issue now heads to the Legislature, where its ethics oversight committee gets a chance to recommend changes as part of the approval process.

Different sets of forms seek varying degrees of detail based on what’s required by recently approved disclosure laws.

The governor and statewide officials provide more information than legislators and members serving on an array of government boards and commissions are required to give.

The issue arose as a result of a letter from LSU System general counsel Ray Lamonica.

For members of boards such as the LSU Board of Supervisors, Lamonica argued that the law “does not require disclosure of the monetary amount of a covered business interest but rather disclosure by percentage of the interest in excess of 10 percent.”

Staff lawyers for the Ethics Board had interpreted the law to require board members to report the values of their business interests in financial ranges.

However, Lamonica wrote that the wording of the statute distinguished between the LSU board and offices requiring higher reporting standards, such as the governor.

He said boards such as LSU’s should report only the percentage of ownership they have in a particular business and not the financial ranges.

Lamonica said it is clear that the Legislature did not intend to impose the “more stringent” requirement on members of boards in the lesser reporting category.