Board balks at Boasso ruling

• By MARSHA SHULER
• Advocate Capitol News Bureau
• Published: Nov 21, 2009 - Page: 12A

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

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

The Louisiana Board of Ethics refused Friday to ratify a ruling by an administrative law judge panel in a campaign finance disclosure case involving Walter Boasso, a candidate in the 2007 governor’s race.

Board members said they disagree with the ruling and could not in good conscience endorse it.

Instead, the Ethics Board voted 8-1 to acknowledge receipt of the ethics adjudicatory panel’s ruling.

The vote heightens a conflict stemming from the 2008 transfer of judicial powers from the board to separate administrative law judge panels. The power transfer was part of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s ethics revamp.

Ethics Board member Blake Monrose, the lone objector, said the board would violate state law if it did not approve the Boasso ruling.

“While I personally disagree with what the Ethics Adjudicatory Board did in the Boasso decision, we are required to adopt it within 45 days of a decision,” said Monrose, of Lafayette.

An administrative law judge panel found the campaign of Boasso — a former state senator who came in second in the election Jindal won — violated the campaign finance disclosure law when it failed to accurately report $1.2 million in spending.

But the panel said the Ethics Board did not consistently enforce the law and reduced the fine to $5 a day for each day the accurate report detailing media spending was not submitted.

That came to a total fine of $230 — far short of the $2,500 maximum find that could have been imposed.

Ethics Board member Scott Schneider, of Mandeville, said the $5 a day fine is problematic because it could be precedent-setting for future cases of nondisclosure of campaign spending.

Board chairman Frank Simoneaux, of Baton Rouge, said legal counsel also was constrained in efforts to defend the ethics agency against claims of inconsistent enforcement.

Boasso’s attorney presented examples of campaign finance reports of other candidates where there were similar omissions but no enforcement action had taken place.

Ethics lawyer Alesia Ardoin had objected to introduction of the materials because under state law the agency could not confirm or deny it has looked into any of the campaign finance reports presented.