Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Panel Organization And Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House Ethics Panel elects Martin Malone chair, plans review of rules and transparency
Summary
The House Ethics Panel elected Representative Martin Malone as chair on Jan. 15 and agreed to review its rules to seek greater transparency while maintaining confidentiality.
The House Ethics Panel elected Representative Martin Malone of South Burlington as its chair at an organizational meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 15. Representative Odey nominated Malone and Representative Michael Morgan seconded; the panel conducted a voice vote and, with no opposition recorded on the transcript, appointed Malone as chair.
The panel immediately turned to internal procedures, with Malone saying the group would review its rules and practices to explore whether there is room for “more transparency” while preserving required confidentiality. Malone said the panel will coordinate with other legislative panels and the speaker’s office before proposing changes to ensure consistent handling of transparency and communication across related bodies.
Panel co-counsel told members that providing required ethics training is a standing obligation under House Rule 90 and that a tentative training session was scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 23, after floor activity. A counsel said, “We don't have to respond. It is not a record subject to public scrutiny,” describing the panel’s current confidentiality rules and how panel records and information are treated under existing procedures.
Counsel clarified limits on that confidentiality: complainants and respondents are not bound by the panel’s confidentiality rules and may disclose complaints or panel responses themselves. Counsel noted practical complications when separate panels receive related complaints and one panel cannot share information it holds, which can leave other panels without context and create “awkward” interpanel conversations.
Malone said the panel would schedule a subsequent meeting to dig into rule adjustments and to discuss possible ways the panel could issue brief statements about process or action when matters are already publicly known from sources other than the panel. Staff and co-counsel offered to draft updated training materials and procedural language for panel review.
No other formal votes or actions were recorded in the transcript excerpt beyond the chair’s election. The panel did not adopt changes to rules during the meeting; members discussed next steps and planned follow-up work.
