Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Disclosure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee clears bill to let judiciary retain judicial-branch financial disclosures
Summary
A departmental bill would remove a statutory requirement that the Maryland Judiciary transmit copies of financial disclosure statements filed by judges and judicial candidates to the State Ethics Commission, leaving administration and public inspection to the judiciary.
A bill before the Environment and Transportation Committee would stop the automatic transmittal of judicial-branch financial disclosure forms to the State Ethics Commission and leave the judiciary responsible for administering public inspection and notifications.
State Ethics Commission Executive Director Jennifer Allger told the committee the legislation "removes that requirement." She said the change responds to how judges and judicial candidates already file disclosures — electronically through a system maintained by the judiciary — and would reduce duplicative administrative work.
Nancy Faulkner, deputy state court administrator, said the judiciary currently maintains the electronic filing system and transfers copies to the ethics commission under the present law. "House Bill 166 will relieve this burden on the State Ethics Commission and keeps the obligation with the judiciary alone," Faulkner said, adding the judiciary is "well positioned to carry out the requirements of this bill." She also said the bill updates references to the Court of Appeals to reflect the court system's recent name change to the Supreme Court of Maryland.
Delegate Huey asked whether the change would apply to judges only or to other courthouse employees and officeholders. Allger and Faulkner clarified that judges, judicial officers, magistrates and orphan’s court judges are covered by the judicial-branch filing system; executive-branch officials such as clerks of the court, sheriffs and state's attorneys continue to file with the State Ethics Commission under existing law.
The bill is departmental legislation requested by the State Ethics Commission and submitted in consultation with the Administrative Office of the Courts. No formal vote was recorded in the hearing.
Why it matters: the change preserves standards for public inspection and notification while removing a duplicative transfer requirement between two state offices. The committee heard the bill is intended to save staff time and expense without changing which officials are subject to financial disclosure rules.
Next steps: committee consideration and any technical amendments before a committee report and floor action.
