Senate subcommittee delays decision after Ethics Commission seeks new staff, $50,000 for rule implementation and case-management funding

At a meeting of the Senate Appropriations Committee's Human Resources Division, lawmakers debated a proposed amendment to the Ethics Commission's budget that would add an Education and Communications Administrator position and $50,000 for rule implementation, and would leave in place requested funding for a new case-management system.

The proposal matters because the commission is handling rising complaint and enforcement work while also planning rules and outreach; the additional staff and implementation funding would shift current legal staff back to legal work and create a dedicated education/outreach role.

Senator Mather offered a motion to amend the Armstrong executive budget to add the new FTE and the $50,000, and to include a workload-adjustment package the commission had requested. Rebecca, commissioner of the Ethics Commission, told the committee the commission included the case-management system in both the Armstrong and Burgum executive recommendations and said the additional staff and rule-implementation funding were part of a proposed amendment prepared for the committee.

Rebecca said the single requested FTE is an Education and Communications Administrator and that the total additional cost associated with that FTE as presented in the proposed amendment was $278,922, including a small one-time amount of $5,044. "The FTE we have included in the testimony that we previously submitted was 278,922," she said. She also described a separate $50,000 request for rule administration and adoption costs; those dollars, she said, would be contingent funds set aside specifically for rule implementation and had not previously been part of the commission's budget.

Sheila, a legislative staff member who walked the panel through the budget long sheet, explained the material the committee received compares the Armstrong and Burgum executive budgets and shows which items differ between the two recommendations. She described the long sheet as a tool committee members use to decide what the Senate version will include.

Rebecca and legislative staff also described professional-fee needs for the commission. Rebecca said the commission has had to retain outside counsel and private investigators in some matters, and that much of the professional-fee line covers spillover litigation and instances in which in-house counsel need to be recused or supplemented. She said the Armstrong recommendation included an increase in professional fees and that the commission's proposed amendment also added $50,000 for rule implementation on top of the professional-fee funding.

Several senators raised concerns about adding a new permanent FTE to a small agency. Senator Davison said she intended to vote against adding new FTEs until she had reviewed more of the department requests across the budget process, calling herself cautious about adding general-fund FTEs in smaller agencies. Other members said they supported the commission's goals but wanted more time and clear options.

The committee did not vote on the amendment. Senator Mather withdrew the motion and asked legislative counsel to prepare two options for the committee's next meeting: one that adopts the Armstrong recommendation plus the new FTE, $50,000 rule-implementation funding and workload adjustments, and a second that includes the same changes except for the new staff position. Committee members agreed to return with those two amendment options and vote when the full committee is present.

The commission also noted pending legislation that could affect its workload; Rebecca referenced House Bill 1360, a bill pending in the House that aims to change the complaint process and that, if enacted, would require upfront work on forms, public outreach and legal processes.

For now, the subcommittee left the Ethics Commission item open, instructed legislative counsel to prepare amendment language for both options and deferred a formal vote.