Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Secretary of State and Ethics Commission at odds over who must host candidate disclosure form as filings near
Loading...
Summary
A Senate committee heard competing claims from the Secretary of State’s office and the Vermont State Ethics Commission about which agency must create, post and answer questions about the candidate financial disclosure form, with both citing staffing limits as candidates prepare to file next week.
The Senate Government Operations & Military Affairs Committee heard competing testimony April 22 from the Secretary of State’s office and the Vermont State Ethics Commission over who should host and answer questions about the statewide candidate financial disclosure form as candidates begin filing next week.
Deputy Secretary of State Lauren Hibbert told the committee the Secretary’s office supports the bill’s disclosure requirement but cannot and should not provide individualized tax or disclosure advice. “What we are not comfortable doing is answering what tax forms do I need to provide? … How do I answer this question if this is my particular financial scenario? We are not experts in that,” Hibbert said, urging that the Ethics Commission post the official form and FAQs so the SOS can point candidates to a single source.
Paul, chair of the Vermont State Ethics Commission, testified that the Commission drafted and updated a revised form months ago and has provided it to the Secretary’s office. He said the Commission lacks capacity to take on new, ongoing advisory duties without additional staff and proposed an interim approach: both offices post the form and FAQs, accompanied by a clear statement that neither body presently has capacity to answer legal-advice questions and that candidates should consult a private attorney if they need individualized guidance. “Neither the Secretary of State’s office nor the Ethics Commission is currently capable of responding to your questions. If you have questions, contact a private attorney,” Paul said.
The exchange exposed a legal and operational tension in draft 2.1. Hibbert said the statute, as written, assigns enforcement of disclosure penalties to the Ethics Commission and that her office lacks enforcement power. She asked the committee to clarify the dates and offices named in the bill’s temporary-enforcement language and stressed the practical problem that candidates begin filing imminently: if the form is not publicly available, the Secretary’s office faces an operational crunch processing petitions and disclosures.
Committee members pressed both sides for a short-term fix. Several members said the form must be posted immediately and urged plainly labeled hosting so candidates know where to find it and who to call for what kinds of questions. The Commission and the Secretary’s office agreed they could post the draft and FAQs quickly but differed on who must accept responsibility for follow‑up legal questions.
The committee did not take a formal vote. Members scheduled a continuation of the conversation for the next morning with the Ethics Commission’s executive director expected to appear, and staff were asked to circulate the latest form copy so the committee and agency staff could agree on labeling and a posting plan.
