State report shows status of county ethics codes

By TONY FYFFE

BSN Editor

More than 25 years after Kentucky counties were required by law to adopt an ethics code, State Auditor Mike Harmon last week released a report showing the status of those codes in all 120 counties. The law, passed in 1994, requires ethics codes to address standards of conduct for elected officials, annual financial disclosure reporting, nepotism and the designation of a person or group responsible for the enforcement of the code. Counties were also required to establish ethics boards to make sure local elected officials adhere to the codes. Among other findings, Harmon’s “data bulletin” shows that Johnson, Floyd and Martin counties currently do not have members appointed to their ethics boards, with Lawrence being the only local county to have members in place. Statewide, 35 counties currently do not have any members appointed to their ethics boards, according to the report. “Although state law doesn’t require local ethics boards to meet regularly, a good practice would be meeting at least once a year to review financial disclosure statements that must be filed annually,” Harmon said. “Having a good ethics code and ethics board are crucial to ensuring the public’s trust in government, so all local governments need to ensure they have an ethics code that meets the legal requirements and a functioning ethics board to uphold that code.” The bulletin, “An Examination of County Ethics Codes and Enforcement Entities,” includes a county-by-county summary of issues observed during the fact-finding process. The data bulletin notes that Lawrence County does not require candidates for local offices to file financial disclosure statements, which is required by statute, and that such documents required for elected officials are not filed annually. Lawrence County’s ethics code requires additional employees and officers to file financial disclosure statements and indicates that penalties could be assessed for noncompliance with the filing requirements, according to the bulletin. Elected officials in Lawrence County are limited to one relative on the payroll under the county code, the bulletin says. Although state law requires that financial disclosure statements be filed with the “person or group responsible for enforcement of the code of ethics,” Johnson County is one of only 18 counties that file only a related party questionnaire with their auditor or CPA, the report says. Disclosure statements are not filed annually in Floyd County, which could not provide a copy of its updated ethics code to auditors, the report says. Floyd County’s code also requires ethics board members and additional employees and officers to file financial disclosure statements. Financial disclosure statements are also not filed annually in Martin County, where additional employees and officers are required to file such documents. When it comes to nepotism, elected officials in Lawrence, Floyd and Martin counties are limited to one relative on the county payroll, according to the report. The data bulletin can be found on the state auditor’s website.