Connecticut 2017 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB07248

Introduced
3/8/17  
Refer
3/8/17  
Refer
3/8/17  
Report Pass
3/24/17  
Report Pass
3/24/17  
Refer
4/7/17  
Report Pass
4/13/17  
Report Pass
4/13/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Report Pass
4/25/17  
Report Pass
4/25/17  
Engrossed
6/5/17  
Engrossed
6/5/17  
Report Pass
6/5/17  
Report Pass
6/5/17  
Chaptered
6/26/17  
Chaptered
6/26/17  
Enrolled
6/29/17  
Passed
7/11/17  

Caption

An Act Concerning Appointments To The Citizen's Ethics Advisory Board And The Board's Authority In Ethics Enforcement Proceedings.

Impact

This bill has a significant impact on ethics laws within the state, particularly regarding how ethical conduct is monitored and enforced among public officials. By altering the committee's structure and authority, the legislation aims to create a more robust mechanism for ethical oversight. The bill empowers the board to impose civil penalties for violations, thereby strengthening enforcement and underscoring the importance of ethical governance. The adjustments in appointment procedures also suggest a desire to mitigate partisan influence in ethics oversight, fostering a more impartial approach.

Summary

House Bill 07248, titled 'An Act Concerning Appointments to the Citizen's Ethics Advisory Board and the Board's Authority in Ethics Enforcement Proceedings,' aims to revise the appointment process and enhance the authority of the Citizen's Ethics Advisory Board. The bill addresses the composition of the board, stipulating how members are appointed, ensuring that no more than five members belong to the same political party, and modifying term lengths to promote accountability and representation among different perspectives within government ethics oversight. The changes are effective from October 1, 2017, indicating a push for reforms in state ethics offices.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 07248 appears to be predominantly supportive among lawmakers who advocate for enhanced government transparency and ethics. The zero votes against the bill during the voting process reflect a consensus on the need for reform in ethical oversight systems. However, while there is general approval, concerns regarding the true effectiveness of these changes and potential implications for individual rights remain points of discussion among critics of heavy-handed enforcement.

Contention

Notable points of contention arise from the balance between stringent enforcement and fair treatment of public officials. Critics speculate that the expanded authority of the ethics board could lead to abuses of power if not carefully monitored. The detailed provisions about penalties and the authority of board members raise questions about how to ensure fairness in hearings and decisions. This discussion encapsulates the broader debate on achieving a balance between rigorous ethics enforcement and protecting the rights of individuals in public service.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB219

Property taxes: revenue allocations.

CA SB80

California Environmental Quality Act: notices.

CA AB1112

Tax Equity Allocation.

CA AB873

Department of Food and Agriculture: commercial cannabis activity inspectors: peace officer duties.

CA AB2651

School finance: necessary small schools.

CA SB233

Regional housing need: determination: consultation with councils of governments.

CA AB459

Initiatives: qualification: electronic signatures.

CA AB1086

Housing: regional housing needs.