Collecting Ethics Commission Fines

What's an ethics commission to do? Even ethics commissions with teeth, that is, with the ability to fine officials, rarely have a way of actually collecting the fines. And if they do have a way of collecting fines, it can make things look unfair.

Take South Carolina, whose ethics commission has jurisdiction over local government officials.  According to its online debtors' list, officials, candidates, and lobbyists owe about $4 million in fines. Several owe hundreds of thousands of dollars each and, according to an article in the Post and Courier early this year, have refused to file the necessary reports or discuss a settlement.

An article on carolinalive.com tells the story of the latest instance, involving a county council chair who ran for re-election in 2006 and didn't file any campaign finance reports after April.

Since the last filing in April 2006, 11 filing dates have passed. ... [EC general counsel] Hazelwood said the commission attempted several times throughout 2008 to contact Gilland through certified mail and phone calls. In January 2009, Gilland contacted the commission and said she would take care of the reports, but Hazelwood said she never did.

In July 2009, the commission held a hearing on the matter, but Gilland was not present.  Hazelwood said the commissioners fined Gilland $22,000 ($2,000 for each count of failing to disclose). They also tacked on an additional $238,500 in late-filing penalties. Since then, the late-filing penalties have increased by $1,100 every day ($100 for each count) and will do so until the matter is resolved. As of August 26, 2009, the fines totaled $300,100. 

Hazelwood said the commission doesn't realistically expect to collect the money and said the commissioners would most likely work with Gilland to reduce the fines. But to do that Gilland must contact the commission soon.

Gilland needs to "immediately download a form and tell us what (she's) done with that $4,600 since (her) last filing in April of 2006. Bring the account forward," Hazelwood said.

The EC seems to mean it. According to the Post and Courier article, another official "racked up $11,500 in penalties by last November in his Charleston mayoral race. He said he appealed to the commission, which reduced the fines and penalties to about $400. 'They were very fair with me.'"

The numbers are outrageous, but they are mechanical -- they just keep on growing as long as the non-mechanical official, candidate, or lobbyist refuses to fill out a report. If the individual is as stubborn as the numbers, the numbers will grow.

One former council member said "his $430,000 fine is ridiculous considering that the extent of his campaign spending was paying $50 to get on the ballot when he first ran in 2000. 'I didn't have no campaign fund. This is a small town,' he said of Eastover, which has a population of 830 and a municipal budget of about $600,000." But what does it cost to fill out a report?

At first I thought it was wrong to let fines get so high. So did state legislators, who passed a law limiting fines and penalties to $5,000. But the governor vetoed the law, and I think this limit was too low.

If public servants, candidates, and lobbyists refuse to file reports, even after many reminders, it should be an embarrassment to them. If the public could see the crazy numbers as a sign of the officials' stubbornness or desire to hide the sources of their funds or the way they spend their money, and not a sign that the EC is overweaning, then I would say there shouldn't be a limit. But people will see things this way, so there should be a reasonable limit, something high but not outrageous, such as $25,000.

Unlike the great majority of local government ECs, South Carolina's does have ways of collecting fines. According to the Post and Courier article, it can "file judgments in the county where offenders live, file liens against their properties and have the Department of Revenue garnish their wages."

Wage garnishing is the fastest, easiest way to get fines paid, but it discriminates against current employees, while former and current elected officials, candidates, and lobbyists are harder to deal with.

When fines cannot be collected, they can still cause problems locally. That is, it might cost them future elections. Scnow.com reports a member of Conservatives for Responsible Government saying of Gilland, the county council chair discused above, “As far as her political career is concerned right now, it’s gone."

But some of the elected officials simply say they filed the reports and the EC lost them, or otherwise make the EC out to be the bad guy. $300,000 fines look very bad in such a situation.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---