APOC Financial Disclosure Statement More of a Hindrance than a Help

The new APOC Financial Disclosure regulations came into law after I retired from the Assembly. So it wasn't until I filed for the 2011 Mayoral race that I really tackled these regulations.

The 12-page form is complex. If you haven't looked at it, you can go to APOC and download your very own copy. It requires more than a working knowledge of your finances to complete. And it requires disclosures that in some cases are barriers to potential Haines candidates. But not for the reasons you might think. Several people have told me that they would have filed if not not the requirement, in some situations, to disclose specific clients and the amounts they owed. They felt that to disclose these debts (anything over $1000) was a breach of trust between proprietor and consumer. And by the way, it's not just a question of your personal finances. You must report on behalf of your spouse and your dependent children.

I am ashamed to say that I voted NO on the local opt-out question that came before us in 2009. I probably voted NO in 2008, too. I was uneducated then. I'm not now. And I'm not surprised that I knew little about this form - it takes a more than a passing interest to download and examine 12 pages of small print - especially if you are not going to fill it out anyway.

Some people have said that they voted NO because the Borough did not offer an alternative other than its existing ethics (Borough Charter Chapter 2.06; Borough Code Title 2.06) and conflict of interest statutes:

Haines Borough Code Section 18.01 Conflict of Interest

An elected borough officer may not participate in any official action in which he or a member of his immediate family has a substantial financial interest unless after disclosure of the interest his participation is approved by a majority of the body.

In essence, we have experimented since the state regulations were enacted. I don't think the regulations applied locally have revealed any "snakes in the grass." On the contrary, the regulations have discouraged people from running for office. I think this is unacceptable.

On Friday, July 29, I asked the Borough Clerk if the question of opting out of the APOC regulations could, once again, go on the ballot. It could, but my request was too late. The ordinance would have had to have been introduced July 26 to make it through the process for inclusion on the October 4 ballot.

Here is my suggestion so as not to miss the next boat - or election: request the Assembly to ask the Government Affairs Committee to hold hearings on the APOC regulations and to hammer out a local alternative if that is what is necessary to get YES-OPT OUT vote passed. I personally think that we have sufficient protection in our Code and Charter as it is now. I also recommend that we go through the process of adopting an ordinance to be ratified by the voters in time for the next regular or special election - which ever comes first.