Latest news with #SenateBill2004
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Dakota governor issues 7 line-item vetoes, including lawmaker ‘immunity' provision
Senate Majority Leader David Hogue, left, talks to Gov. Kelly Armstrong on May 3, 2025, after lawmakers adjourned. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor) Gov. Kelly Armstrong issued seven line-item vetoes on six bills Monday, with many objections focused on policies he felt lawmakers 'shoehorned' into budget bills or encroached on executive authority. One line-item veto was of a section of the Ethics Commission's budget bill meant to protect lawmakers from being prosecuted for conflicts of interest — though he let a similar clause in the bill become law. Both provisions, part of Senate Bill 2004, concerned lawmakers who have a special interest in the outcome of legislation. Under House and Senate rules, lawmakers are supposed to notify their peers when they believe they have conflict of interest with a bill so that their colleagues can decide whether to excuse them from voting. They may also seek guidance from the Ethics Commission. North Dakota lawmakers approve Ethics Commission bill with deadline removed The vetoed clause stated that if a lawmaker voted on a bill they had a conflict of interest with, but followed legislative ethics rules and/or followed informal guidance from the Ethics Commission, they couldn't be prosecuted for any potential crime that stemmed from that vote. In a line-item veto message, Armstrong said the provision 'sends the wrong message to North Dakotans.' 'While transparency and ethical conduct are essential in a representative democracy, this provision elevates internal legislative procedure above state law, effectively shielding lawmakers from accountability under our criminal code,' he wrote. He said the clause would create another blanket protection for lawmakers at a time when the state 'already has opaque campaign finance laws.' The Legislature at the last minute rejected a bill some hoped would increase campaign finance disclosure requirements — a move Armstrong criticized. Armstrong signed the rest of the Ethics Commission budget into law, which included another more narrow immunity clause. The narrower section protects a lawmaker from being prosecuted under a specific statute for voting on a bill they have conflict of interest with if they follow House and Senate ethics rules. The statute, titled 'speculating or wagering on official action or information,' is what Rep. Jason Dockter, R-Bismarck, was convicted of last year. 'Section 4 of Senate Bill 2004 is acceptable and reasonable because it appropriately clarifies that legislators must have the freedom to perform their official duties without fear of prosecution,' Armstrong said in his veto message. Effort to improve North Dakota campaign finance reporting fails The Ethics Commission expressed earlier this month that the immunity provision the governor vetoed would have made it legally more risky for the commission to give informal advice. House Bill 1003, budget for the attorney general: Armstrong vetoed a provision that sought to prevent a district court judge from waiving fees for the 24/7 sobriety program. 'It invites a constitutional challenge and will only increase costs and jail overcrowding for counties,' Armstrong wrote in his veto message. He also noted a standalone bill, Senate Bill 2365, had the same provision but failed in the House, yet the policy was later 'logrolled' the budget bill. Senate Bill 2014, North Dakota Industrial Commission budget: The governor vetoed a $150,000 passthrough grant from the Housing Incentive Fund to a Native American-focused organization to fund a homelessness liaison position. 'Addressing homelessness and housing insecurity requires a comprehensive, sustainable, and statewide strategy, not isolated, one-time allocations to individual entities,' Armstrong wrote in his veto message. Also in that bill, Armstrong vetoed a mandate for the Bank of North Dakota to spend up to $250,000 to study economic development strategies in western North Dakota as oil production decreases. The governor said the Department of Commerce already has the authority to do such a study. House Bill 1019, Parks and Recreation Department budget: Armstrong vetoed a portion of the bill that sought to eliminate the department's ability to rename state parks and require legislative approval for name changes. Armstrong wrote that provision encroaches on the executive branch. It also could complicate matters if federal dollars were contingent on the renaming of a state park, he said. Last November, the department changed the name of the state park in Medora to Rough Rider State Park. Senate Bill 2001, Legislative Council budget: Armstrong vetoed a line in the budget that reserves the 15th floor of the Capitol for legislative staff. The floor is occupied now by the Department of Career and Technical Education. Armstrong said lawmakers did not get input from his administration, the department affected or the public. He said his administration will help identify available Capitol space, but he objected to doing so in state law. Senate Bill 2018, Department of Commerce budget: Armstrong vetoed $350,000 to the State Fair Association for sanitation restoration projects. The governor said that funding should have been included in the State Fair Association's primary budget. He said adding it to the Commerce budget at the end of the session 'is a clear example of logrolling, which undermines transparency, accountability, and the principle of deliberate budgeting.' 'Through limited use of my line-item veto authority, we've reduced spending, protected the integrity of the budgeting process and preserved executive branch authority to ensure that state government remains efficient and transparent,' Armstrong said in a statement Monday. Sen. David Hogue, R-Minot, chair of the Legislative Management Committee, said Monday that while he may disagree with some of the vetoes, he does not believe Armstrong overstepped his authority. 'I don't think they (the vetoes) rise to the level of a situation where we'd want to independently call ourselves into session,' Hogue said. 'If we had another reason, we might take them up, but these vetoes would not be the impetus in my view.' The Legislature, which adjourned earlier this month, does not have to act on the vetoes within a set amount of days, said Emily Thompson, director of the legal division of Legislative Council. She added lawmakers would need to use at least one of their six remaining legislative days to consider a potential veto override. Lawmakers during the 2025 session passed a total of 601 bills. Armstrong signed 597 and vetoed four bills in their entirety: a bill affecting state employee health insurance, a library content bill, a private school voucher bill and a tax credit for prison industries. Budget bills take effect July 1 and policy bills take effect Aug. 1. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
North Dakota lawmakers approve Ethics Commission bill with deadline removed
North Dakota Ethics Commissioner Murray Sagsveen, left, and Sen. Tim Mathern, D-Fargo, talk while walking in the hall of the Capitol on May 1, 2025. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor) North Dakota lawmakers on Friday approved an Ethics Commission budget full of major policy changes — though they abandoned a controversial proposal that would have imposed a deadline for ethics complaints. The budget, totaling nearly $1.4 million, was forwarded to both chambers for a vote that morning following final amendments from a six-member conference committee. The Senate approved the budget by a 44-2 vote, while the House passed it 71-19. The Ethics Commission sought money in Senate Bill 2004 for a fourth staff member for the 2025-2027 budget cycle, which the Legislature ultimately rejected. That employee would have focused on education and communications. The Senate initially approved the request, setting aside $250,000 for a two-year salary, benefits as well as other costs. The House later axed this funding — a move the conference committee sustained. Legislators did agree to fund a $50,000 case management system to help the commission track filings, which staff say will help them work more efficiently. Other noteworthy provisions in the budget include a handful of changes intended to fix bottlenecks in the Ethics Commission's complaint process. Some lawmakers who worked on the budget this session complained that the commission sometimes takes years to resolve complaints. Some complaints are more than two years old. Meanwhile, the commission has received a flood of new filings since Jan. 1. As of April 28, the board had received 68 complaints since the start of 2025. That's more than the commission received in all of 2024. Some, though not all, of the policy changes in the budget were originally proposed in bills that died earlier this session, like House Bill 1360 and House Bill 1505. Generally, the Ethics Commission is opposed to adding policy into the budget bill, said Executive Director Rebecca Binstock. She said she worries some of the provisions will add red tape to the commission's work, though she expects at least a few to help the board's work go more smoothly. 'The commission's position has always been that we prefer a clean budget,' Binstock said. Ethics commissioners say bill would impose an arbitrary cutoff for investigations One provision in the bill approved Friday would allow the commission to informally settle ethics complaints directly with the accused. Previously, the commission could only act as a mediator to broker informal resolutions between the accused and the filer — which sometimes doesn't work if that filer's demands were unrealistic. The commission must attempt to mediate between both parties first, however. Another requires the commission to develop time management standards for processing complaints, which Binstock said the commission supports and wanted to pursue anyway. Until Thursday, the budget included a mandate for the Ethics Commission to dismiss complaints after 180 days. It was added as part of an amendment brought by Rep. Mike Nathe, R-Bismarck, who said it is needed to make sure the commission's investigations don't drag on indefinitely. 'It's just a matter of fairness to the accused,' Nathe said previously. 'They shouldn't have to sit there with this hanging over their head for years at a time.' The Ethics Commission opposed the six-month window as a threat to its work, arguing that many complaints cannot be effectively probed within that timeframe and that it would incentivize people accused of ethics violations to obstruct investigations to run out the clock. In place of the deadline, the conference committee added a clause that states an individual accused of a violation may petition the commission at any time to dismiss the complaint against them. The Ethics Commission will have to draft a policy implementing this language. Some lawmakers said the root of the commission's backlog of complaints stems from a lack of resources, and that the budget does not address this problem. Sen. Tim Mathern, D-Fargo, unsuccessfully brought a budget amendment to more than double the commission's staff, arguing that the funding is necessary for the body to do its job effectively. 'I think the activity thus far indicates that we have a lack in that we don't have another staff person,' Mathern said on the floor Friday. 'However, we've made some progress, and hopefully by the next time we meet next session, we can get that other staff person to help us all do a great job.' Voters created an ethics commission in North Dakota. Then the Legislature limited its power. A separate amendment brought by Rep. Karla Rose Hanson, D-Fargo, requires the commission to publish an annual report providing details about its work, including the number of complaints filed and what the commission has done to resolve them. The bill also allows people accused of violations to discuss complaints against them. Another section protects lawmakers from being prosecuted with a conflict of interest crime for voting on bills so long as they observe the proper legislative conflict of interest rules or heed the informal advice of an Ethics Commission staff member. The bill advances to Gov. Kelly Armstrong for his consideration. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ethics commissioners say bill would impose an arbitrary cutoff for investigations
Commissioners Murray Sagsveen, left, and Ronald Goodman, right, members of the North Dakota Ethics Commission, listen to a House committee hearing on March 18, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) The Ethics Commission fears changes approved by North Dakota lawmakers earlier this week could allow alleged ethical violations by public officials to go unaddressed. 'We're going to allow ethical concerns to fester,' Executive Director Rebecca Binstock said during a special meeting on Tuesday to discuss how legislation making its way through the session could impact the commission's work. Members of the House on Monday voted to approve a number of amendments to the commission's budget, Senate Bill 2004, which included a new provision requiring the commission to dismiss ethics complaints older than 180 days. If the bill is signed into law, it would take effect immediately. The change stemmed from some lawmakers' frustrations with the pace at which the commission processes complaints. Some filings are more than two years old. North Dakota House removes new Ethics Commission position from budget, adds 6-month deadline Commissioners asked Binstock how many complaints the board could be forced to dismiss if the bill is signed into law within the next few weeks There are 28 complaints that will be more than 180 days old on May 1 — 17 of which are against state lawmakers, Binstock said. Rep. Mike Nathe, who brought the amendments, has said the changes would give the commission a tool to reduce its number of pending complaints, some of which are more than two years old. He called the backlog a due process concern that is unfair to those accused of violations, including some of his colleagues in the Legislature. Commissioners took issue with the notion that the deadline would help them. 'That's not a tool,' said Commission Chair Dave Anderson. 'Giving an arbitrary restriction is not a tool.' Anderson also said that the Legislature should give the commission more resources if it wants the board to process complaints more quickly. The commission is following the procedures prescribed by the law, he said. 'We have things that have to be accomplished according to statute the Legislature approved,' Anderson said. 'So we can't just hurry things up.' Nathe said previously that the intent of the bill is to have the 180-day clock start ticking against complaints as soon as the law goes into effect. Under that interpretation, the Ethics Commission would still have half a year to investigate those 28 complaints. According to Binstock, the language of the bill is not completely clear, and the deadline may work differently in practice. Commissioners worry the deadline will prevent the commission from meaningfully investigating complaints. 'You could have people who had a complaint filed against them stall in giving you information, which would take you past the 180 days, and so then it would be dismissed,' Commissioner Ward Koeser said. If the deadline forces the commission to dismiss a complaint before an investigation is completed, the commission's efforts would go to waste, Binstock said. 'By following the arbitrarily imposed deadline, really what we could have is we could have quite a bit of work, quite a bit of resources put into something and then end up having nothing as a product because we just have to close it,' she said. 'I don't personally think this is a tool for North Dakota citizens.' Senate narrowly approves adding position to North Dakota Ethics Commission Commissioner Ron Goodman wondered whether the bill conflicts with the North Dakota Constitution, which states that the Legislature may not do anything that impedes the responsibilities assigned to the Ethics Commission under Article XIV. 'It seems to me that that's going to be a question that maybe the Supreme Court has to answer,' Goodman said. The budget also includes a policy provision that Nathe said would help the commission throw out complaints that are unlikely to go anywhere but that the board does not have the ability to dismiss under current law. The bill will go to a conference committee of representatives and senators, who will work out final changes to the bill. The Senate approved a budget that included funding for a new staff member dedicated to education and communications, though that position was slashed by the House. The commission's main priority for the conference committee will be urging lawmakers to add that funding back in. It also hopes to convince legislators to take policy provisions out of the budget, Binstock said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Dakota House removes new Ethics Commission position from budget, adds 6-month deadline
Rebecca Binstock, executive director of the North Dakota Ethics Commission, speaks during a committee hearing on Jan. 31, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) The North Dakota House on Monday voted to give the Ethics Commission a six-month deadline to resolve ethics complaints while also removing a new position approved by the Senate. The amended bill, which passed by a 65-29 vote, will head to the Senate for a concurrence vote before it can go to Gov. Kelly Armstrong's desk for a signature. Supporters of the bill say its policy changes would address the Ethics Commission's growing backlog of ethics complaints. The commission has received more than 60 complaints since the beginning of this year. House committee recommends removing new Ethics Commission position, adding deadline Under amendments adopted Monday, Senate Bill 2004 would require the commission to dismiss complaints 180 days after they are filed. Rep. Mike Nathe, who brought the amendments, said that he believes some North Dakotans are 'weaponizing' the Ethics Commission to lodge frivolous complaints against public officials that can drag on indefinitely. The commission has some complaints that are more than two years old. 'It's just a matter of fairness to the accused,' the Bismarck Republican said. 'They shouldn't have to sit there with this hanging over their head for years at a time.' House Minority Leader Zac Ista, D-Grand Forks, spoke against the bill. He said a 180-day deadline would prevent the commission from properly probing cases. It may encourage people accused of ethics violations to not cooperate with investigations in an attempt to run out the clock. Ista noted the constitutional amendment that created the commission says the Legislature may not do anything to impede its implementation. 'We're literally tying their hands,' Ista said. If the bill is signed into law, it would take effect immediately. Lawmakers indicated their intent is for the clock to start ticking on all the commission's pending complaints. The Ethics Commission last week called the changes 'a roadblock intended to hamper the commission's work.' The House amendments also removed roughly $250,000 for an additional staff member the Senate previously approved. That employee would have focused on education and communications. The funding would have covered a two-year salary, benefits and other costs. Some House committee members said in hearings they weren't convinced an additional employee is necessary. The commission has three staff members. Ista urged the floor to add the education and communications employee back in. He said an employee dedicated to teaching the public about government ethics would help reduce the commission's caseload by preventing violations from happening in the first place. 'Our Ethics Commission does not want to play 'gotcha' games,' Ista said. 'What they want to do is help us learn to do what's right.' House defeats bill to streamline North Dakota Ethics Commission The budget does include $50,000 for a new case management system that would track filings with the commission, which staff have said will help streamline its workload. Some other amendments were lifted from bills that died earlier in the House, including House Bill 1360 — which the Ethics Commission supported — and House Bill 1505. One new provision gives the board more power to dismiss complaints, for example. Commission staff have said that under current law, the person who submits the complaint wields outsize power over when a complaint may be thrown out, which is partly why some complaints have gone unresolved for extended periods of time. The amendments also allow people accused of violations to discuss complaints against them. Another section would protect lawmakers from being prosecuted with a conflict of interest crime for voting on legislation if they adhere to legislative conflict of interest rules or the informal advice of an Ethics Commission staff member. Additionally, the bill contains a new requirement for the commission to publish an annual report detailing its work. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
