Posts

Property Disclosure Requirement for Lawmakers Hits Snag

An ethics bill requiring Tennessee policymakers to disclose all real property they own other than their primary home has hit a snag this year, and the bill sponsor said she doesn’t expect it to pass.

Rep. Susan Lynn said she would still like to get the bill back in committee this year as a thermometer test.

Susan Lynn

“I perceive that a lot of members think that it’s a good idea, but I perceive also that a lot of members strongly oppose it,” the Mt. Juliet Republican said. “So it may need a little bit more time to become more apparent to the members as to why it’s important.”

Originally assigned to the House Local Government Committee, HB1063 was moved back to the speaker’s desk after Lynn failed to appear on two separate occasions to present her bill. However, Chairman Matthew Hill made a procedural error by invoking Rule 13, meant to kick in after the sponsor fails to appear for a third time.

To get the bill back on track, the House clerk’s office told Lynn she will have to see Rep. Joe Carr, chairman of the Local Government subcommittee.

“I need to call the clerk’s office to find out why I need to talk to the subcommittee chair, “ Lynn told TNReport.com. “I think it was a mistake we’re going to try and get worked out.”

HB 1063 would require all elected and certain appointed public officials, such as those on local and regional planning commissions or state boards, to disclose any real property owned by them, their spouses or any minor children living at home.

Earlier in March, Lynn told TNReport.com that she would entertain an amendment excepting state legislators from the new disclosure requirement if that’s the only way to make it a requirement for local government officials.

“I think it’s very important for local government to make this disclosure, especially the planning commission members,” she said. “I think property holdings that one has, especially holdings that they hold for some future opportunity, should be disclosed, [because] maybe they’re in a position to vote on things that will make the opportunity better.”

Kent Flanagan, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, agrees that the bill “offers a lot for citizens who don’t have the advantage of public office.”

“I think it’s critical for this legislation, or anything similar to it, to be enacted, simply to level the playing field because of economics,” said Flanagan, the former state bureau chief for The Associated Press.

During public discussion of a proposed development, if “everyone knows who owns property and where that property is located, then everyone knows where everyone stands. When people own property and don’t disclose it, I think that’s a clear conflict of interest.”

Still, the former newspaper editor doesn’t hold out high hopes for the bill’s passage.

“I think in terms of this legislation, the chances of it passing are probably slim with the legislator exemption,” Flanagan said. “If they’re not exempt, I don’t think it has a chance of passing.”

Amelia Morrison Hipps may be reached at amhipps@capitolnewstn.com, on Twitter @CapitolNews_TN or at 615-442-8667.

Ban on Local ‘Living Wage’ Regs Bound for House Floor

Towns and cities would be barred from dictating the wages or benefits paid by private businesses under a bill set for a House vote next Thursday.

The move is the latest in a four-year battle to block so-called living wage bills at the local level. If passed, the bill would nullify bills passed in Nashville and Shelby County that require businesses that contract with those governments to offer a certain level of wages and benefits to employees.

Sponsored by Rep. Glen Casada, House Bill 501 would prohibit local governments from setting wages, family leave and insurance benefits that private businesses must offer employees. It also blocks local regulations that address wage theft.

On Tuesday the bill passed the House Local Government Committee 11-5 along party lines, with Republicans joining Casada while Democrats voted against.

“The most important person here is the taxpayer,” the Franklin representative said. “When a project costs more than it should, the taxpayer pays that. So this is a pro-taxpayer bill.”

Even if the legislation passes, there is no certainty that Gov. Bill Haslam will sign it.

“I’m not a fan of the living wage,” Haslam told the Chattanooga Times-Free Press in 2011. But local “governments should be able to decide for themselves if they want to do that.”

During the committee meeting, Rep. Mike Stewart, D-Nashville, questioned why local governments should be prohibited from requiring private companies to pay people “a living wage” if the company wants to do business with that government.

“You know in Davidson County, it’s harder to live. It’s more expensive,” Stewart said. “If the Davidson County legislators or council wants to say, for our contracts, we’re going to require that people be paid a living wage, why shouldn’t Davidson County people be able to control their own contracts?”

Casada replied that the problem is when a city dictates to a private business that operates statewide what that business must pay its employees.

“That’s not good public policy,” he said. “It drives up the cost of doing business, which is a burden to the taxpayers of Tennessee.”

This is not the first time this type of legislation has come before the General Assembly. Attempts by Casada and Sen. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown, to prohibit local governments from establishing living wage laws date back to 2009.

The bill goes to Calendar & Rules to be scheduled for a vote on the House floor. The companion bill in the Senate, SB35, by Kelsey, has been referred to the Senate State and Local Government Committee.

Amelia Morrison Hipps may be reached at amhipps@capitolnewstn.com, on Twitter at @CapitolNews_TN or at 615-442-8667.