Editorial: No need for financial disclosure

A significant benefit to living in a small town is that everyone knows everyone’s business. Some consider this a detriment, but in the case of Proposition 1, which appears on October’s election ballot in Petersburg, and as Proposition 2 in Wrangell, the Financial Disclosure requirement is not needed.

Currently, municipal officers and some candidates for elective office must file a financial disclosure statement. Depending upon how a person’s company is legally organized, the law can be very intrusive, or in the case of a corporation it can require much less disclosure.

In either case, we don’t think the requirement is needed. We also know for a fact that it keeps qualified candidates from seeking election to public office. We have talked to several of those people.

In last year’s election, the proposition failed by only 29 votes in Petersburg.

We encourage the passage of the proposition in both Petersburg and Wrangell, which exempts municipal officers and some elected officials from the State financial disclosure law.

Elected officials in both towns have been exempt from the law’s requirements for decades and it has caused no problems. Following borough formation in both Wrangell and Petersburg, the financial disclosure requirement was mandated, until such a time as voters in both boroughs exempt their officials from the disclosure requirement.

In our small towns, it is easy to determine when financial conflicts arise when elected officials vote on matters coming before the body for consideration. All the officials have to do is declare their conflict of interest prior to a vote of the elected body, and the remainder of the group decides by vote if the conflict is substantial enough to have the official abstain from voting.

Should an elected official repeatedly avoid disclosing a potential conflict, his fellow members can censure him. In the event the abuse continues, voters would be free to file recall papers against the offender, and remove that person from office.

Alaskans have a long history of dealing with wayward elected officials. The public does not put up with officials and public officeholders who don’t play by the rules. As long as bad eggs can be rooted out, the public’s business can be conducted without the benefit of the Financial Disclosure law.