Advisory Opinion No. 2004-9
(Superseded by Statute and Regulations)
Pursuant to the Ethics Codes’ statutory requirements, “Upon the complaint of any person on a form prescribed by the Commission, signed under penalty of false statement, or upon its own complaint, the Commission shall investigate any alleged violation of this part.” Conn. Gen. Stat. §§1-82(a)(1) and 1-93(a)(1). In the conduct of its investigations, “…the Commission shall have the power to…subpoena witnesses under procedural rules adopted by the Commission as regulations.”
In a recent superior court appeal, a respondent challenged the legality of a complaint and subpoena issued pursuant to the above referenced sections. State State Ethics Commission v. Linda Kowalski, No. CV 04-0832632. Specifically, the respondent claimed that a complaint filed by a Commission attorney, without a Commission hearing or vote, was invalid; and that a subpoena signed by the Commission Chairperson, again without a hearing or vote by the Commission, was also improper. The Court rejected these arguments and held that the Commission’s procedures were in compliance with the law. Memorandum of Decision, Although the Court’s decision was unequivocal in rejecting the respondent’s position, the Commission nonetheless believes that it is appropriate to issue this advisory opinion clarifying and reiterating the Commission’s existent procedures in such matters. Under Commission Regulations, the “Commission means the State Ethics Commission of the state of Again acting in accord with its Regulations, the Commission’s subpoenas consistently have been signed by the Chairperson. See, Regulations of Conn. State Agencies §1-92-5: “The Commission’s…subpoenas…shall be signed in behalf of the Commission by the Chairperson.” As with Commission complaints, said subpoenas are not reviewed or voted on by the Commissioners in an ex parte proceeding. Rather, any respondent seeking to contest a subpoena, in whole or in part, is permitted to do so in a noticed motions hearing, conducted by the Commission after the subpoena has been issued and served. Today the State Ethics Commission, taking cognizance of the above cited judicial approval of its complaint and subpoena procedures, reiterates the continuing application of these procedures to Commission enforcement proceedings conducted pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §§1-82 and 1-93. Rosemary Giuliano
Chairperson