CEO 75-216 -- December 15, 1975

MUNICIPAL BOARDS

APPLICABILITY OF FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE LAW

To: (Name withheld at the person's request.)

Prepared by: Bonnie Johnson

SUMMARY:

Reference is made to CEO 74-64; members of a municipal planning board are public officers subject to financial disclosure. Members of a municipal permit committee are deemed to be public officers by virtue of the regulatory nature of the board, which precludes it from being solely advisory. See s. 112.312(7)(b), F. S. (1974 Supp.).

QUESTIONS:

1. Are members of the Town of Melbourne Planning Board public officers within the meaning of that term as defined by the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees and therefore subject to financial disclosure?

2. Are members of the Town of Melbourne Permit Committee public officers within the meaning of that term as defined by the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees and therefore subject to financial disclosure?

Question 1 is answered in the affirmative.

Enclosed please find a copy of a previous opinion of this commission, CEO 74-64, the rationale of which is equally applicable to your inquiry. Your question is answered accordingly.

Question 2 is answered in the affirmative.

The term "public officer" is defined to include "[m]embers of boards . . . however selected but excluding advisory board members." Section 112.312(7)(b), F. S. (1974 Supp.). In a previous opinion of this commission, CEO 74-22, we determined that this exclusion pertains only to those boards which are solely advisory in nature.

Chapter 4, ss. 4-13 of the Melbourne Village Code provides that the permit committee has the duty to "[a]ct on all applications for permits," and "to issue permits in the absence of a town superintendent." Such functions are not advisory but, rather, are regulatory in nature. Members of the permit committee therefore do not meet the advisory board exclusion cited above. Rather, they are public officers subject to financial disclosure.