An executive order is just that — an order, not a suggestion or a recommendation.
It’s the law.
If anyone should know that, it ought to be Colorado’s own chief executive, Gov. Bill Ritter, a former career prosecutor.
But until Tuesday afternoon, his administration seemed oddly intent on flouting the law.
Because of what his office called an oversight, most of Ritter’s Cabinet members and executive staff failed to file annual conflict of interest reports for the past three years, as required by a 1999 executive order.
The issue came to light when the Independence Institute, a local conservative think tank, asked for copies of the reports from the Ritter administration.
An oversight, we were told. Won’t happen again. They’ll be filed from here on out.
Ritter on Monday quickly issued a new executive order requiring disclosure statements from now on, but it wasn’t retroactive for the past three years. However, after some questioning Tuesday, the administration changed course and decided to file forms covering all three years of the Ritter administration.
That was a positive turn of events.
Ignoring the first executive order was a mistake, no doubt, and one that ought to be rectified. But on the scale of government errors, it didn’t qualify as a calamity, especially since we don’t know that anyone had ever requested them before or noticed them missing.
Even if the Ritter administration had, as they told us, dealt with potential conflicts of interest as issues arose, the public still is owed access to written records to make those judgments for itself.
There is value in requiring public officials to put in writing potential conflicts and enumerate outside employment — even if they are going to attest to not having any.
And, of course, let’s not forget that the disclosure is a matter of law.
As it turns out, Ritter Cabinet members — with the exception of Agriculture Commissioner John Stulp — and executive staff hadn’t filed the disclosure statements since the new administration took office in 2007. They blamed the inaction in part on confusion over Amendment 41, a voter-approved ethics law.
The purpose of disclosure, as outlined in the executive order Gov. Bill Owens issued shortly after taking office, was to build public confidence in the integrity of state government.
Similarly, the Ritter executive order says that in order to gain the people’s trust, public officials ought to “demonstrate the highest ethical standards at all times.”
That’s a lofty goal to aspire to, a task that requires constant introspection and strict adherence to the letter and spirit of the law.
We’re glad to see the Ritter administration taking steps to meet that standard.
