Marc Caputo, Miami Herald
Monday, October 6, 2014 5:24pm
Florida's Constitution has some pretty plain language about "all elected constitutional officers" who must file "full and public disclosure of their financial interests."
It continues: "Full and public disclosure of financial interests shall mean filing with the custodian of state records by July 1 of each year a sworn statement showing net worth and identifying each asset and liability in excess of $1,000 and its value...."
Since the spring, that disclosure requirement has been at the center of a lawsuit against the legislation passed in 2013 by Florida's Legislature and Gov. Rick Scott that created a blind trust law allowing the governor to not make such disclosures.
So far, courts have sided with Scott's secretary of state, who's named in his capacity as a defendant in the suit.
Here's the latest appeal, which asks this question of the First District Court of Appeal:
Does Section 112.31425(5), Florida Statutes, which allows constitutional officers and candidates to report only the lump sum holdings and earnings of a "qualified blind trust" on financial disclosure statements rather than filing itemized reports, satisfy the requirements of Article II, Section 8, of the Florida Constitution that financial disclosure must be "full and public"?
This weekend, the Herald/Times bureau tried to unravel some of Scott's finances. And it wasn't easy. Here's that story.
Here's the appeal: Download Apthorp v. Detzner - 1st DCA - Initial Brief - October 6 (1)