Two Daytona Beach Shores city commissioners have resigned prior to a Jan. 1 deadline for filing a more stringent financial disclosure form.

Two Daytona Beach Shores city commissioners have resigned as the latest in a wave of local elected officials leaving before Jan. 1, when they face more stringent financial disclosure requirements.

Mel Lindauer, a Shores commissioner since 2016, told The News-Journal on Wednesday the new requirement − submitting what’s known as Form 6 − is “totally invasive” and serves no purpose.

Commissioner Richard Bryan, who has also served since 2016, said in his Dec. 21 resignation letter that he had another priority but added the Form 6 issue “affected the timing” of his decision.

…

Many state officials already file a Form 6, including the governor and Cabinet, legislators, county council members and sheriffs. The forms require disclosure of the filer’s net worth and holdings valued at more than $1,000, including bank accounts, stocks, retirement accounts, salary and dividends.

  • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
    101·
    11 months ago

    Meanwhile in Norway every citizen can look up any other person’s tax returns. Income and fortune all neatly presented on a government website.

    • azimir@lemmy.ml
      58·
      11 months ago

      I just today learned that Finland does this as well. It took a while to consider, but it would help people to get paid fair wages, detect corruption, and to generally ensure people are more honest about their finances. Overall, it’s a very different approach to what it means to be in a society together.

      • lad@programming.dev
        9·
        11 months ago

        I think this works much better in society with low inequality, or maybe for ones that got rid of most robbers, scammers, and fraudsters. But then again, maybe Finland and Norway are good in that regard and that’s great then.

        • jwt@programming.dev
          1·
          11 months ago

          And by ‘works much better’ you mean: there won’t be country-wide outrage, I assume? I think it’s actually meant to bring to light inequalities, awkward as it may be.

          • lad@programming.dev
            1·
            11 months ago

            No, I meant less targeted robbing and burglary, and people that can rest peacefully knowing that they earn pretty much the same amount as their neighbour

      • hglman@lemmy.mlEnglish
        2·
        11 months ago

        Privacy is by and large the tool of the powerful to abuse power and privilege.

        • Hardeehar@lemmy.world
          21·
          11 months ago

          This swings both ways. Public information such as voting records, for example, were used to coerce, intimidate, and physically hurt innocent people in the past. I think it takes a mature culture/society to use public information responsibly and I don’t think we are there yet.

          Then again, a ton of awful stuff happens in private already, so there needs to be a balance of some kind.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      1911·
      11 months ago

      I’m in favor of transparency, but this sounds like it was designed to put democrats in prison.

      It only applies to city officials, not county or state, (more likely to be democrats) and has stiff penalties for any errors discovered during an audit.