Ethics Commission adopts new travel disclosure rules for some North Dakota officials

BISMARCK, N.D. (North Dakota Monitor) – The North Dakota Ethics Commission has adopted new rules requiring some state officials to file forms when they take trips paid for by third parties.

The rules apply to all elected and appointed officials of the executive and legislative branch, including lawmakers, legislative employees, members of the Ethics Commission and the governor’s Cabinet.

The statements must include the purpose and dates of the travel, location, where funding for the trip came from and approximately how much money was spent. Disclosures are also required to include whether the funding covered “air transportation, ground transportation, lodging, meals, entertainment, or other activities.” If officials brought any immediate family members along, they must say how many. Reports would also be required if family members attended on officials’ behalf.

Reports would have to be filed with the commission within 15 days of a trip. The Ethics Commission will post all travel disclosure statements on its website and retain each one for three years.

The new rules, which take effect July 1, allow the commission the discretion to impose fees if officials don’t comply with the disclosure requirements. Officials must receive notice and an opportunity to respond before the commission may conclude someone has violated the rules.

The rules also establish penalties for violators, with the fees for late, incorrect or incomplete filings ranging from $25 to $200.

If a public official is found to have knowingly not filed a report, or deliberately falsified it, the commission can impose a sanction of up to $500 for a first violation and up to $1,000 for any future violations. The rules also allow the commission to require officials to reimburse them for any money spent investigating whether a violation was deliberate.

Any official facing a sanction must be provided notice and an opportunity to respond, the rules state.

The rules contain a handful of exemptions.

First, trip details would only need to be reported when officials are traveling in their capacity as a public official. If they already reported travel details through the state’s records system or the Legislature’s out-of-state meeting form, they also would be exempted.

Officials wouldn’t need to file reports if traveling with their personal or campaign money. They also wouldn’t need to disclose travel made for the purpose of supporting or opposing a political candidate.

Trips details that include information considered confidential information under state law would be exempt from the rules, too.

The Ethics Commission approved the rules at its Friday meeting in West Fargo after working on them for nearly a year. They passed 4-1, with Commissioner Mark Western being the only no vote.

Western and other commissioners voiced concerns about the rules discouraging North Dakotans from holding public office, particularly when it comes to serving on smaller boards and commissions.

“It’s the job of the Ethics Commission to shine a light on state government,” Western asked during the meeting. “But it’s not necessarily to step on the toes of state government.”

The commission during the meeting discussed potentially exempting officials who serve on executive branch boards and commissions from the rules, but ultimately decided against the idea.

The commission has been discussing the travel disclosure rules for about two years. It held two rounds of public comment on the draft rules — one in the summer of 2025 and one that began in November.

Lisa Kruse, commissioner of the North Dakota Department of Financial Institutions, said during an Ethics Commission meeting in March she was worried the rules could make it more difficult to recruit members to the State Banking Board and the State Credit Union Board.

“I am concerned about finding bankers willing to serve if they feel in any way a government infringement into private businesses,” she said.

If she has to report that she traveled to a particular bank, for example, people could assume there’s an issue and public confidence in the financial institution could be impacted, she said.

Binstock said Friday the confidentiality exemption in the rules would protect such information.

Gov. Kelly Armstrong provided public comment on an earlier iteration of the proposed rules in July.

Armstrong said was generally supportive of the idea of travel disclosure rules, so long as officials facing potential sanctions have the opportunity to appeal.

The Attorney General’s Office in a July letter objected to the proposed rules on the basis that the commission lacks authority to enact penalties. The Attorney General’s Office previously raised this concern in public comments to lawmakers during the 2025 legislative session.

The commission has said its ability to enforce ethics laws is implicit in the voter-initiated constitutional amendment that created it.

By Mary Steurer.