House File 500 - Introduced



                                       HOUSE FILE       
                                       BY  SWAIM


    Passed House, Date               Passed Senate, Date             
    Vote:  Ayes        Nays           Vote:  Ayes        Nays         
                 Approved                            

                                      A BILL FOR

  1 An Act relating to disclosures of wrongdoing by government
  2    employees.
  3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA:
  4 TLSB 1882HH 81
  5 ec/gg/14

PAG LIN



  1  1    Section 1.  Section 8A.417, subsection 4, Code 2005, is
  1  2 amended to read as follows:
  1  3    4.  a.  A person shall not discharge an employee from or
  1  4 take or fail to take action regarding an employee's
  1  5 appointment or proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed
  1  6 promotion to, or any advantage in, a position in a merit
  1  7 system administered by, or subject to approval of, the
  1  8 director as a reprisal for a failure by that employee to
  1  9 inform the person that the employee made a disclosure of
  1 10 information permitted by this section, or for a disclosure of
  1 11 any information by that employee to a member or employee of
  1 12 the general assembly, or for a disclosure of information to
  1 13 any other public official or law enforcement agency if the
  1 14 employee reasonably believes the information evidences a any
  1 15 violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of
  1 16 funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific
  1 17 danger to public health or safety.  However, an employee may
  1 18 be required to inform the person that the employee made a
  1 19 disclosure of information permitted by this section if the
  1 20 employee represented that the disclosure was the official
  1 21 position of the employee's immediate supervisor or employer.
  1 22 This subsection does not apply if the disclosure of the
  1 23 information is prohibited by statute.
  1 24    b.  For purposes of this subsection, any presumption
  1 25 relating to the performance of a duty by a person who has
  1 26 authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or
  1 27 approve any personnel action may be rebutted by substantial
  1 28 evidence.  For purposes of this subsection, a determination as
  1 29 to whether an employee reasonably believes that the employee
  1 30 has disclosed information that evidences any violation of law
  1 31 or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of
  1 32 authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public
  1 33 health or safety shall be made by determining whether a
  1 34 disinterested observer with knowledge of the essential facts
  1 35 known to and readily ascertainable by the employee would
  2  1 reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed evidence of
  2  2 such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger.
  2  3    Sec. 2.  Section 70A.28, subsections 1 and 2, Code 2005,
  2  4 are amended to read as follows:
  2  5    1.  A person who serves as the head of a state department
  2  6 or agency or otherwise serves in a supervisory capacity within
  2  7 the executive or legislative branch of state government shall
  2  8 not require an employee of the state to inform the person that
  2  9 the employee made a disclosure of information permitted by
  2 10 this section and shall not prohibit an employee of the state
  2 11 from disclosing any information to a member or employee of the
  2 12 general assembly or from disclosing information to any other
  2 13 public official or law enforcement agency if the employee
  2 14 reasonably believes the information evidences a any violation
  2 15 of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an
  2 16 abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to
  2 17 public health or safety.  However, an employee may be required
  2 18 to inform the person that the employee made a disclosure of
  2 19 information permitted by this section if the employee
  2 20 represented that the disclosure was the official position of
  2 21 the employee's immediate supervisor or employer.
  2 22    2.  A person shall not discharge an employee from or take
  2 23 or fail to take action regarding an employee's appointment or
  2 24 proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed promotion to,
  2 25 or any advantage in, a position in a state employment system
  2 26 administered by, or subject to approval of, a state agency as
  2 27 a reprisal for a failure by that employee to inform the person
  2 28 that the employee made a disclosure of information permitted
  2 29 by this section, or for a disclosure of any information by
  2 30 that employee to a member or employee of the general assembly,
  2 31 or a disclosure of information to any other public official or
  2 32 law enforcement agency if the employee reasonably believes the
  2 33 information evidences a any violation of law or rule,
  2 34 mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority,
  2 35 or a substantial and specific danger to public health or
  3  1 safety.  However, an employee may be required to inform the
  3  2 person that the employee made a disclosure of information
  3  3 permitted by this section if the employee represented that the
  3  4 disclosure was the official position of the employee's
  3  5 immediate supervisor or employer.
  3  6    Sec. 3.  Section 70A.28, Code 2005, is amended by adding
  3  7 the following new subsection:
  3  8    NEW SUBSECTION.  2A.  For purposes of subsections 1 and 2,
  3  9 any presumption relating to the performance of a duty by a
  3 10 person who has authority to take, direct others to take,
  3 11 recommend, or approve any personnel action may be rebutted by
  3 12 substantial evidence.  For purposes of subsections 1 and 2, a
  3 13 determination as to whether an employee reasonably believes
  3 14 that the employee has disclosed information that evidences any
  3 15 violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of
  3 16 funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific
  3 17 danger to public health or safety shall be made by determining
  3 18 whether a disinterested observer with knowledge of the
  3 19 essential facts known to and readily ascertainable by the
  3 20 employee would reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed
  3 21 evidence of such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger.
  3 22    Sec. 4.  Section 70A.29, subsection 1, Code 2005, is
  3 23 amended to read as follows:
  3 24    1.  a.  A person shall not discharge an employee from or
  3 25 take or fail to take action regarding an employee's
  3 26 appointment or proposed appointment to, promotion or proposed
  3 27 promotion to, or any advantage in, a position in employment by
  3 28 a political subdivision of this state as a reprisal for a
  3 29 disclosure of any information by that employee to a member or
  3 30 employee of the general assembly, or an official of that
  3 31 political subdivision or a state official or for a disclosure
  3 32 of information to any other public official or law enforcement
  3 33 agency if the employee reasonably believes the information
  3 34 evidences a any violation of law or rule, mismanagement, a
  3 35 gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial
  4  1 and specific danger to public health or safety.  This section
  4  2 does not apply if the disclosure of the information is
  4  3 prohibited by statute.
  4  4    b.  For purposes of this subsection, any presumption
  4  5 relating to the performance of a duty by a person who has
  4  6 authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or
  4  7 approve any personnel action may be rebutted by substantial
  4  8 evidence.  For purposes of this subsection, a determination as
  4  9 to whether an employee reasonably believes that the employee
  4 10 has disclosed information that evidences any violation of law
  4 11 or rule, mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of
  4 12 authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public
  4 13 health or safety shall be made by determining whether a
  4 14 disinterested observer with knowledge of the essential facts
  4 15 known to and readily ascertainable by the employee would
  4 16 reasonably conclude that the actions disclosed evidence of
  4 17 such violation, mismanagement, abuse, or danger.
  4 18                           EXPLANATION
  4 19    This bill deals with establishing permissible disclosures
  4 20 of government information relating to Iowa's whistleblower
  4 21 statutes.  Iowa law provides that disclosures of information
  4 22 by a government employee are protected from adverse employment
  4 23 action if the employee reasonably believes that the
  4 24 information evidences a violation of law or rule,
  4 25 mismanagement, a gross abuse of funds, an abuse of authority,
  4 26 or a danger to public health or safety.
  4 27    The bill provides that any presumption applicable to the
  4 28 performance of duty by a supervisory person relating to an
  4 29 employee's disclosure of information may be rebutted by
  4 30 substantial evidence.  In addition, the bill provides that a
  4 31 determination as to whether an employee reasonably believes
  4 32 that they have disclosed information that evidences wrongdoing
  4 33 shall be made by determining whether a disinterested observer
  4 34 with knowledge of the essential facts known to and readily
  4 35 ascertainable by the employee would reasonably conclude that
  5  1 the actions disclosed evidence of such violation,
  5  2 mismanagement, abuse, or danger.
  5  3 LSB 1882HH 81
  5  4 ec:nh/gg/14