Tape on file for more detailed information.

Chairman Delfino called the meeting to order at 9:15 a.m.

Legislator Spreckman motioned to approve the minutes of April 28, 1997 and was seconded by Legislator Swanson. The motion was carried by a vote of 5-0.

Chairman Delfino started the meeting by stating that in the last meeting there was a lengthy discussion on gifts, and that he would appreciate any comments from this committee on what an alternative is, if they collectively as a Committee can not support what was proposed he would take recommendations on a change. These are sensitive issues and we will bring the public into the process, it will not be a closed process. Chairman Delfino reminded everyone where they had left off at the last meeting and asked Mr. Vitagliano and Mr. Ochacher to begin the review.

Mr. Vitagliano began with a follow up from the last meeting in regard to the section on gifts. Under Standards of Conduct, section 2, item d, there was some question as to whether the term Committee included PAC’s (Political action Committee’s). Mr. Vitagliano stated that he

checked in the election law for what the definition of a political committee is and it does include a PAC. He stated that he will need some feed back from the Committee as to whether they want to exclude PAC’s from providing admittance’s to political events. He also stated that most PAC’s raise their funds from their memberships. It is a judgment call for the Committee, as it is right now, PAC’s can invite you to something, if we want them excluded we have to narrow that definition.

Mr. Ochacher began the overview of the eighth draft at section five, where they left off at the last meeting. He read each section then there was a discussion when questions or concerns arose.

Section five: This section puts a prohibition on any County employee singling out and pressuring any other County employee to participate in a political campaigning. They did not want to prohibit a general solicitation. They just wanted to prevent any strong arm tactics.

Section six: This section has the same theory as section five except that it has to do with promise or payment of political contributions. Again it does not prohibit general solicitation. Legislator Spreckman asked if this was in the old code. Mr. Ochacher responded that it was not. Mr. Vitagliano stated that this provides a safe harbor for elected officials to know that as long as they don’t target anyone specifically there is no problem. There was a brief discussion giving different examples in order to get a better understanding of this section.

Section seven: Mr. Ochacher explained that this prohibits County employees from soliciting political contributions from individuals or organizations, who they know do business with the County. However, it does not prohibit a general solicitation. Again there was a lengthy discussion, giving examples to clarify the intent of the item. Legislator Donovan was concerned that it is too easy to cover yourself with the way this was drafted. Legislator Donovan was further concerned that it

will appear to be a facade to make it look ethical. Mr. Vitagliano

stated that ethics has to be viewed in the context of behavior, the same act of behavior can be viewed ethically or unethically. He went on to say that it is easy to get to a safe harbor that protects you from the perception that you had a breach of ethics, but that this is support for other legislation, whether it be campaign finance reform, or something else, there are other pieces of the puzzle to be put together.

Legislator Carsky expressed a concern about people who have a fiduciary responsibility to the County, that there not even be the perception that the elected officials can be influenced. The most obvious situations would be when you are dealing with the tax payers money, that would be with the auditors, bond underwriters, and bond council. She sees a problem taking money from them, solicited or unsolicited, concerned that it may weigh into your decision of who is going to be your auditor or underwriter. Mr. Vitagliano stated that this section of the ethics code deals with solicitation, but in the area of campaign finance reform or contract reform in general you could put prohibitions on donations, but he personally believes it does not belong in the ethics code. A lengthy discussion continued about what would be ethical, or unconstitutional and what could be regulated and what could not. Mr. Vitagliano suggested that a clause could be written into the contracts with the vendors that they can not give contributions any more. If they want to do business with the County these are the terms of the contract. Mr. Ochacher stated that he and Mr. Vitagliano took this draft as far as they could to prevent the appearance of an impropriety, taking it any further would just fall if challenged constitutionally. Legislator Carsky was concerned that elected officials public credibility is diminishing. We have less credence than we ever have. We have to do whatever we can to sure that up. We should make ourselves as credible as possible.

Mr. Ochacher explained that it was pretty straight forward, if County Employees obtains confidential information in the course of his or her employment, they can not use that information for private gain.

Mr. Ochacher stated that section nine, ten and eleven, along with the gift prohibition are the greatest changes between this draft and the prior ethics law. They deal with post county employment.

A complete one year ban on you or the corporation you are affiliated with from appearing before the very agency you were employed by, not the County as a whole, but your particular agency. They wanted to prevent a former County employee from immediately capitalizing on his or her relationships with the people in his or her direct department. Legislator Donovan inquired as to what employment constituted. There was a lengthy discussion regarding this. Mr. Vitagliano referred back to the dictionary section, where officer and employee is defined. He went on to state that we can only regulate people who are employed, not people in contract.

Legislator Donovan motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:23 a.m. and was seconded by Legislator Young. The motion was carried by a vote of 5-0.