Kane County might lessen disclosure requirements for contracts
Businesses seeking contracts with Kane County may no longer be required to disclose political contributions and relationships with Kane County officials. A lessening of the disclosure requirements was called for by a county board committee Wednesday after officials revealed county staff members aren’t enforcing the county’s current ethics laws requiring the disclosure because they are too burdensome.
The law requires the county’s purchasing department to obtain a list of all individuals with an ownership interest of more than 5 percent in any company wishing to do $15,000 or more worth of business with the county. The department must also obtain a listing of the company’s lobbyists and a full disclosure of any stock or beneficial interest held by shareholders, subsidiaries and subcontractors. Failure to produce the information is supposed to result in immediate cancellation of the contract with the county.
“We’re not doing it,” said Phil Lewis, who is chairman of the committee revising the county’s ethics ordinance. “Our ethics ordinance says do it, but we’re not doing it. Once the guy gets the contract, then we do follow this. However, the purchasing department is the only department in the county that’s looking at this. So unless it’s a really obvious (conflict of interest), or someone brings it to their attention, the information just goes into a file.”
In other words, the county board has been approving contracts for the past year with no information about potential conflicts of interest board members may have in voting on those contracts. Currently, that information is only collected after the contract is approved. And only some of the required information is being collected. In part, that’s because no board members have sought that information. Lewis said he believes that’s because board members do a good job of policing their own behavior.
“We, as elected officials, know who we’re doing business with,” Lewis said. “It’s our responsibility to bring those interests forward when there is a conflict of interest.”
Committee members said they can’t recall any time when a county board member has recused himself from a vote on a contract because of a personal, financial or social relationship with the person or company receiving the contract.
That may be because not all county board members see that as a conflict.
“Accepting a campaign contribution doesn’t disqualify you from voting on a contract,” county board member John Hoscheit said. “If I work for a company that’s bidding on a job here, that’s a direct conflict. But I haven’t seen a real ethical problem with the way contracts work here. If we’re worried about someone who’s going to get money back from the bid, or that they work for the company, I think that’s covered by the other parts of the ethics ordinance.”
Committee members agreed it’s easy enough for any member of the public to look on the Illinois State Board of Elections website and find all campaign contributions received by county board members.
But there may be an easy way for companies to get around even a diluted disclosure requirement. Lewis revealed large corporations already shirk the disclosure requirements with no repercussions. Some corporations have given the county letters stating they have no legal responsibility nor authority to obtain or provide all the information the county wants. Despite the county’s law, the contracts with those corporations have still been honored.
Committee members said they were OK with that. They don’t want to discourage a wide range of bids on county projects just because the disclosure requirements may be too cumbersome.
The committee will vote on a revised disclosure plan next month.