DuPage board tightens ethics law

A series of revisions to DuPage County's ethics ordinance were approved by the county board Tuesday.

The board voted 15-2 to approve the changes that reduces the value of gifts that can be accepted by elected officials and employees and limits campaign contributions from companies and unions that do or seek county government work among other things.

Democrats Dirk Enger and Rita Gonzalez voted against the revisions, saying the changes "don't go far enough." Among their complaints, they wanted provisions regarding no-bid contracts addressed in the new policies. County officials said those issues will be addressed in revisions of the county procurement policy.

Republicans accused the dissenting Democrats of "political gamesmanship" by opposing the revisions now instead of during oversight committee hearings where the changes were hashed out. Republican board members also noted that the county is hamstrung on making some changes because of state law.

"This is a good document," Republican board member Jim Zay said to Enger and Gonzalez. "But if you really want ethical reform and campaign finance reform, talk to your legislators down in Springfield."

Maryam Judar, a lawyer at the Citizen Advocacy Center in Elmhurst, said her group was pleased by the changes the county made, but urged them to go further in the future.

"Despite the difficulties in legislating ethics, a sound ethics code is integral in ensuring public confidence in a fair and accountable system of government," Judar said.

The revisions reduce the gift ban from $75 to $25, limits campaign contributions from companies and unions as well as the officers or owners of those entities to $1,000 per year, removes a statute of limitations period from the whistle-blower protection provision, includes lobbyists in contractor disclosure requirements, includes lobbyist registration and creates a "revolving-door" policy that is intended to keep county employees from going to work for county vendors.

Board member Jeff Redick, who was chairman of the committee charged with drafting the initial revision proposal, said the changes provide "common sense ethical standards" and has "proven this board to be a leader in this area."

Enger said his vote against the revisions was out of protest for how "little is changed."

"I think it was more or less a smoke-and-mirrors ordinance and didn't address money," he said. "Why wait until later when you can do it now?"