New ethics law: Local officials worry about carrying out act's requirements
From The Courier News Online 4/26/04
By Liza Roche
STAFF WRITER
ELGIN ‹ When the General Assembly approved an update and expansion of an ethics and gift-ban law back in November, it called on local governments to adopt similar resolutions to help ensure that government is free of unfair influence.
But the new State Employees and Officials Ethics Act has created some concern and confusion for those in the public sector at the local level.
For the last month or so, Elgin Community College board members have been reviewing a new ethics ordinance that would put them in compliance with the act.
But while trustee Bob Getz of that board said he applauds a heightened ethics package, he maintains reservations.
"Ethics are a good thing," said Getz, a Harper Community College administrator who is serving his first term as a board member at ECC. "The problem that I have is in the way we have to administrate (an ethics law)."
Central to Getz's concerns is the belief expressed by Illinois Attorney General and others that to comply with the new law, local governing bodies are advised to name an ethics adviser, who explains ethics-related rules, and then an ethics commission, which reviews ethics and gift-ban complaints and then prescribes punishment for guilty parties.
The new law, he said, unfairly burdens institutions like ECC to have a law enforcement arm even though it does not have those powers in other circumstances.
"We're not a police agency, we're an educational institution," Getz said.
Questions remain
In other circumstances, if an employee acts inappropriately, it can be handled administratively, although potential criminal activities are turned over to a law enforcement agency, he said.
But in the case of the new ethics law, ECC will have to "set up our own jury, our own judge and we make our own interpretations," Getz said.
But not everyone on the ECC board agrees with the trustee.
Board President Ellie MacKinney said she believes the new law, along with its apparent need to name an ethics adviser and an ethics commission, will have a "very minimal" impact on the school.
Like other institutions, ECC needs to be in compliance with the new law by early June.
"It is not a question in my mind whether or not we will move forward" with the resolution, MacKinney said.
Even after adoption, questions will probably remain about the legislation, she said.
For example, some board members are hoping for clarity about what is allowed when it comes to the elected officials' participation in political activities, such as campaigning for friends and referendums.
Under the law, such activity would be prohibited during time officially associated with the school.
"For employees I think it's pretty cut and dry, but for voluntary board members, it's not so clear," she said.
"We have concerns and questions," she said. "The problem is that there is nothing that has tested this."
School district differences
Legal questioning about the new ethics law is growing.
Melinda Selbee, an attorney for the Illinois Association of School Boards, said she agrees that the new law brings cause for concern.
Once Madigan drafted a model ordinance for governmental bodies within the state, Selbee took a look and she felt the need to revise it for her clients, local school boards.
"There's a lot of uneasiness," Selbee said. "The enforcement provisions are extremely vague.
"And if there's not uniform agreement on enforcement, then there's not going to be agreement on a commission."
For school districts, Selbee recommends that school boards designate their superintendents as their ethics officers.
Under the IASB plan, the superintendent would name a three-member ethics commission if a there was charge of an ethics or gift-ban violation.
The difference in the IASB recommendation is that the commission would investigate the charge, but would turn enforcement over to the local state's attorney's office in the case of a suspected school board member; or the school board in the case of a suspected school district employee.
Violations related to prohibited political activities can carry a jail sentence of up to one year and a fine of up to $2,500. Gift-ban violations can bring a fine of up to $5,000.
Madigan's writings on her office's model ordinance admit that while the new law does not specifically grant authority to local governments and school districts to impose penalties set out by law, "it must be necessarily be interpreted as just that."
Selbee said she believes the attorney general's model ordinance, with its enforcement provisions, is illegal when applied to school districts.
The issue needs clarification, but it is not clear whether local governing bodies will be too worried before that happens, Selbee said.
The ethics reform law, she said, was mainly written as a backlash to alleged activities by Gov. George Ryan and his associates.
"I suspect after school boards adopt these policies, nothing will happen. School boards don't engage in these kinds of activities," she said.
04/26/04