Laserfiche WebLink
<br />less likely to have conflicts of interests simply because they do not occupy full- <br />time, permanent positions with these governments. <br /> <br />2. Definition of Financial Interest <br />Section 2-11.1(b)(8) <br /> <br />Recommendation: The definition of financial interest should eliminate the <br />term "controlling" and change it to a "significant financial interest" and the <br />level of ownership to hold a significant financial interest should be reduced <br />from ten (10) per cent to one (1) per cent. Furthermore, a significant <br />financial interest would also exist if it exceeded one (1) per cent of the <br />individual's annual taxable income, if the employee or immediate family <br />member held leadership position or any paid employment with a for-profit, <br />not-for-profit or charitable organization. <br /> <br />Rationale: The current law only bars an employee or the employee's immediate <br />family from transacting business with his/her government if the employee works <br />in the department which will enforce, oversee or administer the contract. A <br />conflict only applies when the employee or immediate family member holds a ten <br />percent interest or more of the company or firm seeking to enter into the contract <br />and. Furthermore, there is no bar against local government employees or their <br />immediate families who control non-profits and other organizations from entering <br />into contracts with the employee's department because the controlling financial <br />interest test is not applicable in these settings. Finally, the current definition of <br />financial interest does not take into account that an immediate family member <br />may hold a position of influence in a private firm without necessarily having a <br />"controlling financial interest." Thus, the reason for redefining financial interest <br />is to acknowledge that the current standard is much too narrowly drawn, <br /> <br />3. Definition of Immediate Familv <br />Section 2-11.1(b )(9) <br /> <br />Recommendation: The definition of immediate family would be extended to <br />include relatives generally covered by the state law and the county code. <br /> <br />Rationale: The Task Force is concerned about the perception of bias and <br />favoritism that may be perpetuated by awarding a contract to the business of a <br />family member or relative who is not specifically covered by the current <br />definition (spouse, parent, or child). A more expansive definition of immediate <br />family may reduce the claim of bias or favoritism in contracting and procurement <br />decisions. <br /> <br />8 <br />