CC_Minutes_2004_1122 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The Ihlan/Klausing proposal does not address recent campaign finance issues raised in the community... 1. This proposal does not address the recent episode of three council members receiving $50 contributions from an attorney representing a client before the city council. 2. The proposal does not address Mr. Klausing's receipt of Political Action Committee (PAC) money or other related donations associated with a special fund raiser held at the Outback restaurant by the Saint Paul Chamber of Commerce, while being in office. 3. The proposal does not a.ddress comments from Ethics Commission. members concerning a developer's donation to Mr. Kysylyczyn, made. . when he was a private citizen prio~ to the election. Their comments :were not conflict of interest related since Mr. Kysylyczyn had removed himself from voting or discussing the developer's issues immediately upon taking office. Instead the Commission members raised concerns about non- residents donating to Ctty campaigns, which is legal and has been a common occurrence in ~o~eville campaigns. 'Mr. Klausing, Mr. Masp~;ka, Mr. Goedeke, and Ms. Mastel supported these concerns. . . . . . 4. fhe pro'posal does not address requests of members~of the :RCG Political Party, now known as the Roseville Citizens League Political Party. ; Members requested that disclosure be set at any amount over $1.. This request was supported in writing by Mr. Maschka, Mr. Goedeke, and Ms. Mastel. 5. The proposal creates several loopholes which makes passage meaningless. To state it in _.a humorous mar)ner, the loopholes are larg_e enough to drive an armored truck through. Passage of the current' proposal simply provides good campaign brochure reading material to those who are foolish enough to believe that change was accomplished. Addressing campaign finance issues that are of concern to the people of Roseville, requires meaningful laws which cannot be easily circumvented 3