Pay-to-play adopted; amendments to come Council president wants more restrictive provisions added BY CHRISTINE VARNO Staff Writer LONG BRANCH –– A much anticipated pay-to-play ordinance was finally adopted by the City Council last week, but amendments to the new law are still to come, officials say. At previous council meetings, residents have complained that the city had failed to adopt a pay-to-play ordinance. Council members have also expressed concerns that the proposed ordinance drafted by City Attorney James Aaron was not inclusive enough. For example, as approved, the ordinance does not require listing the names of donors who make contributions under $300. But Aaron recommended at the May 10 meeting that the council move forward with adoption of the ordinance as written and take up the issue of amending the ordinance at subsequent sessions. “The council posed questions [on the ordinance],” Aaron said at the council meeting. “If they made amendments [to the ordinance before adoption] then we would have to pull the ordinance [off the agenda].” “Once [the ordinance] is enacted into law, then we can go ahead with the amending process.” If the ordinance was not adopted last week and the council went back to the drawing board to include all changes before adoption, Aaron said it would just postpone the process and could take months. “[The ordinance] would then be brought before the council for suggestions, reintroduced, readvertised and revoted on,” he said. The council went ahead and unanimously adopted the ordinance, excluding Councilwoman Mary Jane Celli who was absent. The council will discuss the suggested amendments over the next two weeks. Aaron will then provide legal advice on the suggestions at the workshop meeting prior to the May 24 council meeting. Council President John Zambrano said the council is currently discussing about five points for possible inclusion that were suggested by council members and residents. They include “wheeling,” which refers to the practice of moving contributions from one political organization to another so that the original source of the funds can no longer be identified. Zambrano said he agrees that wheeling should be added to the ordinance, along with listing the name of everyone who donates to a campaign, not just the names of those who donate over $300. “Right now, any donations under $300 are just listed by the amount of money, not the name,” he said in an interview last week. “I asked that when we make changes, everyone be listed.” Another suggestion is to bring in a professional for meetings on quotes and bids to make sure the process is kept competitive, Zambrano said. “I think we will see two or three changes to the ordinance, but not all that are being discussed,” he said. “I think what you are trying to do is the right thing, passing this then doing the amendments,” Harold Bobrow, Ocean Boulevard, said at the meeting. But he asked the council to hold off on adopting the ordinance. “You have waited all this time, waiting a little longer so there are no questions may be the way to go.” Ordinance 13-05 states, “The city of Long Branch shall not enter into an agreement for professional services with any individual and/or professional business entity if that individual has solicited or made any contribution of money or pledge of a contribution to a campaign of a city of Long Branch candidate or council or mayor, in excess of ....$500 per candidate ... on an annual basis ... to the maximum extent of $3,000 per annum per business entity.” It also prohibits professional business entities who are in negotiations with, or who have agreed to perform services in, the city from making a contribution to any Long Branch candidate. A business entity is defined as an individual seeking a public contract, and includes the individual’s spouse, child living in the home, firm and corporation. If an individual owns less than 10 percent of a professional business entity that contracts with the city, he or she will not be treated as part of that entity, according to the ordinance. All contributions by a business entity made prior to the adoption of a pay-to-play ordinance will be grandfathered and will not be deemed in violation, according to the ordinance. If a business entity violates the pay-to-play law, it will be subject to a $2,500 fine on the first offense and on a second offense, will be disqualified from eligibility for contracts in the city for four years from the date of the violation. But there will be no breach of contract if a contribution by a business is questioned and as a result the contribution is returned to the contributor. In the event of any disputes as to whether or not a campaign contribution is proper, the matter shall be submitted to arbitration, according to the ordinance.