AUGUSTA (AP)- Maine’s legislative ethics laws are fundamentally sound but could use some tweaking here and bolstering there to prevent special interests from exerting undue influence over public policy, a study panel was told Thursday.

Lobbyists, lawmakers and others involved in the crafting of state laws addressed the committee as it gathered information for a report to submitted to the Legislature. Additional hearings, which will also cover gifts to legislators and the “revolving door” pattern of legislators becoming lobbyists, will be held before the report is due in mid-November.

In creating the committee, the Legislature’s presiding officers said it was a response to ethical breaches in Washington, particularly the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling case, which was prominent in the news earlier this year.

But much of the discussion Thursday surrounded a case in Maine which Rep. Thomas Saviello engaged in discussions with state officials and a paper company by whom he was employed about pollution regulations.

The state’s governmental ethics watchdog panel later determined that Saviello, an independent from Wilton, should not be automatically disqualified from serving on the legislative committee that deals with pollution issues because of his association with the paper industry.

Through their backgrounds, lawmakers bring expertise in a variety of fields to the State House, a lobbyist told the Presiding Officers’ Advisory Committee on Legislative Ethics on Thursday.

“I have always found that legislators put the interests of their constituents before those of their employer,” added John Delahanty, who was not involved in the Saviello matter.

Steve Hinchman, a Conservation Law Foundation attorney who was involved in the Saviello matter, said he believes Maine’s current ethics law is fundamentally sound.

“The problem we run into is fair implementation of the statute,” Hinchman said.

Guidelines on when legislators should recuse themselves from votes to avoid conflicts may also be too vague, the Maine Association of Broadcasters’ lobbyist suggested.

Suzanne Gaucher said she sees too many cases in which legislators fail to abstain from voting on issues in which they stand to benefit.

“There should be some kind of standard for recusal on issues in which someone has a direct financial interest,” Gaucher said.

Charles Soltan, a lobbyist since 1987, sought to focus the discussion on who is trying to influence decisions in the State House. In his view, those who lobby on behalf of state agencies merit as close oversight as those from outside state government.

Soltan said that on the question of decisions being made in the public, government has become much more open thanks largely to the Internet, which carries many meetings and deliberations – including the ethics panel’s on Thursday – live.

“Whether or not the public drinks from that information lake is an open question,” Soltan said.

Attempts to refine and bolster Maine’s lobbying laws were made during the past legislative session.

A new law will require the state Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices to create a Web site that includes a directory of lobbyists.

A bill that sought to require lobbyists to report on their activities in trying to influence state agencies was rejected. Currently, lobbyists are required to report activity dealing with the Legislature and the governor’s office.

AP-ES-07-13-06 1635EDT