Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 06/12/06 <br />Minutes - Page 16 <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in favor of motion; opmmg the <br />amendment provided genume independence to the Ethics <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion; opining that <br />language as written would meet a policy objective to reflect the <br />values of the community. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka questioned who would pay for outside <br />parties to serve. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust opined that the people of Roseville elected <br />the City Council to do its work; and historically, the Ethics <br />Commission was initially appointed by the City Council. <br />Councilmember Pust further opined that, if the citizens didn't <br />approve of the actions of the City Council, they would make <br />their displeasure known at the polls. <br /> <br />Roll Call <br /> <br />Ayes: Kough and Ihlan. <br />Nays: Pust; Maschka and Klausing. <br />Motion failed. <br /> <br />Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, including consultants and the <br />City Attorney as recognized public officials in the Code of <br />Ethics. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kough spoke in strong support of the language; <br />opining that consultants and the City Attorney played a public <br />official role, and removing them substantially weakened the <br />code; as well as giving the City Attorney more authority. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion; reiterated his <br />rationale for language eliminating consultants, given the different <br />role they represented in a non-government or public official role; <br />and were governed by their contractual obligations as a separate <br />entity, addressed in the scope of their contracts; and specifically <br />addressing the City Attorney, they were bound by Ethics <br />provisions of their own. <br /> <br />Roll Call <br />