My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014_0212_Ethics Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Ethics Commission
>
Packets
>
2014_0212_Ethics Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 10:59:29 AM
Creation date
2/6/2014 3:18:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, January 06, 2014 <br />Page 9 <br />Councilmember McGehee recognized that this put the Commission in a difficult <br />position and spoke in support of moving to the "preponderance of evidence" <br />standard. <br />Recognizing the serious work of the Ethics Commission, Councilmember <br />Willmus expressed his dire concern if the burden of proof standard was lowered. <br />Councilmember Willmus opined that the bar was intentionally set high and that it <br />should remain high; and stated that he would not support this recommended <br />change in standards. Councilmember Willmus further opined that he would hate <br />to see ethics complaints and charges being generated under the knowledge that <br />there was less of a standard for burden of proo£ If charges come forward in the <br />future, Councilmember Willmus opined that the higher standard should be in <br />place and complaints fully vetted under that standard. <br />Mayor Roe noted that one issue was the current process with the initial investiga- <br />tion done by the Ciry Manager or Ciry Attorney depending on the rype of com- <br />plaint and against whom, with both of those individuals having full access to all <br />information — private and public. With the City Council also able to have full ac- <br />cess to the data, but not its Ethics Commission, Mayor Roe opined that there <br />seemed to be question raised about the process itself. While State Statute 13.b <br />was quite clear on the Open Meeting Law, Mayor Roe asked if the Commission- <br />ers had any thoughts on the process itself; and asked the City Attorney to further <br />research whether or not the Commission could go into Closed Session in such in- <br />stances. <br />Mayor Roe concurred with the comments expressed by Councilmember Willmus; <br />opining that he also preferred to keep the standard high. <br />Vice Chair Lehman concurred with Mayor Roe and Councilmember Willmus; <br />opining that he would like the Commission to be able to go into Closed Session if <br />information under review was not public data. <br />While not interested in lowering the bar either, Councilmember McGehee noted <br />the realities if the current standards didn't allow the Commission to effectively <br />review information to maintain the integrity of the overall organization. <br />Mayor Roe suggested action on any revision to the standard be postponed until <br />the City Attorney provided further research on whether or not the Commission <br />could go into Closed Session. If they could do so, Mayor Roe opined that this <br />would essentially solve the problem and standards could remain as is. Mayor Roe <br />noted that the next step would be to refer this back to the Ethics Commission and <br />City Attorney for their review and future update to the City Council at any time, <br />not necessarily only during the quarterly meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.