2016_0224 HRC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, February 8, 2016 Page 27 1references and inclusion, Ms. Lindberg offered to submit those ethics findings an- 2nually to the City Council. 3 4Mayor Roe noted a number of reasons the code language was as currently written, 5and sough to make sure this City Council and Ethics Commission understood that 6initial rationale and whey it was established as written. Mayor Roe referenced 7discussion held at the time the original code was in place, and not to imply these 8are not valid questions, expressed the need that those past discussions inform this 9process. Mayor Roe noted that the City Attorney had worked with the Code and 10could advise the City Council if they decided to move in this direction. 11 12Councilmember McGehee noted that she was also here when working through the 13Ethics Code subsequently reconstituted in a different tone; and suggested it may 14be worthwhile to review that previous process, since she was also not sure every- 15one was privy to how and why those revisions were applied. Specific to com- 16plaints brought to the EC without formal filings, Councilmember McGehee asked 17if that wasn’t due to no process being in place. Councilmember McGehee opined 18that a process was needed, and whether or not it belonged in the Ethics Code, 19there needed to be a process for handling violations. 20 21Mayor Roe clarified that he didn’t think it had been established that the com- 22plaints brought forward were ethics violations. 23 24Councilmember McGehee stated that she understood that, but still thought a Code 25of Conduct was needed. 26 27Mayor Roe suggested that this discussion not get into that level of detail tonight; 28and thanked commissioners for their work. 29 30Councilmember Willmus stated that he hated to set the clock back and revitalize 31revisit mistakes under the previous code, opining that often that commission had 32been used as a political tool for disagreements, which was why the EC had been 33dissolved in the first place. Councilmember Willmus opined that he found the fo- 34cus of the current Code of Ethics aligned where it needed to be, and as far as the 35complaint process itself, expressed his disinterest in seeing anyone labeled as an 36ethics violator if there was any disagreement in how to best proceed at the com- 37mission level. Councilmember Willmus opined that he thought the function of 38how the EC should work or how to assemble it was needed, and he expressed his 39appreciation for the model provided in the packet in draft form, allowing a com- 40plaint to be dealt with as it comes forward. Councilmember Willmus also spoke 41in support of further discussion on the continuation of the three commissions and 42their scopes and duties for further discussion and attempting to free up administra- 43tive personnel as liaisons. 44