My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0312_ET_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Ethics Commission
>
Minutes
>
2001_0312_ET_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2017 3:50:31 PM
Creation date
8/24/2017 3:50:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Ethics Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Coversheet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
<br />Roseville Ethics Commission <br />Minutes of the March 12, 2001 Meeting <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Members present: Mark Battis <br /> Connie Pease <br /> Thomas Ring <br /> <br />Others present: Christine Butterfield <br /> Joel Jamnik <br /> <br />The meeting was called to order by Ring. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Minutes of the <br />March 9, 2000 meeting were approved on voice vote. All ayes. <br /> <br />I. Status of the Annual Disclosure of Financial Interest Statement Responses <br /> <br />Ms. Butterfield reported on the status of compliance with the mandated disclosures. Although <br />some statements were filed beyond the thirty-day deadline, all statements required by the Code of <br />Ethics have been received and reviewed. Two statements were not filed: one by a firm that had <br />done business with the city in the past, and one by a commission member who recently resigned. <br />With respect to the firm, the City has not been doing business with the particular firm for some <br />time. <br /> <br />II. Discussion of Ethics Commission Annual Workshop <br /> <br />Members reviewed the summary comments and data relating to the last workshop of 12/7/00. <br />Attendee comments were almost uniformly positive. The compare-and-contrast format between <br />the City’s code and the lawyer’s code of professional conduct that was employed by Mr. Klausing <br />appears to have been effective and well received. <br /> <br />With respect to the upcoming seminar, members concurred that a speaker/topic that draws <br />connections to/with the City’s code would be beneficial. In addition to a “main speaker,” it was <br />discussed that the seminar should ideally be organized so as to also present an initial, short <br />“primer” on the City’s code, after which the program would be turned over to the speaker for the <br />session. <br /> <br />Possible topics for the upcoming seminar were discussed; these included: (1) campaign finance <br />disclosure, and (2) some topic that would serve to contrast an ethical code with one’s sense of <br />personal morality. Members will forward further thoughts on speakers and/or topics to Pease. <br /> <br />III. Minnesota Statutory Update <br /> <br />Mr. Jamnik reported he knew of no statutory changes since the last meeting that are applicable to <br /> <br />the Commission or its work. <br /> <br />IV. Expansion of Membership <br /> <br />Commission membership is expected to expand to five. One new member will be a non-resident. <br />It is also possible a “student” member will be added to City commissions, including the Ethics <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.