2015_0513_Ethics Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

A;� AI,Y� IS Sectic�n 3.,I of the ��hics Code involves four distinct elements fhat must exist before a violation can accur. The f'our elernznts are; A. C'c�nduc� by Public Ofticials; B. Use ot'public funds, personnel, facilities, or equipment; C. Political ca�npaign activity; and ll. I,ack of'authorization by law. Scrutiny c�f each element is necessaiy for a proper determinatian in this matter, If all four elefnents are found to exisi in this matter, then a violation oi� the Bthics Code has been comn�itiec�, 1f any of'the f'our elemcnts are not presen.t, then a vialation c�f ihe S�thics Code has not 1�eelz committed, Undei• Section S,C, the standard for decisia�ls regarding ailegations of �thical violations shall be by "cicar �nd convincin�; evidence," as that pf�rase is detined by slate law. fn Minnesoia, clear and convincing evidence requires more than a pl•eponderance of the evidence hi�t ]ess than proof beyond a reasonablc doubt. Clear and convincing evidence exists anly �Jhere the truth of the facts asserted is "highly probable." A. CQI�TI��JCT �Y PU�LIC OrC'ICIA�,S The Caae of �thics defines "Public OCficials" as: members of the City C�ljncil and Mayor; the deparimeni head and assistant department head of each City department; rne�nbers of any City commissi��13, board, and tasl< force; and the City Manager. The c�mplaint asserts that actions by the City Council, the I-iuman Kights Com��ission, and the City Manager coz�stitute fhe alleged violatic�r�. To the e�tent th�t the complaint alleges a violation duc t� the discussion and passing of distinct resoiutions, the Human Rights Commission and City Council are appropriately named, As such, the com}�laint sufficiently satisfies the frst element of Sectit�n 3.J with regar�d to the Human Rights Commission and the City Council. The fact thai the City tvlanager may have been present f�r one or bc�th actions, l�owever, does not equate to actua] conduct by thc City Manager, Tl7�reiore, the complaint doe5 not satisfy the fir•st elernent of Section 3.J with regard to the City M anager. �3. �JSE O� i'UE�L�C rUI�TUS, PE��1�'��L, r�C�LIT'IES, OR E(�CIIFMENT The cc�mp3�int asscrts that tl�e alleged violations involved the use af an advisory commission's n�eetirzgs and' a regular mceti7�g oi'the City Council, all or some of t��hrch pr�sumably occurred at a pubiic facility (City Hall), Purther, the drafting and execution of the respeczive resolutions presuma�3y required some involvement by C'rty personnel and equipment, It can ('airly be cancluded, then, that public personnel, facilities or equipment were usec� in the commission of the alieged violation, Whetlle�� public runds were actu�lly expcnded within the context of the allegec� violation is less certain, It is dif�ctilt, if not impossible, to campule vrhether the amount of� }}ublic f'unds requiT•ed to support the personnel (salaries/wages/etc.}, f'acilities (council chamt��-�ietc,), or equipment (paper/eopy machine/etc,) actually increased as a result of the alleged violation. Therefore, it cannot be said that public funds �vere expended in this matter. 2