CCP 06022025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment 1 ETHICS CODE Members of every city council must live in the city they are elected to represent. They drive on its roads and walk on its sidewalks for which they are responsible for maintaining; use its parks for which they are responsible for funding; eat at restaurants which must receive a city-issued license; and they notify staff when they observe code violations. Council Members express their personal experiences during Council discussion and often, during Council meetings, bring issues they have observed to the attention of City staff. Having a personal experience related to items that come before a City Council is part of the role of being a Council Member. Ethics codes are not intended to remove elected officials from participating in the day-to-day life of the communities they represent. Rather, they are intended to prevent public officials from using their position for personal gain. In the introduction to Section 3, the Roseville Code of Ethics explains: Public Officials are to serve all persons fairly and equitably without regard to their personal or financial benefit. The credibility of Roseville government hinges on the proper discharge of duties in the public interest. Public Officials must assure that the independence of their judgment and actions, without any consideration for personal gain, is preserved. 4 Section 3 of the Roseville Code of Ethics enumerates 16 specific ethics violations. Both 5 complaints alleged a violation of Section 5, Paragraph M. Paragraph M reads as follows: Official Action. No Public Official shall take an official action or attempt to influence any processwhich will benefit any person or entity where such Public 6 Official would not have otherwise have taken such action but for the Public Official’s family relationship, friendship, or business relationship with such person or entity. \[emphasis added\] Potentially relevant to the allegations in the Complaints, Section 2 of the Roseville Code of Ethics includes several definitions. Public Official includes members of the City Council. Anything of value is defined as: money, real or personal property, a permit or license, a favor, a service, forgiveness of a loan or promise of future employment. Immediate family is defined as: spouse, minor children, minor stepchildren or other person residing in the same household. Under Section 5, Paragraph F, the standard to apply to allegations of ethical violations is “clear and convincing evidence,” which means that, based on the evidence presented, it is highly and 4 The Roseville Code of Ethics explains that the enumerated violations “do not necessarily encompass all the possible ethical considerations that might arise.” Neither complaint alleged any violations other than those enumerated in the Roseville Code of Ethics. 5 It should be noted that the Quinn Complaint states: “I . . . feel she violated the code of ethics, specifically code 3.M, but possibly more.” I reviewed all of the enumerated violations in Section 3 and do not believe any, other than Section 3 Paragraph M as discussed herein, apply in this instance. 6 It should be noted that a “but-for” test is a common concept in law that is used to determine whether one thing is the proximate cause for another. Proximate cause is also referred to as the primary cause, or direct cause. 6 RS160\\27\\1025838.v5 Qbhf!4:!pg!385