Laserfiche WebLink
an infraction of Section 3(L) of the Rosevilie Ethics Resolution. (it is particularly <br />interesting to me to note that Mr. Lambert questioned my `lobbying' to get a bill that <br />wouldn't affect pending legislation as unethical, but tends to support the <br />unauthorized lobbying of this group as a legitimate action.) <br />As an elected official, Mr. Maschka's presence at the meeting was on his own time, <br />with no direct financial loss to the City. However, Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Burrell, as <br />employees of the City, were not available to citizens or performing duties authorized <br />for their positions, and Mr. Jamnik's time, as a contracted service provider, bills the <br />City for his services. The time used in round trip transportation to the Legislature <br />and in meeting with the Senators therefore are financial losses to the City for <br />unauthorized activity. It also means that public funds and personnel were used for <br />personal gain and/or political activities, an infraction of Roseville Ethics Resolution <br />Section 3(K). <br />Since any potential investigator hired by the Commission will interview legislators in <br />the House, it seems appropriate that they could also interview legislators in the <br />Senate. If I were guilty of violating the Ethics Resolution by speaking with <br />Legislators on my own time, then most certainly Mr. Maschka, lobbying with the <br />assistance of compensated city officials, without the knowledge and approval of the <br />City Council, would also be in violation of the Ethics Resolution. <br />