2001_0827_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

06/26/2601 19:10 16515780701 2480 Cobble Hill Alcove, $uile � Woodbury, Minnesota 55 125 June 26, 2001 Mr. Ed $urrell Acting City Manager 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville, MN 55 � 13 Dear Mr. �uz�eU: NIEMI LAW OFFICE, PA Kelth A,. Nicmi Auomey 8t COWiSEIOC et Lew VIA FAX AND U,S. MAIL PAGE 01 O�ce (65l) 73Q-6248 Facsimile (65 I) 578-0701 In response to an ethics complaint filed three months ago by Dick Lambert, a member of the RCC political organization, I was asked by Mayor Kysylyczyn to represent him through the investigation of the Roseville Ethics Commission. In an April 1 fi, 20011etter addressed to Connie Peace, Chairperson of the Roseville Ethics Commission, I stated that the Mayor was willing to cooperate fully with the Ethics Commission. At that time, I also stated that it was di�cult to provide answers to charges that were not specific in nature. Despite this, it has always been the intention of the Mayor to separate facts from politics, and to focus on those issues that have relevance to the Ethics Resolution of the City of Roseville. The Mayor believes that it is in the interest of the citizens of Roseville to have these issues resolved prior to the election season, and the arrival of the new City Manager, Mr. Neal Beets. Unfortunately, based on the outcome of today's Ethics Commission meeting, neither the Mayor or I believe this is possible. Moreover, I feel that I must raise some issues of serious concern that act to limit the Mayor from receiving a fair hearing. Early in the process, I notified City Attorney Joel Jam�i�C, of a potential conflict of interest of one of the members of the Ethics Commission, Mr. Mark Battis. This conflict of interest was based on Mr. Battis involvtx�ent in the Cub Foods controversy and the fact tkwtsome of the complaints before the Ethics Commission involved the Cub Foods controversy. This was raised in a letter dated May 2, 2001, and followed up by telephone conversation. It was my understanding that the commission would be informed of this issue so it could be addressed in a timely fashion. However, during today's meeting, based upon the questioning of Mr. Battis on this issue and a direct question to the City Attorney by the Chairperson of the Ethics Commission, it became apparent that the Ethics Commission had not been informed of the potential conflict of interest of one of its members. I therefore had an obligation to state my objection for the record. When I attempted to raise this conflict of interest issue in an orderly fashion to Connie Peace the Chairperson, Mr. Battis, without the recognition of the chairperson, rudely shouted me down a total of two times. Mr. Battis stated that: "there would be r�o citizen comment on the issue." Since the Mayor is the subject of the inquiry, and as his legal counsel, I believe � had the right and obligation to raise the conflict of interest issue on the Mayor's behalf.