My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2014 02 24 SP
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2014 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2014 02 24 SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:35 PM
Creation date
3/5/2014 10:08:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
2/24/2014
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2014 02 24 SP
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br /> Special Meeting Minutes <br /> February 24, 2014 <br /> Page 5 of 11 <br /> and Council business should be addressed in City Council <br /> meeting. <br /> n) No employment of officials by City for 2 years after leaving <br /> office. <br /> o) No acquisition of real estate interests in property the City is <br /> considering acquiring. <br /> p) Gifts <br /> COUNCIL QUESTIONS: <br /> What if a Council member did not know the City was considering buying a piece <br /> of property? Special Counselor Krob stated if they can document they did not <br /> know the City's intent to purchase, it is not a violation. However there would be a <br /> problem with the public's perception of a violation. <br /> A Council member felt if a developer comes before the City on a development <br /> request within the City, the City Council should know about it so to avoid any <br /> conflict with buying property in the adjacent area. Special Counselor Krob <br /> agreed. The risk is the public's perception that the elected official knew about <br /> the potential development, however, if Council received notice of a PUD coming <br /> forward, it would be better to not know any details until the quasi-judicial process <br /> is underway so to avoid a Council member being disqualified from hearing the <br /> request. <br /> City Manager Fleming asked how to balance the philosophical questions if notice <br /> is provided to the Council on potential property transactions. Special Counselor <br /> Krob stated if it appears the Council has had a lot of information on the <br /> application prior to the hearing; it can be resolved by a full and complete <br /> disclosure on the record. <br /> GIFTS <br /> 1) Louisville's Code of Ethics is more restrictive than the State's rules 41. <br /> Amendment 41 limited the value of things an official could receive to $50, while <br /> Louisville's code of ethics limits it to $15. <br /> 2) Gift ban for certain independent contractors: By resolution, the City Council <br /> extended the limitations on gifts that can be accepted by officers, public body <br /> members and employees from independent contractors who have the power or <br /> duty to perform, or have any influence over an official action of the City. <br /> SECTION 5- 10 — DISCLOSURE/NONPARTICIPATION <br /> 1. Disclosure/nonparticipation requirements apply to any officer who has an <br /> interest in a matter (1) before City Council, or (2) before the public body of <br /> which he/she is a member. <br /> 2. Disclosure/Nonparticipation process for such matters: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.