Laserfiche WebLink
Prosecutor shall sake such opinion public as soon <br /> as possible and as soon as publicly posting said <br /> opinion will not harm the best interest of the <br /> City.• <br /> Ms. Wick opposes this amendment as she believes <br /> this section is not following the intent of the <br /> Public Meetings Law for local government and the <br /> amendment gaits one appointed official to decide <br /> whether an opinion should be made public. 'The <br /> City Prosecutor is not an elected official and <br /> hence not responsible to the public as our elected <br /> officials. I urge you to withdraw these <br /> amendments to the Ethics Code.' <br /> Rautenstraus explained that the change of this <br /> particular section, is a natter of policy for <br /> Council to determine. Every advisory opinion <br /> would have to be posted immediately under the <br /> current Code. With this amendment, under certain <br /> limited instances, an advisory opinion would not <br /> be immediately posted. This change may not <br /> clarify the Code, but may be a way of encouraging <br /> people to seek advisory opinions. Currently, <br /> people may not seek an advisory opinion because it <br /> would be publicly posted. Rautenstraus stated <br /> that it would be for Council to Jecide which value <br /> they determine to be most important - immediately <br /> posting the opinion or possibly encourage more <br /> people to seek opinions. <br /> Sackett asked why an advisory opinion needs to be <br /> public at all. 'It seems to me that an employee <br /> or public official ought to be able to get an <br /> opinion confidentially.' 'If you want to know <br /> whether or not certain activities would be ethical <br /> or not ethical, you ought be able to do that <br /> confidentially." <br /> Mohr stated that he agreed with Ms. Nick's <br /> concerns on both proposed amendments to the Ethics <br /> Code. Mohr feels it important that people are <br /> aware that charging a person with an alleged <br /> violation is a serious charge and should not be <br /> entered into frivolously. Therefore, it is proper <br /> to have the section assessing the costs of the <br /> investigation including reasonable attorney fees <br /> against the person acting in bad faith or filing <br /> the groundless and frivolous complaint. However, <br /> this may best be addressed by the District Court <br /> when the determination is made relative to such <br /> civil action. <br /> Both Councilmen Scarpella and Sackett felt that <br /> this particular section regarding advisory <br /> 5 <br />