My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1992 05 05
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1992 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1992 05 05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:34 PM
Creation date
8/1/2005 10:39:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
5/5/1992
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1992 05 05
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
2.) <br /> <br />A memo to Linda Salas, Administrative Assistant to the <br />City Administrator, City of Louisville, from Kirk <br />Schweitzer, Chief Building Official, dated May 4, 1992, <br />regarding the Brass Monkey Liquor Store. (See attached <br />document.) <br /> <br />3.) <br /> <br />A memo to the Mayor, City Council, City Administrator, <br />and City Attorney from Sharon Asti-Caranci, Deputy City <br />Clerk, Linda Salas, Deputy City Clerk, and Donna <br />Cummings, past City Clerk, regarding fingerprint checks, <br />CBI and FBI, dated May 5, 1992. (See attached document.) <br /> <br />Davidson asked that the applicant or its representative come <br />forward and make their presentation. <br /> <br />Michael H. Bynum, Attorney, on behalf of the Applicant. <br /> <br />Bynum: <br /> <br />Our firm is Chrisman, Bynum & <br />Johnson in Boulder, Colorado. Mr. <br />Stavely, who is a partner in our <br />firm, serves as a part-time <br />Municipal Judge in Louisville. I <br />had not considered that as a <br />conflict issue. Mr. Sisk just <br />raised the issue with me, so I <br />wanted to bring that to the <br />attention of Council to make sure <br />everything is out on the record. <br />Mr. Stavely has not been involved in <br />this, but he is a member of my firm. <br />I had not considered it or I would <br />have brought it up earlier. I asked <br />Mr. Sisk why he didn't call me <br />earlier. I don't believe there is a <br />problem as far as we're concerned. <br />If the Council/Authority does, we'll <br />certainly abide by that and make <br />arrangements to proceed without my <br />direct participation. <br /> <br />Griffiths asked that she and Council take a few minutes break to <br />take a look at the Ethics Code provision to see if there is a <br />potential problem. <br /> <br />SHORT RECESS WAS TAKEN. <br /> <br />Griffiths stated that Section 2.80.030 of the City's Code of <br />Ethics, paragraph G provides that no public officer or employee <br />shall appear on behalf of any persons other than himself, his <br />spouses, minor children, parents, or grandparents before any City <br />Agency. Mr Stavely does fit in under paragraph G. It's unclear <br />whether that paragraph would extend to members of his law firm and <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.