My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1991 10 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1991 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1991 10 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:33 PM
Creation date
6/16/2006 2:06:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
10/15/1991
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1991 10 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
<br /> --" <br />Griffiths: Mayor and Council, I would just state again that these <br /> amendments were suggested by the Municipal Judge <br /> and discussed with the Council previously at a work <br /> session. If I can answer any questions I'd be happy to <br /> try. <br />Szymanski moved to adopt Ordinance No. 1053, Series 1991 - Amending Title 10, Louisville <br />Municipal Code at the second and final reading, seconded by Howard. Roll call was taken. <br />Motion passed 7-0. <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1054, SERIES 1991 - REPEALING CHAPTER 2.80 OF <br />THE LOUISVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE - 1ST READING - SET PUBLIC <br />HEARING (ETHICS CODE) <br />Griffiths read by title only Ordinance No. 1054, Series 1991, "An Ordinance concerning <br />Ethics, Open Government, Open Meetings and Executive Sessions and providing penalties <br />for violation thereof." <br />Davidson: I have a couple of questions for the City Attorney, so <br /> when we come back at the public hearing we can have <br /> an answer. On page three, Paragraph I, Section 1 and <br /> 2, my question is how would the wording apply if a City <br /> Councilman was in the business of renting equipment to <br /> a third party contractor who then did business with the <br /> City? <br />Griffiths: Just for clarification, the third party is the entity that is <br /> doing business with the City? <br />Davidson: The third party would be doing business with the <br /> contractor, who is doing business with the City. The <br /> City issues a City contract to repair a street. The <br /> contractor or his subcontractor then rents equipment <br /> from the proprietor of a rental center who happens to <br /> be a City Councilman. Which might happen. Does this <br /> language in any way restrict that operation? I would <br /> refer that same question to paragraph B on page 3. I <br /> have one further comment. I would really like to thank <br /> the Ethics Committee for the excellent job they have <br /> done on this and the long hours they have put into it. <br /> When I initiated this process about a year and a half <br /> ago, I had no idea of the time that would be involved. <br /> Both I and the citizens of Louisville appreciate the <br /> effort, it is a really well written ordinance and I look <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.