My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0102.010 2000-2002
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2000-2002
>
COM 0102.010 2000-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2008 4:52:34 PM
Creation date
5/10/2008 2:23:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2000-2002
Communication
0102
Point
010
Author
Roger Christie, Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Communications - Referred To
COUNCIL
Communications - File Code
POL
Document Relationships
RES 046 Draft 01 2000-2002
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Resolutions\2000-2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
View images
View plain text
Face <br /> of the ~~rpcrat~on counsel to defend impeached officials. <br /> s exacerbated by the relatively low threshold <br /> establ•s ed by ycur County Charter to initiate impeachment. Our <br /> Depart:~ent has no special expertise in this area, and I believe <br /> your C:rperation Counsel has alrez~dy advised you on this issue. <br /> A~ the meeting with the Governor, you also raised the <br /> possib=lity of our Department supporting your request for <br /> reimbLrsement from the State legislature for your out-of-pocket <br /> legal expense incurred in the impeachment defense. As was <br /> ndica=ed at the meeting, while a one-time legislative <br /> reimbursement will solve the problem this year, the Legislature <br /> may asl, how the County plans to solve this problem in the long <br /> term. <br /> As we see it, <br /> and so long as your ar i s your <br /> corporation sel from defending county officials based on <br /> assertea violations of the 9 }•ear review requirement, and so long <br /> as your Charter provision makes it relatively easy to initiate an <br /> ~,-npeac ::~e:,~, Cou;aty officials :l::ays be a*_ risk to advance <br /> °rem their own pockets for impeachment defense costs. I also was <br /> .reformed chat your Charter Revisicn committee is reluctant to <br /> propose any changes to these various Charter provisions creating <br /> the di_2mma you face. <br /> F_nally, you asked again whether the State could somehow <br /> restructure the federal grant process so that the State, not the <br /> Count}, remains responsible for implementing the marihuana <br /> eradica~ion program, and thus the State, not the County, would <br /> <br /> have xefend and challenge to the program. I have checked <br /> <br /> again ..nth and confirm our earlier advice <br /> <br /> ~':at <br /> Very truly yours, <br /> Earl I. ?nzai <br /> Attorney Gene <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.