Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Sumner -Mack: <br />Mr. Robinson: <br />Mr. Heintz: <br />Robinson also made comments about trust in government and <br />confidence and impropriety. And that those questions were going <br />to be included in the draft. And I've read the draft and I don't find <br />them there. Those were going to go towards what David just <br />mentioned. Addressing recusal to at least to some extent. What <br />we have doesn't address it at all. And I'll accept that the Board <br />may not vote to address that...but at least I think we need to <br />address it and vote whether or not we're going to included that. <br />Just as it is, it's unsatisfactory to me. I'm happy to make a motion <br />that we reopen the discussion of this issue to include a discussion <br />of whether or not Council person Kierkiewicz should have recused <br />herself and whether she needs to disclose in the future any bills or <br />legislation that involve Hastings, and her work at Hastings & <br />Pleadwell. And at least disclose...address a question of disclosure. <br />If that's a motion, I second it. I think this is a very crucial, <br />important matter of public trust. And I think it belongs in...if it's <br />not implied in the rules and so on. It should be...it should be <br />emphasized. I think we need to...anyway I think we opening it...I <br />think it was worth reopening and reconsidering that particular <br />obligation. <br />Okay just so I understand the motion, Nan, is to reopen the <br />hearing? Go back in and have a...reopen the hearing and... <br />If that is what J is suggesting we would have to do. I mean in <br />fairness to the both the petitioners and the respondent. I mean they <br />think the issue is closed. We've said what we had to say and we <br />weren't going to address recusal. But...but we were going to...in <br />our meeting it did say we were going to address it obliquely at <br />least or by inference. And that didn't happen. If that can be <br />explicit enough, maybe that will satisfy us. <br />Mr. Robinson: And so, Nan, if I understand it, then your second is to reopen the <br />hearing as well? <br />Ms. Sumner -Mack: If that's what he meant. If that's necessary according to the rules, <br />then so be it. It's an important issue. <br />Mr. Yoshimoto: Why don't we do this then? Before we go any further. Why don't <br />we have an executive session discussion regarding the legal <br />opinion that we're going to be issuing? And then we can have that <br />discussion today. Then we can decide how to move forward. <br />Mr. Heintz: Thank you. <br />8 <br />