My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009-02-11 Board of Ethics Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2006-2010
>
2009-02-11 Board of Ethics Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/30/2011 2:08:57 PM
Creation date
6/30/2011 1:57:13 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
noted that the State Ethics Commission has a good instruction sheet which could be used as a <br />sample. <br />Ms. Schoen proposed that the Board amend its instruction sheet or disclosure form to <br />make the process more understandable for everyone. She could then check with the County <br />Clerk to get his input and approval. <br />Ms. Nicholson suggested combining the instructions and the disclosure form into one <br />document, even though it might mean more paper. It would be good if the instruction for each <br />item was incorporated next to that item on the form. Ms. Schoen said that was a good <br />suggestion. <br />The Board agreed to wait for Ms. Schoen's drafts. <br />6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br />a. Update on the status of amending the Board's Rules of Practice and <br />Procedure regarding the imposition of administrative fines pursuant to <br />Ordinance 08 -57. <br />b. Discussion on Board's position, if any, on Senate Bills 1128 and 531, and <br />House Bill 626, pending before the legislature regarding administrative fines. <br />Ms. Schoen reported that there are two senate bills and one house bill that are alive on the <br />issue of administrative fines. She had recently contacted their Chair to suggest postponing the <br />public notice and hearing on the Board's rule changes until the legislature rules on these bills, <br />since they may affect their rules. <br />The Chair stated that he would like the Board to submit testimony in support of the two <br />senate bills, and Ms. Schoen said that the bills were at the committee level and were not yet set <br />for hearing. However, she would prepare testimony for the Chair to sign. She noted that Kauai <br />and Maui counties were also in support but had not yet submitted testimony. <br />Ms. Nicholson asked whether either of the bills relate to the appeals process, and Ms. <br />Schoen said yes, and that she was changing her "no" answer from the previous meeting <br />regarding whether an appeals entity would be needed. Based on how the law is written now, her <br />answer is yes, a County agency or department would need to be created or designated to review <br />BOE decisions. If the bills do not pass on that provision, this will remain the case, because it is <br />existing law. <br />The Chair said since he is following other bills, he will try and track these as well and <br />that if it was okay with everyone, he would sign off on the testimony on BOE letterhead. <br />Ms. Schoen said that she discussed the administrative fines issue and the pending bills <br />with several attorneys in her office, and some felt an appeal process was not necessary because <br />people could appeal to the Circuit Court. Other attorneys believed a separate appeal agency was <br />needed, and the more she studies the issue, the more she believes that is the case. There are three <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.