Laserfiche WebLink
MS. CRAWFORD: So one of the appraisers buying property within the zone that they currently appraise – <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS: That might become a substantial interest at that point, yes. <br /> <br />MS. CRAWFORD: Right, in which they would need—which I think is what Marilyn was alluding to there— <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS: --You see, what we’re looking at is the conflict of interest concept. It’s not all those checks and balances we’re talking about, or wrongdoing and all that. What it talks about is a person making a recommendation without having any other interest in it--on the recommendation they’re making. But once they live in that area, they may have an interest in it. We’re not saying they’re doing anything wrong, but they may have an interest which may guide their thinking. That’s what we’re talking about. And we don’t want that to occur. And that’s why they have conflict of interest regulations, so that your mind is not guided by something else--that your mind is totally neutral. So we’re not saying it’s wrongdoing. We just want a neutral mind. <br /> <br />MR. ADAMS: I just think it’s important to understand that when we’re talking about conflict of interest, that there are situations and there are documents--oftentimes corporate documents will have a paragraph, for example, that talks about conflict of interest. And it’s not that those situations can’t occur, it’s that they’re disclosed. And sometimes there’s recusal, sometimes there’s not, by the individual that might have that. And so there are processes that those documents will put in place with those organizations. That’s not the situation here, because the situation here says no officer or employee shall take any official action directly affecting an undertaking or a business where they have a substantial financial interest. There isn’t really a lot of wiggle room there for mitigating processes. That’s the difference, it seems to me, when we’re thinking about a conflict of interest situation. <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: Okay, there is a motion on the floor to move this into a formal hearing at our January meeting. All those in favor say aye. <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS, MR. ADAMS, MR. HISASHIMA, and MR. BALSIS (simultaneously): Aye. <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: It’s unanimous in that regard. So we’ll go into a formal hearing in January. And at this point in time I’m going to ask the Board some of the specific questions that we’re going to be addressing, so that people can get the specific information for us. Is there specific information we need from the department, or do we need it from Michael, the petitioner? <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS: Well, as I stated, reiterating, is we’re concerned about whether en masse is a direct—we know she’s taking direct action. If she’s making a recommendation, from my consideration I see it as a direct action. Is en masse—does