My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-11-12 Board of Ethics Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2011-2018
>
2014
>
2014-11-12 Board of Ethics Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2015 8:12:09 AM
Creation date
2/6/2015 8:12:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Mr. Adams: Right. We have in the Rules of Practice and Procedures, we have <br />four different functions. We have declaratory, we have informal <br />advisory, we have investigatory, investigatory hearing and we have <br />formal opinions. I just want to make sure that those are consistent <br />across the board from the Charter to the Code to the Rules of <br />Practice and Procedure. When we use our phrasing, for the most <br />part we have done mostly informal advisory. The interesting thing <br />is there have been times when we’ve been approached to do <br />declaratory, but we’ve called it informal advisory. Where we have <br />someone that will come to us and say, for example, the individual <br />that was looking to become a president for the non-profit Ham <br />Radio Club and was also working at Civil Defense. We <br />approached that as an informal advisory opinion when I think <br />according to our Rules and Procedures it would have been really a <br />declaratory ruling. Meaning there wasn’t any violation, but we’re <br />being asked to advise in the event that this does happen. It’s a <br />before the fact, it’s something that our judicial system is not <br />allowed to do. They have to have a case. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: We actually have that frequently. <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: So just make sure that we are consistent, is really the deal. In our <br />concurring and descending opinions, not that we have very many <br />of those necessarily, but just to make sure that we’re covered on <br />that. We have a timeline associated when we issue our opinions, <br />following a decision that has been made on them. We don’t have <br />that timeline associated with concurring and descending opinions <br />that would be associated with that. I’m suggesting that we say <br />within thirty days. It can be added to the record within thirty days. <br /> <br />Mr. Henricks: I wanted to ask counsel this question. I know that one of our <br />purposes is investigatory. I’ve gone through this whole Code and I <br />found out that we have absolutely no tools to do investigatory <br />hearings, none. We have no tools, we can’t call people here, we <br />can’t ask them… <br /> <br />Ms. Schoen: You have subpoena powers. <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: We have subpoena powers. <br /> <br />Mr. Henricks: What happens if they don’t show up? <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: Where’s the enforcement of the subpoena. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: We have authority without repercussions. <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.