My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC 1999-05-26
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHC 1999-05-26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 1:00:16 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 2:38:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1999
Meeting date
5/26/1999
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1999-05-26 SP MTG
(Related To)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\2000\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
HERKES: Well, it's under their section, legislative section. <br />RAY: Okay. Okay, Mr. Wurdeman. <br />WURDEMAN: Okay, number two is just basically a semantic matter. <br />Number three, Special Council, this may not be totally clear. <br />RAY: This is Article 5-2.5. <br />WURDEMAN: Yeah, right. The Charter presently requires that when my office hires <br />special Counsel that we get the two-thirds approval of the Council, and I think this is perfectly <br />appropriate when we go out to hire someone to do the things we normally do. However, there <br />are occasions where we are obligated by either collective bargaining agreement or by law to <br />provide individual counsel for employees who get into some kind of a difficulty. And although it <br />has not happened yet, I could foresee a situation where the Police Commission is given the <br />authority to direct that counsel be retained for a police officer, and I could see the possibility that <br />they would so direct, we would go to the Council, the Council would turn us down, and there <br />would be an impasse that would lead to crisis. <br />So, my recommendation is that the present language be retained for the normal situation where <br />Counsel is hired to represent the County for doing County business, but that those instances <br />where we're required to hire counsel to represent individual employees be exempted from this <br />requirement. <br />RAY: Okay. Any questions on that? <br />IRVINE: Do County Council -, not County Councils but Corporation Counsels <br />usually represent just the County or do they also represent individuals the way -? <br />WURDEMAN: It's -, well -. <br />IRVINE: We do here? <br />WURDEMAN: You take -. It depends. You take the normal situation, a police officer <br />gets in some kind of a fight, somebody gets hurt. We could represent both the County and the <br />officer, but it has been determined by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court <br />that if we do so, the County has to agree to fully indemnify the officer for all damages, including <br />punitive damages, that might result. <br />Now, normally, counties or cities are not liable for punitive damages which are in excess of other <br />kinds of damages and are designed to penalize the wrongdoer. The conflict exists when if you got <br />one attorney representing both the County and the officer, conceivably, that attorney could argue <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.