Laserfiche WebLink
Yuen: Thinks that Sect . 14-5(e) was consciously done. <br /> Charter deliberately make a differentiation between <br /> 411 somebody who asks for opinion of their own conduct and the <br /> situation where somebody asks for an opinion concerning <br /> someone else who they think is acting unethically. <br /> Bethea agrees that is the way it reads but believes that <br /> opinion about someone else should be confidential as well . <br /> L'Orange: What about the county ordinance? <br /> Yuen: The county ordinance was declared invalid because <br /> it is contrary to the County Charter. <br /> L'Orange: I am more confused than before. Is there <br /> anything specifically which we should consider changing or <br /> not changing or to clarify? <br /> Bethea: I think Sect 13-20(b) with matters concerning <br /> personal privacy being considered, it should specifically <br /> include matters coming before the Board of Ethics alleging <br /> ethical violations. If the person being charged wants it <br /> to be confidential , it should be confidential. <br /> Ms. Poppe agrees that if it affects personal privacy, <br /> individual has right to protect it. But if ethical <br /> question concerns public activities of county officer or <br /> • employee, meeting should be open. <br /> Juvik feels that, where possible, meetings should be <br /> open. County officers should be aware of certain <br /> responsibilities. <br /> Omonaka: Moved motion that there be no change to Code of <br /> Ethics. Seconded by J. Juvik. Juvik withdrew second <br /> after Omonaka made it clear that his motion applied to all <br /> of Art . XIV. Juvik only favored keeping confidentiality <br /> the same. Mr. Juvik moved to keep Sect . 13-20(b) the <br /> same. There was no second. There was no specific motion <br /> to change Sect . 13-20(b) . <br /> With regard to Sect. 14-2(c) , Corporation Counsel made a <br /> recommendation for specific language change because <br /> language is found to be confusing. <br /> Yuen: The present language forbids you in engaging in any <br /> business transations which might impair your independence <br /> of judgment or performance of official duties. This <br /> section has been criticized on two grounds. First, it is <br /> vague. Second, it sounds as if the solution is to not <br /> engage in the personal activity. This may be <br /> impractical. Business activity may not raise a conflict <br /> 938 <br />