Laserfiche WebLink
for the Police Commission members the council would not make <br /> a decision. Now, as it turned out, it was dismissed and the <br /> council went ahead and they approved. But , when they did so <br /> our office received a letter from the council saying, listen, <br /> we want you to know that what you've done here is in violation <br /> of the charter because we think that you ought to allow us to <br /> give you prior authorization. Our office has interpreted this <br /> provision to mean that authorization is necessary but not <br /> necessarily prior to the special counsel being hired. Because <br /> of the problems we've had with that provision and there are <br /> members of the council, right now, who feel differently than <br /> our office but perhaps this provision should be improved upon <br /> so we don ' t have that problem in the future, or at _least there <br /> is a_ clear understanding through the minutes as to what this <br /> provision means. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Bess, I have an academic <br /> question. You said your office has rendered an opinion on this <br /> provision saying you can and the council is not adhering to it? <br /> MR. BESS: No. Our opinion has been that <br /> special counsel in order to hire special counsel you 've got <br /> to get the two-thirds approval. But this two-thirds approval <br /> does not necessarily have to occur prior to the _time you enter <br /> into a contract with the special counsel. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: But you said the county council <br /> is disagreeing with you. Is the council disagreeing with you? <br /> MR. BESS: I 'm saying that the section lends <br /> itself to disagreement and there happen to be" a "couple_ of people <br /> who are 'presently on the council who disagree with our opinion. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: Since your office rendered your <br /> opinion, isn' t it the council ' s position that they must accept <br /> that? <br /> MR. BESS: Oh, yes. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: So, then what ' s the problem there? <br /> MR. BESS: Well , the reason why I am bringing <br /> this up is that it relates back to what you've done with 5-2.3 <br /> and that raises another question in my mind. . .I notice that, <br /> okay, you've put in "and officers" in matters relating to <br /> their official powers and duties. What does the commission <br /> understand that to mean? I guess, Mr. Ishida, the problem is <br /> is that increasingly you see suits being filed ;against officials <br /> and officers of the county in their individual capacity. There <br /> has been no policy established by the council or the county as <br /> to what our position should be with respect to defending these <br /> people because if the head of public works is accused of paving <br /> a parking lot, what do you do, who does Ed Harada go to? Does <br /> he turn to our office? And what happens if the council goes and <br /> says, corporation counsel , go after this chief engineer, if he <br /> has done any wrong that he pay us back. Ed Harada may be hung <br /> out to dry. Depending upon whether or not he has friends on the <br /> council or not he may not be able to get special counsel. That:';s <br /> a real problem and it ' s going to become an increasing problem in <br /> -27- <br />