Laserfiche WebLink
him in his individual capacity. Attorney Reynolds had thoughts <br />that perhaps Commissioner Scurlock's participation in the <br />discussion and this vote in his official capacity could potentially <br />invoke questions about conflict of interest at the time of the vote <br />and of the discussion. <br />Addressing Commissioner Scurlock directly, Attorney Reynolds <br />advised that this matter is open to the public and any individual <br />can come in and state whatever they want, and in your individual <br />capacity you certainly are so entitled. He recalled that one of <br />the matters that came up during the defense of this case was why <br />something wasn't said when the County Attorney or anyone else <br />thought you had a potential conflict of interest.- Attorney <br />Reynolds stressed that for purposes of the record today, he was <br />saying it, because in Commissioner Scurlock's official capacity, <br />and his representing him in his official capacity, he would be <br />bothered by the potential for a conflict of interest by <br />Commissioner Scurlock's participation as a Commissioner in the <br />discussion and vote of this matter. He noted that under the <br />conflict of interest statute, Commissioner Scurlock is guided by <br />his own best counsel, but felt it is very important to point out <br />his reservation at this time. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked if there was an effort to resolve <br />all the issues today, what format or vehicle would he have as an <br />individual to indicate to this Commission. <br />Attorney Reynolds advised that Commissioner Scurlock had only <br />to so state. His advice to Commissioner Scurlock is that he should <br />not vote. <br />Commissioner Scurlock stated that wasn't a problem and agreed <br />not to vote on this issue. <br />001 <br />