My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/8/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
8/8/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:12 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:43:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/08/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
F.S. 286.0115, "ACCESS TO LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICIAL": <br />The County may. now adopt an ordinance or resolution removing the <br />presumption of prejudice from ex parte communications with local public <br />officials by establishing procedures for the disclosure of such contacts, <br />written communications, or investigations and site visits. <br />Disclosures must be made before or during the public hearing at which a <br />vote is taken so that persons with opinions contrary to those expressed in <br />the ex parte communications are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or <br />respond to the communication. <br />A resolution has been prepared (see attachment) that would allow access to <br />public officials taking quasi-judicial action; remove the presumption of <br />prejudice from such communications; and establish procedures for disclosure <br />of such communications. <br />There is no requirement to adopt such procedures. <br />Commissioners Eggert and Bird spoke against the proposed <br />resolution. <br />Commissioner Adams asked if could be done any other way, and <br />Attorney Collins explained that this was a procedure that the State <br />had set up. <br />Commissioner Tippin spoke against the resolution and suggested <br />that either written or verbal disclosure might be acceptable. <br />Attorney Collins suggested they could do that, but reiterated <br />that there was no requirement to adopt the State -approved <br />procedures or any other procedures. He thought they had the <br />opportunity to adopt alternate procedures, but the only question <br />would be whether it would overcome the presumption of prejudice. <br />Chairman Macht preferred to make no change and to continue to <br />lobby the Legislature to modify the law, as he has advocated for <br />some time. <br />The Board discussed Commissioner Tippin's suggestion; the <br />majority wished to continue as they had been doing. <br />Chairman Macht inquired if it was possible to put Commissioner <br />Tippin's suggestion before the Attorney General for an opinion and <br />Attorney Collins thought it would not be a good procedure since <br />there's no case law on it. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED <br />BY Commissioner Eggert, to proceed as they <br />have been and try to abide by the law, but if <br />there is an inadvertent contact causing a need <br />for disclosure, then to make it at the public <br />meeting. <br />55 <br />August 8, 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.