My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/28/1997
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1997
>
1/28/1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:02 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 9:23:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/28/1997
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
This review process would function along the following lines. <br />1. Any County employee, Commissioner or member of a County Board or Commission may <br />request an interpretive ruling on a particular set of fads from the County Attomey's Office as to <br />whether participation in a described activity would violate the code of ethics. Said request would <br />be in writing. <br />2. If the opinion is that there is no violation that ends the matter. <br />3. If the opinion is that there is a violation that opinion may be appealed as follows: <br />a. In the case of a county employee under the jurisdiction of the County Administrator, said <br />employee may appeal to the County Administrator. The County Administrator could overrule, <br />sustain or refer the matter to the Chairman. This same procedure could apply to employees of <br />the executive aide to the Commission and the County Attorney who would hear the appeal of <br />employees under their jurisdiction. <br />b. In the case of a member of a County Board or Commission, said member could appeal to <br />the Chairman. <br />C. In the case of a Commissioner, the appeal would be to the Board County of <br />Commissioners. <br />d. When an appeal is to the Chairman, the Chairman may overrule, sustain or refer the <br />opinion to the Commission for its decision. <br />Commissioner Macht advised that under the State Gift Law, <br />county employees would be allowed to accept $25 gifts (under <br />varying circumstances.) The County's present ordinance is more <br />severe and he hoped we would keep it. <br />Commissioner Ginn also wanted to keep our present ordinance. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Tippin, the Board by a 3-2 vote <br />(Commissioners Macht and Ginn dissenting), opted to <br />operate under the State Gift Law. <br />APPROVAL OF LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING <br />PROTECTS <br />Chairman Eggert reminded the Board that a verification of <br />support for Grove Point Apartments was added to the Agenda. Grove <br />Point is located at 41st Street, east of U.S. #1. The Board is <br />being asked to approve Local Government Verification of Support <br />for: <br />57 <br />JANUARY 28, 1997 <br />RVGK" FACE 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.