2010-0727 Special City Commission Meeting

Home Browse Search

- Summary Minutes: Special City Commission Meeting July 27,2010 Sunny Isles Beach, Florida employee is a resident of the City and has received a notice pursuant to the City regulation; 4) private property exemption; and 5) the City Commission may waive the two-year ban if the former employee's testimony is of public interest and his testimony is needed to clarify a public record. City Attorney Ottinot said the Ordinance also clarifies the City's position on the recent opinion issued by the Ethics Commission of Miami-Dade County post employment restriction. In that opinion the Ethics Commission opined that a former employee can testify as an alleged fact witness in a quasi-judiciary notwithstanding the two-year ban. He strongly disagrees because the language in the County Code does not provide for such an exemption. More importantly, the Opinion that was issued is unprecedented, clearly inconsistent with an opinion issued by the Ethics Commission on the subject of the two-year ban. City Attorney Ottinot handed out a Memorandum summarizing all 28 opinions issued in a 12-year span by the Ethics Commission [Review of County Ethics Commission Opinions- Two-Year Post Employment Restriction). In all of these opinions they construe the two-year ban, in none of those opinions did the County Ethics Commission create a fact witness exemption or any type of exemption with respect to quasi-judicial hearing. Significantly the whole conflict as it is proposed envisioned in the County Ethics Code which was included in this final report as prepared by the Ethics Task Force. The Commission gave him permission to serve on the Task Force, and the Task Force primary responsibility was to eliminate loop holes in the County Ethics Code. Clearly he believes that the opinion that was issued by the Ethics Commission is inconsistent with the work that was done by the Task Force. It creates another loop hole in respect to the two-year ban. He believes that the opinion issued by the Ethics Commission is not only inconsistent with the prior opinions but will create additional loop holes. The proposed amendment Ordinance will re-affirm the City post employment regulations to clarify the City's position in respect to this opinion. Public Speakers: Robert Meyers; Robert Meyers, Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust, said he is here for two reasons: 1) he agrees with City Attorney Ottinot that the City has an absolute right to adopt strong ethics laws than the County Commission adopts, there is no dispute about that; and 2) there is also no dispute about the fact that the Miami-Dade Ethics Commission has a legal authority to interpret the City's Ethics Code. Last week there was a question presented to the Miami-Dade Ethics Commission that was analyzed under the County's Ethics Code, and Victoria Frigo, their staff attorney, prepared the draft opinion which the Ethics Commission adopted. There was never any attempt at that meeting to analyze the City's Ethics Code. The only way that would happen is if a party who we have jurisdiction over comes to our Ethics Commission and says that they would like an opinion with respect to the City's Ethics Code, and if that occurs they will issue an opinion. Obviously, they know what the City's Code says depending on what happens here today and at second reading, we will have further evidence of the City's position on the issue. The Ethics Commission generally gives great deference to the opinion of the City Attorney although it is not bound by that. To clarify the record, their opinion was just to construe the County Ethics Code, if we are asked to construe the City Ethics Code, we will do so taking into account what the City Attorney has said and any arguments that are brought forward by the party that asked for the opinion. 3