pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-08-02.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-08-02 | 3 | possible vision of what a statement of the case would look like; inquired whether the plan to represent City departments in complaints before the OGC extends to any policy body. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded that she does not see any difference between policy bodies versus City departments in terms of how the City Attorney's office would represent them. Commissioner LoPilato inquired whether the Chief Assistant City Attorney, as the advisor to the OGC, would be staffing any policy bodies in terms of advising them on Brown Act issues or stepping back from those duties. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded the City Attorney's office has not determined exactly what her role would be other than she would be stepping back from handling Public Records Act (PRA) requests, which is due to recognition of the fact that at some point one of the productions could be the subject of a Sunshine Ordinance complaint. Commissioner Reid stated that she has concerns about the ethical wall; she is not convinced that the City Attorney's office would be able to truly be a fair and neutral advisor; she wonders if there are other options to explore; suggested considering both outside counsel and a neutral advisor to have a comparison. The Chief Assistant City Attorney stated the idea of an ethical wall is not a new one; case law has been reviewed to support past practices and anticipated future practices in terms of maintaining an ethical wall so that decisions that come out of the Commission would be legally solid; the concept of an ethical wall is used currently in Civil Service Board matters and in adjudicatory appeals to the City Council; the City Attorney's office is comfortable with the process and suggests the format going forward. Commissioner Chen moved approval of accepting Option 2 [Chief Assistant City Attorney with formalized parameters for ethical wall guardrails and commitment to providing transparent, written instructional memo as resource for the OGC] on a provisional basis. Commissioner LoPilato seconded the motion. In response to Commissioner LoPilato's inquiry regarding the appropriate procedural process, the Chief Assistant City Attorney stated Option 2 is relatively consistent with the City Attorney's office proposal for staffing, except for the part about formalizing parameters for ethical wall guardrails and commitment to providing a transparent, written instructional memo. In response to Commissioner LoPilato's inquiry, the Chief Assistant City Attorney stated her initial reaction would be that any sort of request dealing with allocation of resources needs to go through the Council; however, given that the Commission is deciding on Option 2, a formal request to the City Attorney's office would be the most logical since the City Council would not need to take any action. Meeting of the Open Government Commission August 2, 2021 3 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-08-02.pdf |