pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-09-20.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-09-20 | 7 | reminder, her office is tasked by the City Council to staff and advise the OGC; the details and how it is done that is up to the City Attorney's Office, which wants to be responsive to the Commission's concerns; the Office is prepared to commit to delivering written guidance when appropriate; she does not think the Office would be comfortable with the draft procedures as written being absolute, especially referring to her role in the complaint process; the Office will commit to delivering the guidance mentioned in her July 19, 2021 email outlining the current staffing plan, which involves guidance to the OGC in its adjudicatory capacity when deliberating over complaints and calling upon outside counsel if necessary; she would be the one delivering guidance to the Commission; during the complaint process, instances may need elaboration; it would not be wise for her to commit to everything being in writing; guidance ahead of the hearing will be in writing; she does not know if her position will always advise the Commission; another Attorney could fill the position; concerns were raised about ethical walls or guardrails; attorneys are used to walling themselves off from their colleagues in a variety of situations; OGC cases would be no different; she does not have a formalized process; if a complaint is filed, she would advise the OGC in a neutral capacity and would not discuss anything with the staff representing the City. Commissioner LoPilato stated one of the components of the procedures is dependent on whether there is a written statement; she wanted to create a timeline; inquired whether it is beneficial to have the pre-hearing submission timeline include some kind of guidance. The City Clerk responded that she had some concerns about the timeline; stated if the Commission wants to hold meetings the first Monday of the month and a complaint is submitted later in the previous month, the timeline could make it harder to get the hearing on the agenda; expressed concern about coordinating special meetings. The Chief Assistant City Attorney stated the process is more like a motion hearing and more formulaic; individuals filing complaints are most likely not attorneys; the process should not be stifled too much; after someone has gone through the trouble and effort of filing a complaint, they might feel boxed out if they do not understand Respondent Statements; she thinks Commissioner LoPilato addressed the issue and provided enough flexibility, but she is mindful there may be instances in which the Complainant would not articulate their argument and her written guidance may not capture all arguments; there needs to be some flexibility. Commissioner Reid stated in a prior meeting, the City Clerk mentioned Complainants are required to attend the hearing; inquired whether there would be any legal issues with someone filing an anonymous complaint. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded that she is not aware of any legal issues; stated that she would look into the matter more deeply in advance of the next meeting; most of her concerns have to do with the practicalities; it seems odd to her having a quasi- adjudicatory process where there are two sides and one side is anonymous; she is not aware of any legal prohibition. Meeting of the Open Government Commission September 20, 2021 7 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-09-20.pdf |