Friday, January 3, 2003
|
Friday, January 3, 2003 |
|
Ethics board to shun public from deliberations? By JOHN MUNFORD
Peachtree City's Ethics Board will meet 6 p.m. Monday at City Hall to discuss potential revisions to the city's ethics ordinance. One of those revisions would be a rather significant change instead of deliberating the evidence in public, the board would do so in private and announce the decision to the public either immediately or at a later date. Currently, board members hear evidence from both sides at a hearing open to the public, and they also deliberate in public after the hearing phase is concluded. Any changes to the city's ethics ordinance must be approved by council at a later date. The board met twice in October to hash through the ethics ordinance and strengthen it, particularly to keep frivolous complaints from being filed against city officials and employees. According to minutes of those meetings, board members said they wanted some kind of penalty for those who bring frivolous ethics complaints such as a fine, reimbursement of legal expenses, letters to newspapers regarding elected officials and termination of employees. Councilman Murray Weed, who is a municipal attorney, offered to research possible penalties for the board's information. The ethics board members are appointed individually by city council members. The board was called into action twice last year, once on a complaint against councilman Steve Rapson for voting on a matter involving the Development Authority of Peachtree City, whom his wife is suing in court for unequal pay. The board also met at the insistence of Mayor Steve Brown, who cited himself for allowing a city employee to drive his daughter to golf camp at a local course when he had to attend a crucial meeting on the local option sales tax. The board admonished both men but took no further action. Brown later repaid the city the estimated $8.94 in staff time used to drive his daughter to the event. Weed also suggested that the board should have the ability to dismiss complaints which are unjustified, and by doing so a similar complaint against the same person couldn't be filed within six months of the original complaint. The board also wants to make city volunteers subject to the city's ethics ordinance in addition to employees and public officials.
|
||