My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.7 PCSR 09-27-1994
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
_Prior to 1999
>
1994
>
09-27-1994
>
5.7 PCSR 09-27-1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/6/2018 10:34:27 AM
Creation date
4/6/2018 10:34:23 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
MEMORANDUM <br /> LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. <br /> Attorneys at Law <br /> • 1500 Norwest Financial Center <br /> 7900 Xerxes Avenue South <br /> Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 <br /> Telephone: (612)835-3800 <br /> FAX: (612) 896-3333 <br /> TO: Mayor Henry A. Duitsman and <br /> Members of the City Council <br /> FROM: Peter Beck, City Attorney <br /> DATE: September 12 , 1994 <br /> RE: Conflict of Interest Ordinance <br /> Earlier this year the City Council directed me to amend the <br /> City' s Conflict of Interest Ordinance to eliminate certain <br /> sections which were too broad and to generally bring the <br /> ordinance into closer conformance with the state conflict of <br /> interest laws applicable to municipalities . In response to this <br /> direction I have prepared, and attach for Council review and <br /> consideration, two possible revisions of the Conflict of Interest <br /> Ordinance. <br /> In Option 1 (attached Exhibit A) I have tried to address the City <br /> • Council ' s concerns with the existing ordinance, while still <br /> maintaining a conflict of interest policy that applies to all <br /> City officials and employees . Option 2 (attached Exhibit C) <br /> simply incorporates the applicable state laws, which apply only <br /> to "public officials" and "local officials" as those terms are <br /> defined in state statutes . Option 2 would not apply to all <br /> employees. <br /> I am recommending the Council adopt Option 1, with further <br /> revisions if deemed necessary after Council review and <br /> discussion. I believe that this option addresses the concerns <br /> which the City Council had earlier this year, while still <br /> maintaining a comprehensive conflict of interest policy <br /> applicable to all City employees, consistent with the Council ' s <br /> action in early 1993 when the existing ordinance was adopted. <br /> Attached to this memo please find the following exhibits : <br /> Exhibit X , Option 1 <br /> Exhibit ' q Option 1 in "redlined" format, showing changes <br /> from the existing ordinance <br /> • <br /> Z 'd 9Z:ST b66T 'ZT '60 S9Z£968-ZI9 N32194NI1 h1tl4 NtiW330H NIN21N1 W0213 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.