Citizens

should be allowed to speak at City Council

meetings in Peachtree City if they are referred

to by name in council discussions, council

members decided Friday.

During

its annual planning retreat over the weekend,

council dug into the city's ethics ordinance, and

also studied council meeting procedures, in an

effort to reduce the rancor that has erupted at

recent meetings, and to improve decorum. The

group came up with a number of proposed changes,

but decided the next course of action should be a

review of the ordinance by the city's ethics

board.

Though

council members have squabbled over many of the

same issues in the past, last weekend's

discussions were congenial.

In

the wake of two recent ethics complaints against

city attorney Jim Webb and Councilman Dan

Tennant, a number of issues have been raised

regarding the ethics ordinance. The ethics board

looking into the Webb case meets tonight at 7

p.m. at City Hall. The complaint against Tennant

has been withdrawn.

Council

members agreed that the terms of the ethics

ordinance, whatever they become, should apply

equally to all groups contracted with the city as

well as city staff, elected officials and

commission and authority members.

This

issue came up after Tennant commented on a

previous statement by Webb that he was not

certain the ethics ordinance applied to the city

attorney. Tennant said that he felt the city

attorney most certainly should fall under the

ordinance, and Councilman Robert Brooks added

that whatever applied to the city attorney would

have to apply to everyone under contract to the

city.

City

attorney Rick Lindsey pointed out that all

attorneys in Georgia, no matter whom they

represent, are subject to an ethics code

considerably more detailed than what Peachtree

City or any other city is using.

After

tonight's public hearing, the ethics board will

forward any recommendations for enhancements to

the ethics ordinance to the City Council.

Issues

raised for discussion by various council members,

citizens, staff and the city attorney include the

following:

� Statute of limitations on a

complaint.

� Right of confrontation by

the respondent.

� Right of the complainant to

address the ethics board.

� Investigation procedures

used by the ethics board.

� Pre-clearance of claims by

an independent attorney or the city attorney

regarding applicability of the ethics ordinance

and legal questions, but not factual

determinations.

� A time limit to conduct an

investigation and make a recommendation to the

City Council.

� A written report from the

ethics board to reflect the final vote and

recommendations.

� Procedures for ethics board

hearings, including guidelines for witness

testimony, documentary evidence, rules of

evidence, rules of procedure, fair disclosure of

evidence to the opposing side, preservation of

the record for appeals, subpoena power of the

ethics board, and discovery rights of the

respondent.

� Handling the withdrawal of a

complaint.

� Deleting from the ethics

board pool the appointments of any council member

alleging a violation against another council

member.

Also

at the retreat, council members agreed in

principle to a series of proposed changes to the

city's ordinance covering City Council meeting

procedures.

An

amendment in development would give citizens the

right to address the council when publicly

referred to by name during a meeting. This was

proposed by Tennant last month and tabled so it

could be covered during the retreat.

The

ordinance currently allows those other than

council members to speak only upon specific

agenda items. The proposed change will allow one

opportunity for citizen rebuttal.

Another

suggested change to the ordinance maintains that

Robert's Rules of Order will be used for any

matters not specifically covered by the ordinance

itself.

"The

majority of situations which will arise at the

council meetings will be handled by our local

ordinance," Lindsey wrote in his

recommendation. "However, there surely will

be situations which will arise in the future that

we cannot possibly anticipate. Having Robert's

Rules of Order as the `backstop' will ensure

fairness and consistency in the meetings, as well

as protect the dignity and decorum of the

meetings."

Another

issue raised in recent weeks is the use of e-mail

and other forms of communication by council

members.

Tennant

was charged with an ethics violation by Council

member Annie McMenamin after sending an e-mail to

fellow council members requesting input on his

proposal to allow citizen rebuttal at meetings.

That complaint has since been withdrawal before

any hearings were held.

letter to The Citizen by Mayor Bob Lenox also

raised some citizens' ire when he stated that it

would be posted on the city's web site. That idea

provoked complaints that the web site should not

be available for his own personal use.

Council

members agreed that the city's administrative

regulations be amended to contain a provision

allowing only relevant factual information on the

city's web site.

As

for e-mail, Tennant suggested broadening the

proposed guidelines to include all forms of

"electronic correspondence," which

would cover conference calls and chat rooms,

among other things.

Lenox

concurred, saying that while a one-on-one

conversation between two council members is

obviously appropriate, anything that could

constitute a "meeting" of more than

two, such as the examples listed above, would not

be appropriate.

<!--

-----------