A Peachtree

City ethics board needed only 15 minutes Wednesday night

to dismiss a complaint against city attorney Jim Webb.

The board

voted 5-0 to accept the recommendation of attorney Andrew

Whalen III of Griffin, who had been appointed by the City

Council to advise the board.

Whalen said

that since Webb and his firm serve the city as an

independent contractor, he is not a public officer

according to the city's own charter. Thus, he is subject

to regulation only by the state's Supreme Court through

the State Bar's disciplinary process.

The

complaint against Webb was filed by Mike Hyde, stemming

from a discussion at a 1997 council meeting concerning a

proposed buffer ordinance. Hyde pointed out that Webb

owned an interest in some property that would be directly

affected by the ordinance.

As city

attorney, Webb could be charged with an ethics violation

only by his "client," which is the mayor and

council, Whalen said. Hyde, as a third party, does not

have the requisite standing to file a complaint.

"You

can't impose jurisdiction on a ruling body that has no

jurisdiction," Webb said moments after Wednesday's

hearing. "I'm just glad we didn't waste any more of

the city's time on this."

Hyde filed

his complaint days before Webb's firm, Webb, Stuckey

& Lindsey, was to be potentially reappointed as city

attorney, a post it has held since 1992. Mayor Bob Lenox

announced at the March 2 council meeting that a decision

would be delayed until this matter was settled.

City

manager Jim Basinger, who attended Wednesday's hearing,

said that he was fairly certain the reappointment would

be back on the council agenda within the next couple of

meetings.

Webb

maintained that he acted appropriately when discussing

the issue that led to the complaint, and said that Hyde's

actions were completely political.

Noting that

Hyde is the only city official ever hit with an ethics

complaint that has stuck, Webb charged that Hyde got the

information he used against him more than two years ago,

and has waited until now to use it.

Webb also

pointed out that Hyde sued the city over a zoning dispute

concerning a piece of property he owned, and the city was

represented by Webb in that case.

"He

[Hyde] sat on this information for more than two years,

then filed a complaint the day before my firm was to be

reappointed as city attorney," said Webb.

As for the

buffer ordinance itself, Webb acknowledged that he had an

interest in the property in question, on Ga. Highway 54,

but he pointed out that the ordinance would have affected

nearly every major collector road in the city, and a

number of city officials would have been directly

affected by it.

"What

I told the council then was that the ordinance was very

broad, and they should consider putting a mechanism in

place where an individual property owner could come to

the city if he or she felt wronged by it," Webb

said. "We [as property owners] never did that."

When the

ordinance was being considered, city staff sent letters

to everyone they felt would be largely impacted by it,

Webb said. He and his partners did not receive such a

letter.

As it stood

then, the ordinance would have affected his property only

slightly, and perhaps in a detrimental fashion, he added.

Whalen

began his remarks to the ethics board Wednesday by

referring to a March 20 letter by Webb that suggested he

was not subject to the city's ethics ordinance. Webb also

noted that there is no statute of limitations in the

ordinance, but a two-year statute for similar cases would

be applicable, which would disqualify this complaint.

Whalen said

that he examined the city's charter and could not find

any provision for the office of city attorney. "In

fact, the words "city attorney" do not appear

to be used in the charter's provision where public

offices are created," he said.

Citing a

1995 case involving the city of Atlanta, Whalen showed

that the state Supreme Court overruled a Court of Appeals

decision and held that the city attorney was not a public

officer just because of legal representation.

"The

Supreme Court clarified the law in Georgia that every

attorney who represents public sector clients is not

automatically an officer or employee of the governmental

entity," Whalen said.

Using that

criteria, he advised the board that Webb is not a public

officer, but an independent contractor, and under the

current city charter and ordinances is not subject to the

ethics board's jurisdiction. Based on that opinion, he

said that he did not find it necessary to address the

statute of limitations.