Ethics Commission

MINUTES OF NORWICH ETHICS COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING August 3, 2011 MEMBERS PRESENT Joseph Sastre Wayne Rosenfield (participated by speaker phone) Tamara Lanier Rabbi Arian Robert Davidson MEMBERS ABSENT None ALTERNATES PRESENT Marcia Marien ALTERNATES ABSENT Ira Misenheimer OTHERS PRESENT None I. Call to order – Chairman Rabbi Arian called the August 3rd, 2011 special meeting to order at 5:04 P.M. II. Determination of Quorum It was determined a quorum was present. III. Correspondence Chairman Arian read email from Vivian Zoe. She is unable to attend the hearing scheduled for August 15th due to a previous commitment. IV. New Business a.) Appearance of Respondent Vivian Zoe for hearing on Complaints 2011-2 & 2011-4 Email from Assistant Corporation Counsel Aimee Wickless regarding the subpoena of Vivian Zoe. She advised that the courts would most likely not issue a subpoena in this case. T. Lanier commented that she is very familiar with the subpoena process and feels that the courts do not make accommodations for subpoenaed witnesses’ schedules and feels that the tone of the email suggested that Ms. Zoe is not taking the process seriously. R. Arian commented that Ms. Zoe has had every opportunity to raise the issue of the Commission’s jurisdiction over her participation in this matter and did not do so. He is not willing to entertain throwing out this matter over jurisdiction. She has not declined to appear in her email. Ethics Commission August 3, 2011 Page -2- R. Davidson commented the Commission does not necessarily need her at the hearing for it to proceed as the facts of the case are not in dispute. She did not deny the facts in any of her correspondence. R. Arian feels that holding the hearing without her may give her the opportunity for her to portray that she was not dealt with fairly. He suggests that the hearing be begun on August 15th as scheduled and be recorded as required. He will inform her by letter that the hearing will take place as scheduled and she is invited to attend if her schedule permits. He suggests that the letter state that if she cannot appear on the scheduled date, the Commission will continue the hearing on either of two dates which the Commission will provide and she can choose which is more convenient for her schedule. R. Davidson would like the letter to firmly state the seriousness of the proceedings, that this is a hearing, not a meeting and the seriousness if she chooses not to attend the hearing and provide testimony. J. Sastre asked what the purpose would be of holding the hearing only to continue it to a later date. Discussion followed. R. Arian is not willing to re-schedule the entire hearing as it would set a dangerous precedent. The respondents have been notified and the Commission has cleared their schedules. Ms. Zoe will be provided with a recording of that day’s hearing if she requests it. J. Sastre feels that the Commission has a plan and Ms. Zoe’s email should be taken at face value. The Commission should proceed according to their Rules of Procedure. R. Davidson asked the Commission to look at their role in this proceeding. The Commission will write a letter to the City Manager and City Council with their recommendations and that is the limit of the Commission’s power. The Commission has no power other than recommendation. R. Davidson asked if any new complaints that are received regarding the same subject, will they be presented as testimony or will the complainants be allowed to testify? R. Arian, J. Sastre and W. Rosenfield feel that, unless the complaints are offering new information that is relevant to the complaints being considered, testimony is not needed from new complainants and that is the Chairman of the hearing panel’s decision. No one has a right to testify except for the complainants of record and the respondents. R. Davidson feels that the group doesn’t officially know what other information these other potential complainants may have. R. Arian clarified that witnesses may not be added at the hearing as the respondent has to be given a list of intended witnesses 10 days before the hearing. Ethics Commission August 3, 2011 Page -3- The hearing panel for the August 15th hearing consists of T. Lanier, R. Davidson, R. Arian, J. Sastre, M. Marien. Motion to offer August 16 and 17th at 4:30 P.M. as alternative dates for Ms. Zoe to appear at the continued hearing and for Chairman Arian to draft a letter to be sent to her stating such, T. Lanier, 2nd J. Sastre, motion carried unanimously. M. Marien feels that the Commission has two large responsibilities. One is to decide if there is an ethics violation and secondly to do it without letting politics interfere. R. Arian would like to clarify with Corporation Counsel at Monday’s meeting how deliberations take place, either in executive or public session. V. Old Business None VI. Adjournment Motion to adjourn, T. Lanier, 2nd J. Sastre, meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M.