HomeMy WebLinkAbout- - Ex Parte Communication and Transparency - 9/6/2011CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2011 ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT: PROPOSED EX PARTE COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY ORDINANCE
DATE: AUGUST 31, 2011
FROM: THOMAS P. DUARTE, CITY ATTORNEY
PRESENTATION COUNCIL MEMBER WENDY LEECE
BY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: THOMAS P. DUARTE, CITY ATTORNEY
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Ordinance No. adding Chapter XII of Title 2 to the Costa Mesa Municipal Code
that would require the disclosure of ex parte communications between City officials, appointed or
elected, and interested parties regarding matters within the respective City official's jurisdiction.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Costa Mesa has stated its commitment to transparent government. To that end, the
City hired a consultant to assist in achieving a more transparent government. Moreover, ex
parte communications in court room settings have been known to frustrate lengthy adjudicatory
processes in that ex parte communications would not be known to other interested parties. This
problem also can present itself in a meeting and deliberative process of any legislative body.
ANALYSIS:
This Ordinance would require the disclosure of any Ex Parte Communication occurring between
a City official and any interested party regarding the proposal, drafting, development,
consideration, amendment, enactment, or defeat of any rule, regulation, policy, or other action
that the interested party has a stake in. Ex Parte Communication is defined as any direct
communication between a City official and an interested party for the purpose of influencing the
official's administrative, legislative, or quasi-judicial action. An interested person is defined as
the following:
1. Any person who engages in promoting, supporting, influencing, modifying, opposing or
delaying any administrative, legislative, or quasi-judicial action;
2. Any person with a financial interest in any administrative, legislative, or quasi-judicial
action; or
3. Any person who acts as an agent or representative of any person listed above.
If an Ex Parte Communication occurs, then the City official is required to disclose that
communication.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The Council could choose not to approve the Ordinance, in which case the City would continue
without an Ex Parte Communication disclosure requirement.
FISCAL REVIEW:
Depending on the volume of this type of communication, it would potentially require a substantial
amount of administrative time to manage this process including the potential need to hire staff to
ensure compliance.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved Ordinance No. as to form.
CONCLUSION:
Council is requested to approve Ordinance No. and authorize the Mayor to sign and
City Clerk to attest as to the adoption of this Ordinance.
THOMAS R. HATCH
Chief Executive Officer
ATTACHMENTS: 1 Ordinance No.
THOMAS P. DUARTE
City Attorney
E