Laserfiche WebLink
Z R <br /> L " <br /> Councilmember Pfeifer asked City Clerk John Voorde to call Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand <br /> back into the room. <br /> City Clerk John Voorde announced the motions to Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand who <br /> thanked everyone then recounted her understanding of the "work rules" she agreed to <br /> with Charlotte, which would basically reaffirm those practiced by the Council Attorney <br /> for the last 10 years. <br /> Much spirited discussion ensued as to what Charlotte and Kathy Cekanski-Farrand <br /> understood had been agreed upon at their last meeting the previous Wednesday. <br /> Charlotte wants a weekly report from Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand of all work she is doing <br /> for all Councilmembers. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand said she could not do that because <br /> of the accepted principle of attorney/client privilege. Varner offered that current practice <br /> protects confidentiality for Council Committee chairs, and for individual members as <br /> long as their work does not exceed 35 hours by the Council Attorney. Charlotte Pfeifer <br /> maintains the President should get a weekly report of all work by the attorney for all <br /> Councilmembers. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand citing rules 1.6 and 1.13 of the Rules of <br /> Professional Conduct preclude her from doing that. (These rules are attached as Exhibit <br /> #4.) <br /> Tim Rouse stated the principle of confidentiality may well be a matter of law and legal <br /> ethics suggesting an opinion on the matter from the Attorney General was in order. Dave <br /> Varner agreed. <br /> Charlotte Pfeifer stated she did not trust the Council Attorney's interpretation of the <br /> confidentiality rule. She reiterated she thought she and Kathy had an agreement the prior <br /> Wednesday, while citing this as an example of the Council Attorney's actions dividing <br /> the Council. <br /> Karen White agreeing there was a need for an interpretation of the confidentiality rules <br /> moved the President should ask the Attorney General for an interpretation of rules 1.6 & <br /> 1.13 Charlotte seconded. The motion passed Charlotte stated she would try to get a legal <br /> opinion by March 28, 2005. <br /> Kathy Cekanski-Farrand asked that her annual Council Attorney report filed with the City <br /> Clerk's Office on March 21, 2005 be made a part of the record. This is attached as <br /> (Exhibit#5.) Articles referenced on page 8 of that report that Council Attorney offers to <br /> define "Attorney-Client" privilege are on file as exhibit#6 in the City Clerk's Office. <br /> The meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m. <br /> Respectful submitted, <br /> John oo e <br /> City C <br /> 3 <br />