CC Min 1994-03-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE WITH COUNCIL WOMAN STEINFELD ABSTAINING. MINUTE ORDER NO. 94-91 Special Counsel Jackson suggested that Council could indicate that any information relating to the first report, including the letter to Great Western of January 24, 1994, was irrelevant; the letter of March 23 as not relevant in a non-disciplinary proceeding; and then deny the requests in the letters on the basis that they are not appropriate to non-disciplinary proceedings. Councilman Greenalch described Councilwoman Steinfeld's March 23, 1994 letter to Mr. Jackson in which she requested: "1) the right to subpoena witnesses and present evidence in my defense; 2) the right to have a qualified, independent referee conduct the hearing, and listen to arguments on the relevance and admissibility oftestimony and evidence; and 3) the right to have my attorney, or someone of my choice cross examine witnesses and present evidence on my behalf." Councilman Greenalch suggested that the Council separate out these issues, and first deny the right to subpoena witnesses in light of the decision just made not to engage in a disciplinary hearing. MIS: GREENALCHICLAIRE THAT THE COUNCIL DENY COUNCIL WOMAN STEINFELD, AS AN INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER, THE RIGHT TO USE THE SUBPOENA POWER OF THE REDWOOD CITY COUNCIL Councilwoman Gasparini questioned the need for a motion as the letter of March 23, 1994, requesting those actions, referred to a Council censure, and the Council voted not to censure. Therefore the requests were null and void. Councilman Greenalch said there was an exception: Even in a non-disciplinary hearing the Council did not want to deny the due process rights to present evidence in a defense; but the only evidence that could be presented is in defense of the foundation that has been laid by the Council. RESTATEMENT OF THE MOTION WITH AMENDMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS: MIS: GREENALCHICLAIRE THAT THE COUNCIL DENY COUNCIL WOMAN STEINFELD, AS AN INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER, THE RIGHT TO USE THE SUBPOENA POWER OF THE REDWOOD CITY COUNCIL, DENY THE REQUEST TO HAVE A QUALIFIED INDEPENDENT REFEREE TO CONDUCT THE HEARING AND LISTEN TO ARGUMENTS ON THE RELEV ANCE AND ADMISSIBILITY OF TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE, AND DENY THE REQUESTS IN HER LETTER OF MARCH 22, 1994 TO JAMES P. JACKSON, (WHICH PERTAINED TO THE FIRST REPORT AND WAS NO LONGER UNDER CONSIDERATION) In response to Council questions, Councilman Greenalch explained that the motion was to deny all Councilwoman Steinfeld's requests except the right to be represented by Counsel and due process in a non-disciplinary hearing. Councilman Greena1ch said it was his understanding that due process required: 1) that a person be told what he or she is accused of; 2) that a person be told what the intention was to do to him or her as a result of what he or she was accused of (Council had told Councilwoman Steinfeld the intention was to take non-disciplinary, yet to be specified, expression of disapproval of her behavior during the process); 3) the person be given an MINUTE BOOK NO. 52 Regular Meeting Minutes Page No. 194 March 28, 1994 Page 10