Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Posted by on January 23, 2013.

Dunwoody ethics board dismisses complaint against mayor and council members

The city of Dunwoody’s Board of Ethics on Jan. 23 dismissed a complaint against Mayor Mike Davis and members of the Dunwoody City Council due to procedural deficiencies.

The complaint from resident Joe Hirsch is likely to be the last one considered under the city’s current ethics law. Council members last week put in place a moratorium on the filing of new ethics complaints while city officials rewrite the procedure for handling the complaints.

Hirsch claimed city officials violated Georgia’s Open Records Act by failing to provide timely and complete records in response to his request for information about private meetings of the Dunwoody City Council.

The complaint stemmed from questions surrounding a Feb. 3 meeting of City Council that was the subject of separate ethics complaints between Councilwoman Adrian Bonser, the City Council and Davis.

Bonser, who was accused of leaking information from an executive session held during that meeting, filed her own complaint against Davis for attempting to harass her into resigning.  Bonser also contended that some topics of discussion in that executive session may not have been permitted under state law.   In December, the parties dropped their respective ethics charges.

“No one has ever said officially what was said at that meeting,” Hirsch said after the ethics board unanimously voted to dismiss his complaint against the mayor.  “All they cared about was who leaked [information from the executive session].  I applaud whoever leaked it.”

Hirsch said he may now take his complaint to state officials.

The ethics board did not investigate the substance of Hirsch’s complaints.  According to board members, the complaint did not meet procedural requirements for consideration.  Specifically, Hirsch failed to cite the section of the Ethics Code that he believed had been violated.  Additionally, the complaint was not filed within six months of the alleged violation, nor was it notarized before being presented to the board.

“We’re pleased with the result,” Davis said after leaving the board meeting, adding, “This has all already been settled.”

–Chuck Stanley

Facebook Comments:

comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>