File #: 18-1085    Version: 1
Type: resolution Status: Passed
File created: 11/8/2018 In control: City Council
Agenda date: 11/13/2018 Final action: 11/13/2018
Title: Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Payment of the Necessary Expenses for Defense of Mayor Pro-Tem Nathaniel Jones in a Judicial Proceeding Convened to Determine the Sufficiency of Recall Charges
Attachments: 1. Resolution, 2. Demand for Recall, 3. Request for Payment of Legal Expenses, 4. Letter from City Attorney Mark Barber
Title
Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Payment of the Necessary Expenses for Defense of Mayor Pro-Tem Nathaniel Jones in a Judicial Proceeding Convened to Determine the Sufficiency of Recall Charges

Recommended Action
Committee Recommendation:
Not referred to a committee.

City Manager Recommendation:
Move to approve a Resolution Authorizing Payment of the Necessary Expenses for Defense of Mayor Pro-Tem Nathaniel Jones in a Judicial Proceeding Convened to Determine the Sufficiency of Recall Charges

Report
Issue:
Whether to authorize payment of the necessary expenses for defense of Mayor Pro-Tem Nathaniel Jones in a judicial proceeding convened to determine the sufficiency of recall charges.

Staff Contact:
Annaliese Harksen, Acting City Attorney, 360.753.8338

Presenter(s):
Annaliese Harksen, Acting City Attorney, 360.753.8338

Background and Analysis:
A "Demand for Recall and Discharge" of Mayor Pro-Tem Nathaniel Jones was filed with the Thurston County Auditor's office on November 6, 2018 (the "Demand for Recall and Discharge").

Olympia Municipal Code (OMC) Chapter 2.72 authorizes the City Council to consider any request by an elected official of the City of Olympia to pay the necessary expenses of defending such officer in a judicial proceeding convened to determine the sufficiency of recall charges.

Pursuant to OMC Chapter 2.72, Mayor Pro-Tem Jones has requested that the City pay the necessary expenses in defending him in his official capacity as Mayor Pro-Tem of the City of Olympia in a judicial proceeding convened to determine the sufficiency of recall charges.

OMC Chapter 2.72 states that the decision of the Council regarding such request shall be made by motion in open meeting, and that the Council shall approve the request if, upon considering all relevant and available information, it determines that reasonable evidence exists that the acts or omissions did not occur as alleged in the demand for recall and discharge.

OMC Chapter 2.72 a...

Click here for full text