90-PPPP 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING
A PROCEDURE FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF CHARGES
AGAINST A COMMISSIONER FOR MISCONDUCT;
SETTING A SPECIAL MEETING TO CONSIDER THE
CHARGES AND TO TAKE POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY
ACTION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, at the Regular Commission Meeting of June 5, 1990,
charges were made that Commissioner Robert Olenik, Jr. committed
acts in deregation of the duties of his office or in violation
of the City Code or the Commission's Rules of Procedure ; and
WHEREAS, the Commission directed that a proper and orderly
procedure be initiated to investigate the charges and to impose
disciplinary action if it is determined that there are sufficient
grounds; and
WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to adopt a procedure to
follow and establish a time certain for hearing the charges, the
Commissioner's response and to determine disciplinary action, if
any,
NOW, THERFORE, be it resolved by the City Commission of the
City of Boynton Beach, Florida, that:
Section 1. A special meeting of the Commission will be
held the 2~~ day of ~Q~ ~ &~O~ 1990, to determine if
the charges which have been made against Commissioner Robert
Olenik, Jr., are correct and if correct, what disciplinary
action, if any, should be taken against him. Commissioner
Olenik is directed to appear to respond to such charges and may,
at his option, have counsel to represent him during the
proceedings.
Section 2. At the special meeting, the Commission will
consider the following charges:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
A. Whether Commissioner Olenik on May 30, 19R0, violated
City Ordinance 89-29, Section l(c) by dealing with City
Department Heads and employees directly, rather than through the
City Manager;
B. Whether Commissioner Olenik's comments to the press
following the May 15, 1990 Commission Meeting regarding the
Mayor, Commissioner Wische and Commissioner Artis violate the
Commission's Rules of Procedure or Section 2-11 of the City Code
with respect to decorum.
C. Whether the Commissioner's accusations against the
Mayor in connection with the Applied Polymer, Inc., were
knowingly false and in violation of the Commission's Rules of
Procedure or Section 2-11 of the City Code with respect to
decorum.
D. Whether Commissioner Olenik's exiting of the May 15,
1990, Commission Meeting constituted a disturbance of the
Commission Meeting in violation of the Commissions Rules of
Procedure or Section 2-11 of the City Code with respect to
decorum.
E. Whether Commissioner Olenik's exiting of the May 15,
1990, Commission Meeting constitutes improper conduct in office.
Section 3. At the special meeting, the following
procedure shall be followed:
The Clerk should read the charges and specifications;
The Commissioner should be asked to respond if the
allegations are correct or incorrect;
If the Commissioner states that the allegations are
correct, the Commission can proceed directly to a
determination of discipline after hearing a brief statement
of the facts;
If the Commissioner states that the allegations are
incorrect, the meeting should continue with (1) opening
statements by the Chair and by the Commissioner, (2)
testimony of witnesses produced by the Commission, (3)
testimony of the Commissioner's witnesses, (4) rebuttal
witnesses of the Commission, and (5) closing arguments.
Following closing argument, the Chair should state
the question: Are the charges made against the
Commissioner correct? Each specific charge is open to
debate and should be voted on separately.
If the Commission votes that the charges are
correct, the next item of business should be a
determination of penalty based upon a motion for same.
Section 4.
The Clerk is directed to deliver a copy
this Resolution to Commissioner Robert Olenik, Jr.
Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect
mmediately upon passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this /~
CITY OF ~'TON BEA~C~,
day of June, 1990.
FLORIDA
-- Co~issione~
Commi s s loner 'J
ATTEST:
(Corporate Seal)
~UN-14-~gO !~:4~ ]D:~OS]AS AN~ GOREN
TEL N0:305-?~1-4923
~733 P04
1
3
4
$
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
28
29
30
31
NO. ~' PPPP
VI.
LEGAL
C.2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF T~E
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING
A PROCEDURE FOR TME CONSIDERATION OF CHARGES
AGAINST A CO~MI$SIONER FOR MISCONDUCT;
SETTING A SPECIAL MEETING TO CONSIDER THE
CHARGES AND TO TAKE POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY
ACTION~ PROVIDIN~ AN EFFECTI1rE DATE.
cha=ges were made that Commissioner Robert Olenik, Jr. oommltted
acts in dersgation of the duties of his offio~ or in violation
of th~ City Cods or the Commission;~ Rules of Procedur~ ;
WH~REAS~ th~ Commission directed that a proper and orderly
procedure be ~nitiated to inYes%igate the oharges'~nd to impose
disciplinary action if it is determined that there are sufficient
grounds; and
W~REAS, th~ Commission wishes to adopt a procedure to
follow and establish a time certain for hearln~ t~e ¢~arges, the
Commissioner's response an~ to determine disciplinary action, if
any,
NOW, THERFORE, be it resolved by the City Commis~ion of the
City of Boynton Beach, Florida, that:
~9~. A special meeting of the Commission will be
held the /~ day of
the char~es which have been made against Commissioner Robert
Olenik, Jr., are correct and if correct, what disciplinary
action, if any, should be taken against him. Commissioner
Olenik is directed to appear t~ respond ~o ~uch charge~ and. may,
at him ~ption, have counsel to represent him du~ing the
proceedings.
~_~_~. At the ~peoial meeting, the Commission will
oon~ider the following ohargss,
~- iUN-J4-'90 I~:43 ]D:JOSIAS AND GOREN TEL N0:~05-??1-4923 ~?~ POS
1
3
4
6
8
9
~L!
12
14
15
16
l?
18
2O
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
3O
31
32
33
A. Whether Com~issioner Olenik on
City 0rdinanoe 89-29, Section 1(c) by
Department ~eads and employees directly, rather than through the
City Manaqer;
B. Whether -Commissioner Olanik's comment~ to the pro~s
following the May 1~, 1~9'0 Commission Me~=ing regarding the
Mayor, Commissioner Wi=the and Com~issloner Artt~ violate th~
Commis~ion,~ Rules of Procedure or Section 2-11 of the 'City Code
with respect to ~ecorum.
C. Whether th~ Commissioner's accusations ugain~t the
Mayor in connection with ~he 'Applied Polymer, Inc., were
knowingly false and in violation of the Commlssion~s Rules of
Procedure or Section 2-11 of th~ City Co~e with respect to
deoo~.
D. Whether comm±~oner 01enlk,s exl~ng of ~he May lS,
1~90, commission ~eeting cons=~utea a disturbance of the
com~ssion Meeting ~n violation of the Commissions Rules of
Procedure or Section 2-11 of the City Code with respect to
decorum.
S. Whether Co~lssioner Olenik's exiting of the May 15,
1990, Commis~ion Meeting constitutes improper conduct in office.
~. At the special meeting, the following
procedure shall be followed:
The Clerk should read the charge~ and specifications~
The Commissioner should be asked to respond if the
allegation~ a~e correct or incorrect;
If the Comun~=ioner states that the allegations are
co~ect, th~ Commission can proceed directly to a
determination of ~iscipline after hearing a brief ~tatement
of the faot~;
If the Commi~slon~r ~tate~ that the alleganions ar~
incorrect, the meeting ~hould continue with (1) op=ning
~tateme~t~ by the Chair an~ by the Commi~sioner, (2)
testimony of witnesses produced by the Commission, (3)
testimo~y of the Commissioner's witnes~e~, (4) rebuttal
wit~esses of the Commission, and (5) closing arguments.
~UN-l~-~90 13:~ ID:~OSIAS AND GOREN TEL NO:305-??l-492j~
1
2
3
4
5
6
?
t0
11
1)-
14
16
17
18
20
22
25
26
27
30
31
34
Following closin~ argument, the Chai~ =hould =tare the
question: Are the charges made against the Co~mieeloner
torte=t? Each sDeoif±c Cha~g~ is open to debate and ehould
be voted on separately.
If the Commls~ion votes that ~/%e oha~ge8 are uorreot,
the next item of bu=tneee ~hould be a determination of
penalty based upon a motion for same.
~[~1_~. Th~ Clerk is directed tO delive~ a ~cpy of
thi~ Remolutton to Commission~r Robert Olenik, Jr.
~~1-~. This R~eolutton shall tak~ effect immedia=ely
on passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY CO~ISSION OF TH~ CITY OF BOYNTON
B~ACH, ~LORIDA T~IS DAY OF .. .~_~ 1990.
CITY OF ~OYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF BOYNTON BKACH, FLORIDA
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Commissioner
~Ommlssione~ ....
Commissioner
ATTSST:
CITY CL~RK
( CORPORATE SEAL)
~UN-14-'~O 13'.43 ID:IOSIAS AND ~OREN TEL N0:~05-~?1-492~
~7~ POG
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
]0
22
26
27
30
3~1
33
34
Following closing argument, the Chair =hould
~ue~tion: Are the charges made against the Commissioner
correct? Each specific charge is open to debate and should
be voted on separately.
If the Commission votes that the oha~ges are correct,
the next item of hu~ines~ should be a determination of
penalty based upon a motion for same,
~9~_~. The Clerk i~ directed to deiive~ ~ copy of
this Re=olution to Commi~ioner Robert Olenik, Jr.
~ectio~ 5. Thi~ Resolution shall take effect i~media~ely
on paSSage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY CO~MISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON
BEACH, FLORIDA THIS
DAY OF .~ , 1990.
CITY OF ~OYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
(cOR~ORAT£ SEAL)
~JN-14-'90 13:41 ]D:JOSIAS AND ~ TEL NO:305-?71-49~5 tt?D3 P03
4. The special meeting should.proceed as follows:
The Clerk should read the charges and spec!fication~;
The Commissioner should: be asked to respond if the
allegations are COrrect or incorrect:
If the Commissioner states that the al!~ation~ arm
correct, the Com~ission ~an proceed directly to a determination
of discipline after hearing a brief statement of %~he facts~
If the Co~missioner mtatem that th. alle~ations are
incorrect, the meeting should continue with (1) opening
statements by the Chair and by the Commi~ioner, (2) testimony of
witnesses produced by the Commi~io~, (3) testimony of the
Comm!ssOner's witne~se~, (~) r~buttal witnesses of the
Commission, and (5) ~io=ing arguments.
Followin~ clo~ing argument, the Chair should stat~ th~
que~tion~ Are th~ oharge~ made a~ainst the Commissioner correct?
Each ~pecif~c charge i~ open to debate and should be voted on
~eparately.
If the Comm~ssion votes that the ohar~es are correct,
th~ next i~em ~f business should ~e a determination of penai%y
ba~d upon a motion for same.
I have ~repared a draft Resolution incorporating the
foregoing prooedu~ and based upon ~he c~argem -against
Commissioner Olenik as stat~ at the last Co~lssion meeting. If
Re~lution should be ~ended before adoption. Correspondingly,
if ~he cha~es now se~ fo~h ~n =he ReSolutio~ are too broad,
~ should be delete~ by amen~ent.
L/B