Fact Check Hamstrung at City Hall. At the July 22, 2013 caucus meeting, Council-at-large Bentkowski advised Council President Barth he would recuse himself from voting on any City legal bills (invoices). Bentkowski believes a conflict of interest exists between the mayor and law director because they jointly own a building. In addition, Bentkowski said, “Going forward, with Christine Tobin (Assistant Law Director), I don’t know which bills relate to me or involved with me (Bentkowski is suing the City), so going forward I want that spelled out in advance for a vote, as well.” Ward 4 Councilman Draganic asked Bentkowski, “Let me make sure I’m understanding this clearly. Because the mayor and law director own a building together you can’t vote on any of these consent agenda items (legal invoices) that involve (inaudible) from the law director?” Bentkowski responded, “As I said before, I believe that is an improper relationship. It’s my interpretation, it’s being reviewed currently. They have a financial interest in each other so the mayor’s the only person as an individual that can assign work to the law director. So if the mayor’s assigning work to the law director, that he is his business partner, he is turning around and invoicing the City, I want nothing to do with that. Bentkowski now believes there is an “improper relationship” between the mayor and law director. But prior to his lawsuit, Bentkowski voted on similar consent agenda items for nearly two (2) years. We question, who is reviewing the alleged improper relationship? Is it possible for anyone to follow Bentkowski’s logic?
Posted on: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 15:35:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015