§ 6-1. Ex parte communications in quasi-judicial proceedings.

Members of any board or commission of the city, which makes recommendations or takes action in any matter that is quasi-judicial in nature, shall be permitted to receive and participate in oral or written ex parte communications regarding quasi-judicial matters before the board or commission, and any presumption of prejudice arising out of such ex parte communications is hereby removed and declared nonexistent, if all requirements of this section are followed as to any such ex parte communication. For the purposes of this section, members of any board or commission of the city, which makes recommendations or takes action in any matter that is quasi-judicial in nature, shall be referred to as "public officials." Any person not otherwise prohibited from doing so by statute, charter provision, or ordinance may discuss the merits of pending quasi-judicial matters with any public official even through a board or commission on which that official sits will or may take action on the matters, if the following procedures are observed:

(1)

Any oral ex parte communication relating to pending quasi-judicial action shall not be presumed prejudicial to the outcome of the matter if the subject matter of the communication and the identity of the person, group or entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the record in the quasi-judicial proceeding before final action on the matter.

(2)

Any written communication to a public official from any source, regarding a pending quasi-judicial matter, shall not be deemed prejudicial to the outcome of the matter, if the written communication is made part of the record in the quasi-judicial proceeding before final action on the matter.

(3)

Public officials may conduct investigations and site visits and may receive expert opinions regarding quasi-judicial matters pending before them, and such activities shall not be presumed prejudicial to the outcome of the matter if the existence of the investigation, site visit or expert opinion (and as to expert opinions, the subject matter thereof) is disclosed and made a part of the record in the quasi-judicial proceeding before final action on the matter.

(4)

All disclosures required by the section must be made during the public meeting at which a vote is taken on the quasi-judicial matter, so that persons having opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. If, due to the subject matter of the ex parte communication, the complexity of any expert opinion, or any other factor, it would not be reasonable to expect those with contrary opinion to be prepared and able to refute the ex parte communication at the hearing where the existence and subject matter of the ex parte communication are first disclosed, then those persons may request a postponement of the proceeding and all due consideration shall be given to such request in order to afford a reasonable opportunity for a response to the ex parte communication, however the board or commission hearing the quasi-judicial matter shall have absolute discretion to grant or deny postponements on this basis and the failure to grant a postponement when requested shall not be deemed prejudicial to the parties requesting the postponement, nor shall such denial be deemed to reinstate any presumption of prejudice arising out of the ex parte communication.

(5)

No public official shall be subject of F.S. ch. 112, pt. III for failure to comply with the section. This section shall not preclude any board or commission from adopting rules or procedures to govern its operations, so long as those rules and procedures are not inconsistent with this section or other applicable laws.

(Ord. No. 285, § 1, 2-12-96)

State law reference

Authority to so provide, F.S. § 286.0115.