OK, I see that they're inconsistent... and I'm not going to help you decide which mistake to prefer in place of the correct usage. Maybe someone else will help you with that.

They're both OK, but the second is less informal and I prefer it.

Really? When I did desktop publishing, I was supposed to use *appropriate* punctuation. An apostrophe is a different punctuation mark from a single quote.

Dyske still hasn't mentioned if he really is "...a father of a newborn...." LOL

I live in the US, and I've rarely heard people refer to even "glorified" babysitters as nannies. "Nanny" is very close in meaning to "au pair" or "governess," who is the professional caretaker of the kids on a full-time basis, sort of in loco parentis, as Dave says.

On the very few occasions when I've heard "nanny" used for "babysitter," it was for a temporary gal to sit at home with the kids and take care of the house while Mom and Dad were on vacation for a week or two.

I was always taught it was an apostrophe, because apostrophes are usually what you use to replace missing letters or numbers in, for example, contractions such as "don't" and "I'm."

Gee, Dan, for someone who uses the internet, you sure are provincial as hell. Loser.

Got one.

http://www.users.bigpond.com/J_fersOffice/sample.htm

"When you have 'double possession' - when two or more people (or subjects) own one item and both (or all) of their names are mentioned, the apostrophe is applied only to the second (or last) name.

'We had coffee at Ermintrude and Marmaduke's mansion.'"

Think of your statement as "The advisor of Bob and Tina Rusk [not Rusks] suggests...".

First, absolutely, as Nicholas says. Will find cite.

Slemmet's solution is the proper and elegant one. It's not clear to me whether you should use "Officials of..." or "The officials of...," but that's a quibble you can quickly resolve.