1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,880
 We are all here for all of it.

2
00:00:04,880 --> 00:00:11,760
 Okay, so now that we have the members that are expected to show up, I'll call the meeting

3
00:00:11,760 --> 00:00:12,760
 order.

4
00:00:12,760 --> 00:00:20,240
 The special call meeting of the Board of Ethics today, May 23, 2022.

5
00:00:20,240 --> 00:00:28,000
 There's one item for consideration, BOE 22-018, consider and take necessary action regarding

6
00:00:28,000 --> 00:00:33,720
 recommendation made by a panel of the Board of Ethics on May 9, 2022, to determine if

7
00:00:33,720 --> 00:00:38,880
 the ethics complaint number 22011 concerning alleged violations of the ethics ordinance

8
00:00:38,880 --> 00:00:45,280
 section 2-273 may be frivolous and this hearing is being conducted under the Ordinance Section

9
00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:46,280
 2-281C.

10
00:00:46,280 --> 00:00:53,240
 And, Madam Chair, did you state that a quorum is present for the record?

11
00:00:53,240 --> 00:00:57,000
 You just read my mind because I was going to say four people is a quorum and we have

12
00:00:57,000 --> 00:01:05,360
 five people here and the background on this is on May 2, there was a complaint by Scott

13
00:01:05,360 --> 00:01:13,640
 Campbell for the misuse of information against then Councilperson Paul Meltzer and then on

14
00:01:13,640 --> 00:01:21,560
 May 9, 2022, a panel of myself, Annette and Hannah found that the complaint was baseless.

15
00:01:21,560 --> 00:01:27,740
 We also voted to have this frivolous hearing and we talked about how the flyer didn't say

16
00:01:27,740 --> 00:01:35,800
 what the complaint said and that what was on the flyer that actually had the symbol

17
00:01:35,800 --> 00:01:36,800
 was a public document.

18
00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:43,120
 So now this is a hearing to determine if the complaint was frivolous and frivolous in the

19
00:01:43,120 --> 00:01:52,640
 first place, I think we have to stop, I think the power just cut out, does that mean we're

20
00:01:52,640 --> 00:01:55,520
 not live so we need to wait until we're live again?

21
00:01:55,520 --> 00:02:02,400
 Well, technically it's still a public meeting, it's just not being streamed in further,

22
00:02:02,400 --> 00:02:09,280
 I don't really know, everything came back.

23
00:02:09,280 --> 00:02:14,540
 Should we, is there like IT we should contact or can we just go forward with it?

24
00:02:14,540 --> 00:02:18,920
 I think we can just go forward, I'm going to step out just to make sure that we're doing

25
00:02:18,920 --> 00:02:19,920
 alright.

26
00:02:19,920 --> 00:02:22,280
 Okay, so should we pause for a minute while you...

27
00:02:22,280 --> 00:02:26,000
 Let's pause to determine if we need to have this streamed.

28
00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:32,640
 I don't think it's required by state law for us to be streamed, it just has to be a public

29
00:02:32,640 --> 00:02:33,640
 meeting.

30
00:02:33,640 --> 00:02:34,640
 Right.

31
00:02:34,640 --> 00:02:40,040
 Well, how about we just pause and you let us know if we're still live in case people

32
00:02:40,040 --> 00:02:43,040
 aren't watching.

33
00:02:43,040 --> 00:02:58,000
 Yeah, we might still be streaming everyone, but yeah, really you should not drive wildly

34
00:02:58,000 --> 00:03:11,920
 in a public meeting, you don't want to drive wildly in a public meeting, it's just a public

35
00:03:11,920 --> 00:03:12,920
 meeting.

36
00:03:12,920 --> 00:03:19,720
 Okay, we're still live, so where I was is that a frivolous complaint is defined in the

37
00:03:19,720 --> 00:03:23,880
 ordinance as a complaint that is groundless and brought in bad faith or groundless and

38
00:03:23,880 --> 00:03:24,880
 brought the purpose of harassment.

39
00:03:24,880 --> 00:03:30,400
 It's not a complaint, it's a complaint related to an election, the publicity of the complaint,

40
00:03:30,400 --> 00:03:35,960
 complaint tense, participation in the publicity, that's hard to say, the relationship between

41
00:03:35,960 --> 00:03:42,640
 the complainant and respondent, and any relationship between the complainant and the candidate

42
00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:48,400
 opposing the respondent, evidence that the complainant knows it was groundless and the

43
00:03:48,400 --> 00:03:49,560
 complainant's motives.

44
00:03:49,560 --> 00:03:56,700
 Before we jump into the actual hearing, Madison informed me today that complainants wish to

45
00:03:56,700 --> 00:04:00,280
 either withdraw the complaint or postpone this hearing.

46
00:04:00,280 --> 00:04:06,520
 I would start by, I believe withdrawal is not an option, the complaint has been filed,

47
00:04:06,520 --> 00:04:13,840
 and if we just let people that, whether it's found frivolous or not tonight, if a panel

48
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:19,320
 thought it was enough to come to this point, I do not think we should let people withdraw

49
00:04:19,320 --> 00:04:23,440
 the complaints, because it kind of just defeats the whole purpose of doing this, and everybody's

50
00:04:23,440 --> 00:04:27,640
 nodding, so we're just going to move on from that, there's not going to be withdrawal.

51
00:04:27,640 --> 00:04:30,520
 As far as postponing the meeting, under rule of-

52
00:04:30,520 --> 00:04:37,720
 Would you like to take a voice vote on that request to withdraw, just for the record?

53
00:04:37,720 --> 00:04:41,200
 Okay, do you want us to have a motion in a second, and then-

54
00:04:41,200 --> 00:04:42,200
 In a vote.

55
00:04:42,200 --> 00:04:43,200
 Okay.

56
00:04:43,200 --> 00:04:46,200
 Do I have a motion as far as withdrawing the complaint?

57
00:04:46,200 --> 00:04:49,720
 We do not approve, and we do not allow the complainant to withdraw.

58
00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:50,720
 Thank you.

59
00:04:50,720 --> 00:04:53,920
 In a second from Rob, all in favor say aye.

60
00:04:53,920 --> 00:04:54,920
 Aye.

61
00:04:54,920 --> 00:04:55,920
 Aye.

62
00:04:55,920 --> 00:04:56,920
 Aye.

63
00:04:56,920 --> 00:04:57,920
 Aye.

64
00:04:57,920 --> 00:04:58,920
 And it appears to be unanimous.

65
00:04:58,920 --> 00:05:06,600
 Okay, so the next thing we will consider is postponing, under rule of procedure E9,

66
00:05:06,600 --> 00:05:13,460
 pre-trial matters, well pre-trial, I'm sorry, I'm a lawyer, so, but pre-hearing matters

67
00:05:13,460 --> 00:05:20,000
 should have been filed four days before, my understanding is that the request was postponed

68
00:05:20,000 --> 00:05:29,040
 was today, so it is outside of the time, but if we do want to consider it, the determination

69
00:05:29,040 --> 00:05:34,240
 was made on the night to have this hearing, and that the complaint was baseless.

70
00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:39,300
 It was sent to the complaint the next day, and my understanding is that the complaint

71
00:05:39,300 --> 00:05:45,240
 came to City Hall last Friday, and then also, and then asked for the continuance today,

72
00:05:45,240 --> 00:05:46,240
 May 23rd.

73
00:05:46,240 --> 00:05:52,800
 Evidence has been submitted by members of the Board of Ethics, and by the respondent.

74
00:05:52,800 --> 00:05:57,240
 The complaint has been given the chance to submit evidence, and waited until the day

75
00:05:57,240 --> 00:05:59,240
 of the hearing to ask for the postponement.

76
00:05:59,240 --> 00:06:04,600
 And I know it takes a lot of time to set up and get everybody here, and so, in my opinion,

77
00:06:04,600 --> 00:06:08,800
 I think we should move forward today with what we have, but I'll open it up if anybody

78
00:06:08,800 --> 00:06:09,800
 has any other opinions.

79
00:06:09,800 --> 00:06:15,960
 I would like a motion that we will hold this hearing as scheduled.

80
00:06:15,960 --> 00:06:16,960
 Okay.

81
00:06:16,960 --> 00:06:22,440
 So, the motion, the motion needs to be because the Board, under the procedural request, has

82
00:06:22,440 --> 00:06:27,600
 the discretion to determine whether to grant the request for the continuance that wasn't

83
00:06:27,600 --> 00:06:33,440
 timely submitted, so I would make your motion around that.

84
00:06:33,440 --> 00:06:39,240
 Can I say for the record, my name is Richard Gladden, I represent Mr. Melser, the respondent,

85
00:06:39,240 --> 00:06:42,240
 and just for the record, we do oppose any continuance.

86
00:06:42,240 --> 00:06:45,240
 We'd like to get this resolved today.

87
00:06:45,240 --> 00:06:50,240
 And I'll give the vote, but I just want to make sure you don't worry about it.

88
00:06:50,240 --> 00:06:53,240
 Alright, so, let me get to the rules and procedure.

89
00:06:53,240 --> 00:07:00,240
 So, look on page eight, under procedural request, so they're supposed to submit it within four

90
00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:05,240
 days, but then it says the Board shall determine whether to grant requests that have not been

91
00:07:05,240 --> 00:07:07,240
 submitted in time for the preliminary hearing.

92
00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:12,240
 So, your motion would be whether you want to grant that request or not grant that request,

93
00:07:12,240 --> 00:07:14,240
 because it was untimely.

94
00:07:14,240 --> 00:07:18,240
 I would like to make a motion to deny the request for the continuance.

95
00:07:18,240 --> 00:07:25,240
 Okay, we have a motion to deny the continuance in our discretion, but Rob?

96
00:07:25,240 --> 00:07:30,240
 I just wanted to ask, did we have a clarification why the delay?

97
00:07:30,240 --> 00:07:32,240
 Why the delay?

98
00:07:32,240 --> 00:07:36,240
 Why it wasn't submitted within the four days, why is it being asked today?

99
00:07:36,240 --> 00:07:38,240
 I'm not sure.

100
00:07:38,240 --> 00:07:43,240
 I guess I'm not prone to like have a secondary hearing before we have the hearing.

101
00:07:43,240 --> 00:07:46,240
 Just appreciate it.

102
00:07:46,240 --> 00:07:52,240
 Well, I was going to say that in Madison's email today, it says that the complainant asked

103
00:07:52,240 --> 00:07:57,240
 for additional time to provide additional evidence.

104
00:07:57,240 --> 00:07:58,240
 That is true.

105
00:07:58,240 --> 00:08:03,240
 And so, I would think that it would surround that.

106
00:08:03,240 --> 00:08:07,240
 Did anybody make a second to that motion?

107
00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:11,240
 Is there a second to deny the request?

108
00:08:11,240 --> 00:08:12,240
 I second it.

109
00:08:12,240 --> 00:08:13,240
 Deborah, I second it.

110
00:08:13,240 --> 00:08:15,240
 So, now's the time for discussion.

111
00:08:15,240 --> 00:08:24,240
 Okay, I guess my thought is, you know, the termination was made on the 9th and sent the

112
00:08:24,240 --> 00:08:30,240
 complaint on the 10th, and I think we have the evidence before us of what the complaint

113
00:08:30,240 --> 00:08:37,240
 was, and I would like to move forward, but is there anybody else who proposes?

114
00:08:37,240 --> 00:08:44,240
 Okay, well, let's take a vote on that motion to deny the untimely request for continuance

115
00:08:44,240 --> 00:08:45,240
 all in favor say aye.

116
00:08:45,240 --> 00:08:46,240
 Aye.

117
00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:47,240
 Aye.

118
00:08:47,240 --> 00:08:48,240
 All opposed?

119
00:08:48,240 --> 00:08:50,240
 There's a giant spider right there.

120
00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:54,240
 We'll just kind of get him over there.

121
00:08:54,240 --> 00:08:55,240
 All right.

122
00:08:55,240 --> 00:08:56,240
 Sorry.

123
00:08:56,240 --> 00:08:57,240
 Distraction.

124
00:08:57,240 --> 00:08:58,240
 Okay.

125
00:08:58,240 --> 00:09:01,240
 So, we're going forward with the hearing today.

126
00:09:01,240 --> 00:09:05,240
 It will be evidentiary hearing.

127
00:09:05,240 --> 00:09:12,240
 So, under there can be witnesses, evidence, then we deliberate, and then we'll take a

128
00:09:12,240 --> 00:09:14,240
 vote to make a determination.

129
00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:20,240
 The structure under rule of procedure E5 would be one person speaks at a time, and the chair

130
00:09:20,240 --> 00:09:22,240
 is in control of the discussion.

131
00:09:22,240 --> 00:09:25,240
 So, kind of like a normal meeting.

132
00:09:25,240 --> 00:09:30,240
 There are other, I put no pretrial procedure request, but we got one late, but there are

133
00:09:30,240 --> 00:09:36,240
 no other pretrial procedure requests that were filed under rule of procedure E9.

134
00:09:36,240 --> 00:09:41,240
 The parties were to submit witnesses and evidence prior to the hearing under rule of

135
00:09:41,240 --> 00:09:44,240
 evidence, rule of procedure E10.

136
00:09:44,240 --> 00:09:53,240
 We have documentary evidence that was compiled from the board of ethics members.

137
00:09:53,240 --> 00:09:57,240
 There were no witnesses or documents sent from the complaint.

138
00:09:57,240 --> 00:10:01,240
 There are no witnesses from the respondent, but there's one document from the respondent.

139
00:10:01,240 --> 00:10:07,240
 As far as the presentation, under rule of procedure 16 through 18, there can be opening

140
00:10:07,240 --> 00:10:09,240
 statements of three minutes each.

141
00:10:09,240 --> 00:10:17,240
 Presentation of evidence and the closing statements of five minutes.

142
00:10:17,240 --> 00:10:20,240
 And that's rule of procedure E21.

143
00:10:20,240 --> 00:10:25,240
 And then we'll deliberate, and it can be a closed session, but I do not plan on closing

144
00:10:25,240 --> 00:10:31,240
 session because I don't foresee a legal question, and I think it's important that we're

145
00:10:31,240 --> 00:10:32,240
 transparent.

146
00:10:32,240 --> 00:10:36,240
 What we're doing here as part of board of ethics and the ethics code is transparency.

147
00:10:36,240 --> 00:10:44,240
 And at that time, if there's a motion for a vote, it will have to be a super majority

148
00:10:44,240 --> 00:10:50,240
 under rule of procedure E27, which means two-thirds of the vote, two-thirds of the members of

149
00:10:50,240 --> 00:10:51,240
 the board of ethics.

150
00:10:51,240 --> 00:10:56,240
 And I'll probably request a roll call just for accuracy since we'll have to make sure

151
00:10:56,240 --> 00:10:58,240
 it's two-thirds of the members.

152
00:10:58,240 --> 00:11:04,240
 And then after that, if there's a motion, if it's passed by super majority, then we

153
00:11:04,240 --> 00:11:07,240
 will discuss the sanction.

154
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:17,240
 So I will open the hearing and allow, if there's an opening statement for the complaint, you

155
00:11:17,240 --> 00:11:19,240
 may do that.

156
00:11:19,240 --> 00:11:21,240
 Do I sit here?

157
00:11:21,240 --> 00:11:22,240
 You can sit here.

158
00:11:22,240 --> 00:11:23,240
 You can sit there.

159
00:11:23,240 --> 00:11:25,240
 I guess as long as I get picked up on the mic.

160
00:11:25,240 --> 00:11:28,240
 I guess you need to be over here.

161
00:11:28,240 --> 00:11:32,240
 Doesn't he need to get sworn in by the chair?

162
00:11:32,240 --> 00:11:34,240
 Yeah.

163
00:11:34,240 --> 00:11:38,240
 Well, I mean, this is an opening statement, so he's not a witness yet.

164
00:11:38,240 --> 00:11:41,240
 I mean, that's how it is in real trials.

165
00:11:41,240 --> 00:11:42,240
 So here?

166
00:11:42,240 --> 00:11:43,240
 Yes.

167
00:11:43,240 --> 00:11:45,240
 You don't have to speak into the microphone.

168
00:11:45,240 --> 00:11:46,240
 It just exists in there.

169
00:11:46,240 --> 00:11:51,240
 And actually, if you would like, we could -- you can also waive the opening statement

170
00:11:51,240 --> 00:11:54,240
 if you would just like to testify today.

171
00:11:54,240 --> 00:11:56,240
 No, I'd like to make a quick opening statement.

172
00:11:56,240 --> 00:11:57,240
 Okay.

173
00:11:57,240 --> 00:11:59,240
 Would you like me to start?

174
00:11:59,240 --> 00:12:01,240
 Yes, please.

175
00:12:01,240 --> 00:12:02,240
 How much time?

176
00:12:02,240 --> 00:12:03,240
 Three minutes.

177
00:12:03,240 --> 00:12:06,240
 Okay.

178
00:12:06,240 --> 00:12:07,240
 I'm Scott Campbell.

179
00:12:07,240 --> 00:12:12,240
 Good evening, board, staff, Mr. Meltzer, Mr. Gladden.

180
00:12:12,240 --> 00:12:19,240
 On May 2nd, I filed a complaint in good faith with this body recording -- excuse me -- regarding

181
00:12:19,240 --> 00:12:24,240
 Mr. Meltzer's use of the city secretary's notary seal, which could easily be interpreted

182
00:12:24,240 --> 00:12:26,240
 as an endorsement.

183
00:12:26,240 --> 00:12:30,240
 I became aware of this by an article in the Denver Record Chronicle.

184
00:12:30,240 --> 00:12:36,240
 I did not subscribe to or read the paper and heard about it on May 1st or 2nd.

185
00:12:36,240 --> 00:12:38,240
 I based my complaint on that article.

186
00:12:38,240 --> 00:12:43,240
 After filing the complaint on May 2nd, I received all the subsequent correspondence

187
00:12:43,240 --> 00:12:45,240
 from this group.

188
00:12:45,240 --> 00:12:50,240
 Nowhere in that correspondence was the reason for the baseless determination stated.

189
00:12:50,240 --> 00:12:55,240
 Subsequently, I learned that the review panel had been televised.

190
00:12:55,240 --> 00:13:01,240
 Through that, I learned about the mysteriously missing page with the notary seal in question.

191
00:13:01,240 --> 00:13:07,240
 I learned of and watched the meeting last Thursday evening, May 19th, and I have had

192
00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:09,240
 it several times since.

193
00:13:09,240 --> 00:13:14,240
 My request to pull the complaint was based on the video and claimed that evidence was

194
00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:16,240
 missing.

195
00:13:16,240 --> 00:13:22,240
 So, first thing the next morning, Friday, last Friday, May 20th, I requested that my

196
00:13:22,240 --> 00:13:27,240
 complaint be withdrawn in order to determine what became of the missing page.

197
00:13:27,240 --> 00:13:31,240
 It makes no sense for me not to have included the key part of the complaint, and there was

198
00:13:31,240 --> 00:13:33,240
 no mistake on my part.

199
00:13:33,240 --> 00:13:37,240
 I absolutely maintained that the page was included in the complaint file.

200
00:13:37,240 --> 00:13:43,240
 I carefully reviewed the complaint one last time in the parking lot outside before presenting

201
00:13:43,240 --> 00:13:45,240
 it, and the page was there.

202
00:13:45,240 --> 00:13:50,240
 In summary, I filed a good faith complaint with all necessary evidence.

203
00:13:50,240 --> 00:13:57,240
 I did so to hold Paul Meltzer accountable for what I believe to be misuse of the seal.

204
00:13:57,240 --> 00:14:00,240
 The ethics board was written for just such situations.

205
00:14:00,240 --> 00:14:08,240
 Additionally, the ordinance does not limit the number of complaints, which can be filed.

206
00:14:08,240 --> 00:14:13,240
 So I believe the only other filing which I made in good faith, which concerned Deb Armentor,

207
00:14:13,240 --> 00:14:21,240
 potentially campaigned from the dais to be moot, that was mentioned in the initial panel

208
00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:23,240
 review.

209
00:14:23,240 --> 00:14:29,240
 And then I thought this, just this afternoon, one last thing, and I think I know the answer.

210
00:14:29,240 --> 00:14:35,240
 I thought this afternoon and wondered why, or how the DRC article came to be included

211
00:14:35,240 --> 00:14:38,240
 in the evidence included in today's agenda.

212
00:14:38,240 --> 00:14:43,240
 And I was under the impression that this hearing is based solely on my complaint, and the

213
00:14:43,240 --> 00:14:45,240
 article in fact backs my complaint.

214
00:14:45,240 --> 00:14:47,240
 So thank you for your time.

215
00:14:47,240 --> 00:14:49,240
 Thank you.

216
00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:52,240
 Respondent, if you could, if you mind switching out.

217
00:14:52,240 --> 00:14:53,240
 Sure.

218
00:14:53,240 --> 00:15:04,240
 That way we can hear everybody.

219
00:15:04,240 --> 00:15:05,240
 Good evening.

220
00:15:05,240 --> 00:15:11,240
 My name is Richard Gladden, I'm an attorney, and I'm here representing Paul Meltzer, who

221
00:15:11,240 --> 00:15:18,240
 was the target of the complaint filed by the complainant, Scott Campbell.

222
00:15:18,240 --> 00:15:22,240
 And I'll try to be quick, because I know I only got three minutes.

223
00:15:22,240 --> 00:15:27,240
 First of all, I don't appear here with pleasure, particularly because Scott Campbell voted

224
00:15:27,240 --> 00:15:31,240
 in favor of my solar panels at my house a few years ago.

225
00:15:31,240 --> 00:15:38,240
 And we had to go from the Historical Landmark Commission to the City Council in order for

226
00:15:38,240 --> 00:15:39,240
 me to get solar panels.

227
00:15:39,240 --> 00:15:44,240
 So I do appreciate that, but I'm here doing what I think is right.

228
00:15:44,240 --> 00:15:50,240
 For those of you who are around to follow the adoption of the current ethics ordinance,

229
00:15:50,240 --> 00:15:56,240
 one of the greatest concerns was is that the ethics process and not be used for political

230
00:15:56,240 --> 00:16:03,240
 purposes, so that shortly before elections, people like Mr. Campbell could file frivolous

231
00:16:03,240 --> 00:16:09,240
 complaints and then call the newspaper and try to get as much publicity as they could

232
00:16:09,240 --> 00:16:15,240
 as a political device to harm the campaigns of people who they did not agree with politically.

233
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:21,240
 Unfortunately, even though you have those criteria as the foremost criteria and determine

234
00:16:21,240 --> 00:16:27,240
 whether, in this case, that occurred, that is, using your body and your process for political

235
00:16:27,240 --> 00:16:32,240
 purposes, there are no sanctions that really have any teeth at all.

236
00:16:32,240 --> 00:16:37,240
 I would suggest that, although you can't do it today, obviously, that be changed, because

237
00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:41,240
 this is not the first frivolous complaint that Mr. Campbell has filed shortly before

238
00:16:41,240 --> 00:16:42,240
 an election.

239
00:16:42,240 --> 00:16:49,240
 As you have in your packet, back shortly before the November of 2020 election, Mr. Campbell

240
00:16:49,240 --> 00:16:55,240
 filed another frivolous complaint challenging and attacking Deb Arnmentor for some comments

241
00:16:55,240 --> 00:16:58,240
 she was making at a city council meeting.

242
00:16:58,240 --> 00:17:04,240
 In this case, Mr. Campbell filed this on May 2nd, his complaint, and the election was set

243
00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:06,240
 on May 7th.

244
00:17:06,240 --> 00:17:12,240
 The very next day, as the evidence you have in your packet show, he went on Facebook and

245
00:17:12,240 --> 00:17:17,240
 started blasting to everybody he could blast that someone had filed the complaint, meaning

246
00:17:17,240 --> 00:17:25,240
 he had filed the complaint, and that that complaint had been provided to the local newspaper.

247
00:17:25,240 --> 00:17:33,240
 As you've already found, that complaint was baseless because notary seals, or document

248
00:17:33,240 --> 00:17:40,240
 stamped with a notary seal, are public documents, and if I gave you a dollar bill that had the

249
00:17:40,240 --> 00:17:48,240
 Secretary of Treasurer's stamp on it, that would hardly indicate that the Secretary of

250
00:17:48,240 --> 00:17:52,240
 State of the United States, or the Secretary of Treasurer, had endorsed me as a political

251
00:17:52,240 --> 00:17:57,240
 candidate, because the dollar bill had on it, and the same thing would apply.

252
00:17:57,240 --> 00:18:01,240
 I don't think there's any question that what the motives were of Mr. Campbell, particularly

253
00:18:01,240 --> 00:18:03,240
 in a lot of his past experience.

254
00:18:03,240 --> 00:18:10,240
 Okay, and I think the evidence is going to support everything I've just talked about.

255
00:18:10,240 --> 00:18:32,240
 Okay, so, since this is a, just to mention, so this is a frivolous hearing, and our rules

256
00:18:32,240 --> 00:18:37,240
 of procedure are obviously written for a hearing on a complaint, and that would be something

257
00:18:37,240 --> 00:18:41,240
 that we will address at a later time once the Board of Ethics, but we're going to work

258
00:18:41,240 --> 00:18:44,240
 within the standards we have here.

259
00:18:44,240 --> 00:18:50,240
 And before we get into the complaintants, any testimony about the complaintant, I'll

260
00:18:50,240 --> 00:18:56,240
 briefly summarize the evidence that was given to board members as part of the packet.

261
00:18:56,240 --> 00:19:01,240
 It's on the website as well for anybody following along.

262
00:19:01,240 --> 00:19:11,240
 The Board B-1 piece of evidence is the April 21st, 2022 DRC article about Mr. Meltzer's

263
00:19:11,240 --> 00:19:17,240
 mailer, and it was about 11 days before the complaint was made.

264
00:19:17,240 --> 00:19:30,240
 B-2 is a May 3rd meeting, and during the public comment, now, Councilperson Chris Walker,

265
00:19:30,240 --> 00:19:35,240
 Councilperson Chris Watts then, I don't believe he was not elected yet to that position, talked

266
00:19:35,240 --> 00:19:38,240
 about the Meltzer mailer.

267
00:19:38,240 --> 00:19:45,240
 B-3 is the actual ethics complaint that's at issue that was, or, oh no, I'm sorry,

268
00:19:45,240 --> 00:19:54,240
 B-3 was the previous complaint against Dem Arbitor that was filed on 10/15/2020 when

269
00:19:54,240 --> 00:19:59,240
 the next election was in November that year because of COVID, and that complaint was found

270
00:19:59,240 --> 00:20:05,240
 baseless because what the complaint said happened did not actually happen during that meeting,

271
00:20:05,240 --> 00:20:13,240
 and there was actually a discussion of frivolity during that panel, and that panel was appealed,

272
00:20:13,240 --> 00:20:19,240
 and the full board also talked about whether that was frivolous, but because we had not

273
00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:23,240
 changed the rules at that time, we did not know how to then have a frivolous hearing.

274
00:20:23,240 --> 00:20:30,240
 A piece of evidence, B-4, shows the election dates being 5/7/2022 and 11/3/2020.

275
00:20:30,240 --> 00:20:37,240
 B-5 is the notary statutes, Madison, did you add those, or, who has to add those?

276
00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:40,240
 Okay, I asked.

277
00:20:40,240 --> 00:20:49,240
 Yeah, so those are the statutes about the notary seal, and I believe that was it, that's

278
00:20:49,240 --> 00:20:53,240
 all the Board of Ethics evidence.

279
00:20:53,240 --> 00:21:03,240
 No documentary evidence was brought in by complaint, and after the complaint gets a

280
00:21:03,240 --> 00:21:10,240
 chance, I will let the respondent talk about the evidence, the evidence that they brought

281
00:21:10,240 --> 00:21:16,240
 forth, but I guess for now, the complaint, Mr. Campbell, would you like to, do you have

282
00:21:16,240 --> 00:21:28,240
 any testimony today?

283
00:21:28,240 --> 00:21:30,240
 Well, I want to make a point that-

284
00:21:30,240 --> 00:21:35,240
 Okay, Mr. Campbell, if you could please sit up here so everybody can hear, and if you

285
00:21:35,240 --> 00:21:41,240
 are giving testimony, then we'll have to swear you in, which I'm not an actual judge-

286
00:21:41,240 --> 00:21:43,240
 You said there, here before, so-

287
00:21:43,240 --> 00:21:49,240
 Yeah, yeah, whoever's speaking at the moment should be there, and I guess, will you raise

288
00:21:49,240 --> 00:21:51,240
 your right hand?

289
00:21:51,240 --> 00:21:54,240
 You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

290
00:21:54,240 --> 00:21:55,240
 I do.

291
00:21:55,240 --> 00:21:56,240
 All right.

292
00:21:56,240 --> 00:21:57,240
 Okay.

293
00:21:57,240 --> 00:22:02,240
 There seems like some confusion in the ordinance.

294
00:22:02,240 --> 00:22:11,240
 In the May 10th correspondence I got, I was told that you may provide testimony and evidence

295
00:22:11,240 --> 00:22:13,240
 at this meeting.

296
00:22:13,240 --> 00:22:20,240
 Later on, it says that, or I was told that the time had passed to present evidence, so

297
00:22:20,240 --> 00:22:30,240
 there's, I mean, I didn't prepare because I didn't think you could do it, so there's

298
00:22:30,240 --> 00:22:32,240
 some confusion, like I said.

299
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:40,240
 In one, it says you may attend to provide testimony and evidence, and then later on,

300
00:22:40,240 --> 00:22:52,240
 I was told that I couldn't provide it in me, and that the time had passed to do so.

301
00:22:52,240 --> 00:22:55,240
 Any more testimony?

302
00:22:55,240 --> 00:23:00,240
 I, like I said, I filed the complaint.

303
00:23:00,240 --> 00:23:09,240
 I used the Record Chronicle article, and there was part of this mailer.

304
00:23:09,240 --> 00:23:15,240
 I couldn't find the whole mailer, but I found, you know, the Record Chronicle, just the

305
00:23:15,240 --> 00:23:28,240
 facer sheet and the part with all the information about Mayor Hudspeth and the seal.

306
00:23:28,240 --> 00:23:36,240
 And so I included both those, turned them in, and then, like I said, when I later saw

307
00:23:36,240 --> 00:23:43,240
 the video, they said that it was not there, and I disagree with that when I turned it

308
00:23:43,240 --> 00:23:48,240
 in, everything was there.

309
00:23:48,240 --> 00:23:55,240
 Are you aware that the ordinance rules are public?

310
00:23:55,240 --> 00:23:56,240
 Sure.

311
00:23:56,240 --> 00:24:01,240
 And you were able to read those to make your complaint?

312
00:24:01,240 --> 00:24:06,240
 I read through them, like I didn't read the whole thing, and then went through it and

313
00:24:06,240 --> 00:24:08,240
 looked at it, yeah.

314
00:24:08,240 --> 00:24:13,240
 Are you aware that those rules also say that you can present evidence and that you need

315
00:24:13,240 --> 00:24:20,240
 to give evidence to the city auditor prior to the hearing?

316
00:24:20,240 --> 00:24:25,240
 No, I was basing all mine on all the correspondence I got immediately from, directly from you

317
00:24:25,240 --> 00:24:26,240
 guys.

318
00:24:26,240 --> 00:24:30,240
 But you had access to the rules of procedure and those city ordinance?

319
00:24:30,240 --> 00:24:31,240
 Oh, yeah.

320
00:24:31,240 --> 00:24:37,240
 I didn't do it, but like I said, I mean, you guys were telling me one thing, so I had to

321
00:24:37,240 --> 00:24:39,240
 go with what you guys were saying.

322
00:24:39,240 --> 00:24:45,240
 And you said that you sent both sides of the mailer, you turned them into the city, correct?

323
00:24:45,240 --> 00:24:47,240
 Yes, that was part of my file.

324
00:24:47,240 --> 00:24:51,240
 But you also just said that you couldn't find the mailer, is that correct?

325
00:24:51,240 --> 00:24:53,240
 No, I said I couldn't find the complete mailer.

326
00:24:53,240 --> 00:25:00,240
 All I had, as I said, was the facer page, it's about a four or six page mailer.

327
00:25:00,240 --> 00:25:06,240
 So, I couldn't turn it off, since then I couldn't find it, I looked for it, but of course it

328
00:25:06,240 --> 00:25:16,240
 went out to the people I don't have access to.

329
00:25:16,240 --> 00:25:25,240
 So this mailer, where did you find that one?

330
00:25:25,240 --> 00:25:30,240
 That was in the record chronicle, I believe.

331
00:25:30,240 --> 00:25:33,240
 That was part of the complaint, correct?

332
00:25:33,240 --> 00:25:42,240
 Yes, yes, that was part of the complaint.

333
00:25:42,240 --> 00:25:46,240
 But that does not appear to be the one that's on the record, that record chronicle.

334
00:25:46,240 --> 00:25:50,240
 And then I have one last question before I would let anyone else ask questions.

335
00:25:50,240 --> 00:25:55,240
 Did you post about the complaint on Facebook?

336
00:25:55,240 --> 00:26:01,240
 I don't recall, I might have.

337
00:26:01,240 --> 00:26:07,240
 And I don't remember, as Mr. Gladden said, reporting it on, I don't remember a whole

338
00:26:07,240 --> 00:26:11,240
 lot about that, it was three or four years ago with Deb Armentor.

339
00:26:11,240 --> 00:26:16,240
 Did you share the debt and record chronicle article on Facebook?

340
00:26:16,240 --> 00:26:18,240
 No.

341
00:26:18,240 --> 00:26:21,240
 Are there any more questions from Annette?

342
00:26:21,240 --> 00:26:25,240
 I'm curious, you said somebody made you aware of it, can you say who that was?

343
00:26:25,240 --> 00:26:27,240
 That somebody made you aware of the mailer?

344
00:26:27,240 --> 00:26:28,240
 I don't recall.

345
00:26:28,240 --> 00:26:29,240
 You don't remember?

346
00:26:29,240 --> 00:26:30,240
 No.

347
00:26:30,240 --> 00:26:35,240
 I talked to lots of people and there were lots of people, I don't recall.

348
00:26:35,240 --> 00:26:41,240
 Okay, I'm just curious who else you might have talked with about it.

349
00:26:41,240 --> 00:26:44,240
 Yeah, sorry, I don't recall.

350
00:26:44,240 --> 00:26:46,240
 Any more questions about it?

351
00:26:46,240 --> 00:26:47,240
 Rob?

352
00:26:47,240 --> 00:26:53,240
 Were your conversations with the city on your thought of when you were going to present

353
00:26:53,240 --> 00:26:58,240
 it, was this all verbally or did you have a paper as if you had received emails of some

354
00:26:58,240 --> 00:27:00,240
 sort or is it just all verbal?

355
00:27:00,240 --> 00:27:02,240
 Concerning the evidence and when I could present it?

356
00:27:02,240 --> 00:27:03,240
 As you, yes.

357
00:27:03,240 --> 00:27:08,240
 All that came from you guys, all that came from Madison.

358
00:27:08,240 --> 00:27:09,240
 And what?

359
00:27:09,240 --> 00:27:12,240
 And maybe, what's her name, Peel?

360
00:27:12,240 --> 00:27:15,240
 And your understanding, was it all verbal?

361
00:27:15,240 --> 00:27:16,240
 No, it was written.

362
00:27:16,240 --> 00:27:21,240
 I got it written right here.

363
00:27:21,240 --> 00:27:26,240
 Everything was written.

364
00:27:26,240 --> 00:27:30,240
 So you received something from the city stating that if you make, under your thought, that

365
00:27:30,240 --> 00:27:34,240
 you may present evidence at the meeting, but then when we got here you found out that you

366
00:27:34,240 --> 00:27:35,240
 could not.

367
00:27:35,240 --> 00:27:37,240
 No, no, that's not how it worked.

368
00:27:37,240 --> 00:27:46,240
 Okay, on May 9th, panel, I'll read the whole thing, but it does say you may attend to provide

369
00:27:46,240 --> 00:27:48,240
 testimony and evidence.

370
00:27:48,240 --> 00:27:53,240
 Then later on, in one of the other ones, I could look through and find it if we wanted

371
00:27:53,240 --> 00:27:56,240
 to spend the time doing it, but it...

372
00:27:56,240 --> 00:27:57,240
 I would like to.

373
00:27:57,240 --> 00:27:58,240
 Okay.

374
00:27:58,240 --> 00:28:00,240
 I'll open the book.

375
00:28:00,240 --> 00:28:19,240
 What was in that, what was in that last, last flyer she sent out, not the last flyer, the

376
00:28:19,240 --> 00:28:22,240
 last notifications she sent out.

377
00:28:28,240 --> 00:28:55,240
 I don't see it here, but it was, I was given several different ones, several notifications

378
00:28:55,240 --> 00:29:02,240
 from the, from you guys, from Madison, and they came, you know, every couple of days.

379
00:29:02,240 --> 00:29:10,240
 In fact, I got, one of them came via email and by mail, snail mail.

380
00:29:10,240 --> 00:29:15,240
 Madam Chair, can I ask again?

381
00:29:15,240 --> 00:29:16,240
 Yes, go for it.

382
00:29:16,240 --> 00:29:23,240
 So, the document that you do have, that you could present, was it the one that stated

383
00:29:23,240 --> 00:29:26,240
 that you could come and present evidence?

384
00:29:26,240 --> 00:29:30,240
 This was the first one I got on May the 9th.

385
00:29:30,240 --> 00:29:31,240
 I'll read the book.

386
00:29:31,240 --> 00:29:37,240
 "Dear Mr. Campbell, the panel of the Board of Ethics met on May 9th, 2022 to conduct

387
00:29:37,240 --> 00:29:44,240
 preliminary assessment of the complaint you submitted, Ethics Complaint 22-001 against

388
00:29:44,240 --> 00:29:46,240
 Council Member Paul Nelson.

389
00:29:46,240 --> 00:29:53,240
 The panel determined that your complaint was baseless in accordance with Section 2-280

390
00:29:53,240 --> 00:29:55,240
 of the Ethics Ordinance.

391
00:29:55,240 --> 00:30:01,240
 In addition, the panel recommended that a hearing be held to determine if Ethics Complaint

392
00:30:01,240 --> 00:30:05,240
 22-07 may be frivolous.

393
00:30:05,240 --> 00:30:11,240
 This hearing will be scheduled to occur within 30 days.

394
00:30:11,240 --> 00:30:16,240
 A separate notification will be sent out to notify you of the exact time and date of the

395
00:30:16,240 --> 00:30:17,240
 hearing.

396
00:30:17,240 --> 00:30:20,240
 You may attend to provide testimony and evidence.

397
00:30:20,240 --> 00:30:26,240
 The full written determination received from the panel is attached to this notification.

398
00:30:26,240 --> 00:30:31,240
 Please let me know if you have any questions."

399
00:30:31,240 --> 00:30:32,240
 Any more questions?

400
00:30:32,240 --> 00:30:41,240
 Were you given an email that all evidence had to be given to the city auditor by May

401
00:30:41,240 --> 00:30:42,240
 18th?

402
00:30:42,240 --> 00:30:44,240
 Well, that's what I was talking about.

403
00:30:44,240 --> 00:30:45,240
 There's confusion on it.

404
00:30:45,240 --> 00:30:48,240
 This one says that I may.

405
00:30:48,240 --> 00:30:52,240
 But you were told that May 18th you needed to have any evidence into the city auditor.

406
00:30:52,240 --> 00:30:55,240
 Yeah, but at the time I didn't know that I needed to.

407
00:30:55,240 --> 00:30:57,240
 I had no clue that...

408
00:30:57,240 --> 00:31:01,240
 You didn't know you needed to, yet you were told that you needed to?

409
00:31:01,240 --> 00:31:03,240
 No, it gave me the option to do it.

410
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:11,240
 It said I could, but I didn't know until a day or two later that supposedly this key

411
00:31:11,240 --> 00:31:15,240
 piece of the filing was missing.

412
00:31:15,240 --> 00:31:17,240
 Any more questions?

413
00:31:17,240 --> 00:31:19,240
 So that's why I filed it when I did.

414
00:31:19,240 --> 00:31:27,240
 I watched the original video, and again, I've watched it several times since.

415
00:31:27,240 --> 00:31:34,240
 That's when I found that, I guess some of y'all, I can't remember the faces, said that

416
00:31:34,240 --> 00:31:36,240
 there was a page missing.

417
00:31:36,240 --> 00:31:39,240
 And a key one.

418
00:31:39,240 --> 00:31:45,240
 And the Record Chronicle article is included in this, and it backs it up.

419
00:31:45,240 --> 00:31:47,240
 It's got it right there, too.

420
00:31:47,240 --> 00:31:51,240
 So it backs up what I had alleged.

421
00:31:51,240 --> 00:31:55,240
 Did you bring this piece of key evidence with you today?

422
00:31:55,240 --> 00:31:58,240
 That you said was missing out of the original complaint?

423
00:31:58,240 --> 00:32:00,240
 Do you have it with you today?

424
00:32:00,240 --> 00:32:01,240
 Yeah.

425
00:32:01,240 --> 00:32:07,240
 Have we seen it?

426
00:32:07,240 --> 00:32:12,240
 Would you like to see it?

427
00:32:12,240 --> 00:32:15,240
 Is this the same evidence that you got out of the DRC article?

428
00:32:15,240 --> 00:32:16,240
 Right.

429
00:32:16,240 --> 00:32:18,240
 So the DRC article is part of our evidence?

430
00:32:18,240 --> 00:32:23,240
 Yeah, it's in what's given today.

431
00:32:23,240 --> 00:32:25,240
 I have one last question.

432
00:32:25,240 --> 00:32:28,240
 The complaint you filed was on May 2nd.

433
00:32:28,240 --> 00:32:31,240
 The election was on May 7th.

434
00:32:31,240 --> 00:32:33,240
 You said you talked to lots of people.

435
00:32:33,240 --> 00:32:39,240
 Did you or anybody you talked to consider what sort of ramifications that could have

436
00:32:39,240 --> 00:32:43,240
 on the election, and what kind of stress it would cause?

437
00:32:43,240 --> 00:32:47,240
 I don't remember talking to a lot of people, as you mentioned.

438
00:32:47,240 --> 00:32:51,240
 I talked to probably about two or three friends.

439
00:32:51,240 --> 00:32:55,240
 The timing of it is problematic to me.

440
00:32:55,240 --> 00:33:00,240
 Well, the timing is that I found out that this piece was missing.

441
00:33:00,240 --> 00:33:06,240
 No, I'm talking about the original complaint.

442
00:33:06,240 --> 00:33:09,240
 I just found out about the record chronicle article.

443
00:33:09,240 --> 00:33:13,240
 I said I don't read it, and someone mentioned it to me.

444
00:33:13,240 --> 00:33:18,240
 When I read that, I thought, no, that sounds like something needs to be addressed.

445
00:33:18,240 --> 00:33:23,240
 It had been sent to the state by the city manager.

446
00:33:23,240 --> 00:33:26,240
 Then, of course, the record chronicle had it.

447
00:33:26,240 --> 00:33:30,240
 Mr. Gladden mentioned it blasted it all over the place.

448
00:33:30,240 --> 00:33:33,240
 Actually, the city manager, I don't think took it.

449
00:33:33,240 --> 00:33:39,240
 I think Alan Rosa contacted the state to make sure that there wasn't a problem.

450
00:33:39,240 --> 00:33:41,240
 I'm sorry, I'm out of time.

451
00:33:41,240 --> 00:33:45,240
 Hold on a moment. I'll allow you to ask questions in a moment.

452
00:33:45,240 --> 00:33:48,240
 Deborah, do you have any questions?

453
00:33:48,240 --> 00:34:00,240
 I'm very sorry. Could you put an end to everything what you just said about?

454
00:34:00,240 --> 00:34:08,240
 My understanding was that Rosa Rios contacted the state to make sure there wasn't a problem with that.

455
00:34:08,240 --> 00:34:18,240
 But I want to say that anybody who has a license with the state, and I have one, it's abundantly clear that we don't own it, the state does.

456
00:34:18,240 --> 00:34:23,240
 They can take it any time they want to. It's a public thing.

457
00:34:23,240 --> 00:34:28,240
 I guess let's stick to questions right now. We can deliberate after.

458
00:34:28,240 --> 00:34:30,240
 Deborah, did you have any questions?

459
00:34:30,240 --> 00:34:34,240
 I do. There was a 10-day span between the time that it was in the record chronicle.

460
00:34:34,240 --> 00:34:37,240
 Can you speak up a little bit? I can't hear with the mask on.

461
00:34:37,240 --> 00:34:45,240
 There was a 10-day span between the record chronicle article and your complaint.

462
00:34:45,240 --> 00:34:49,240
 Why 10 days? It was so vital.

463
00:34:49,240 --> 00:34:57,240
 I didn't know it existed. Like I said, I don't read record chronicle. I don't subscribe to it.

464
00:34:57,240 --> 00:35:03,240
 I don't think it's, in my personal opinion, I don't think it's worth reading, so I don't read it.

465
00:35:03,240 --> 00:35:12,240
 Somebody mentioned it to me, so that's when I looked at it, and when I did, I thought, well, I think this justifies complaint.

466
00:35:12,240 --> 00:35:41,240
 When did you see it? I don't know.

467
00:35:41,240 --> 00:35:59,240
 On or about May 1st or 2nd? So that's why the next day, the 2nd, is when I followed this, because I said one of the things.

468
00:35:59,240 --> 00:36:04,240
 This warrants a complaint.

469
00:36:04,240 --> 00:36:06,240
 Can I have another question?

470
00:36:06,240 --> 00:36:08,240
 Yeah, go for it.

471
00:36:08,240 --> 00:36:18,240
 When you learned that a page was missing, did you contact Ms. Wörthauk?

472
00:36:18,240 --> 00:36:22,240
 Who? Ms. Wörthauk, magazine editor.

473
00:36:22,240 --> 00:36:24,240
 That's her last name.

474
00:36:24,240 --> 00:36:41,240
 Okay. No, because that was just right when I filed the request to have this postponed or try to get to the root of it to find out why.

475
00:36:41,240 --> 00:36:44,240
 So yeah, I sent her a letter.

476
00:36:44,240 --> 00:36:46,240
 When did you send the letter?

477
00:36:46,240 --> 00:36:48,240
 I'm sorry.

478
00:36:48,240 --> 00:36:53,240
 When did you send the letter?

479
00:36:53,240 --> 00:37:00,240
 20th, I believe.

480
00:37:00,240 --> 00:37:11,240
 Yeah, I watched the video when I learned of it on the 19th, Thursday the 19th.

481
00:37:11,240 --> 00:37:22,240
 Of course, my request to pull it was based on that, so the very next morning I came here and filed a request to have it moved so that we could determine why that was missing when it was there before.

482
00:37:22,240 --> 00:37:24,240
 All right.

483
00:37:24,240 --> 00:37:31,240
 If there's no more questions from the board, respondents, attorney can ask questions.

484
00:37:31,240 --> 00:37:37,240
 Thank you.

485
00:37:37,240 --> 00:37:39,240
 Scott, we've met before, have we not?

486
00:37:39,240 --> 00:37:41,240
 Oh, many times, yep.

487
00:37:41,240 --> 00:37:45,240
 I want to go over just a few things with you.

488
00:37:45,240 --> 00:37:57,240
 Do you recall filing a complaint in October of 2020 challenging the ethics of Councilmember Deb Armador?

489
00:37:57,240 --> 00:37:58,240
 Is that a yes?

490
00:37:58,240 --> 00:37:59,240
 That's a yes.

491
00:37:59,240 --> 00:38:12,240
 I'm sorry, I'm a lawyer and court reporters go crazy if we don't have one here, but if you nod or say uh-huh or uh-huh, sometimes it's harder for people to know later what your answer was.

492
00:38:12,240 --> 00:38:34,240
 In connection with the filing of that complaint, did you receive a letter from the city auditor informing you that the fact that you had filed a complaint was confidential and that it could not be or should not be disclosed publicly to anyone until it had either been placed on the agenda of the Ethics Board or dismissed?

493
00:38:34,240 --> 00:38:37,240
 Do you recall getting that instruction back in October of 2020?

494
00:38:37,240 --> 00:38:39,240
 No, I do not recall it.

495
00:38:39,240 --> 00:38:57,240
 In connection with this complaint, did you receive a letter from the city auditor telling you, quote, the submitted complaint is confidential and should not be publicly disclosed?

496
00:38:57,240 --> 00:38:59,240
 I don't remember.

497
00:38:59,240 --> 00:39:09,240
 And, of course, you indicated that you had access to and you were familiar with the ethics provisions or the ethics code provisions.

498
00:39:09,240 --> 00:39:10,240
 That's true, isn't it?

499
00:39:10,240 --> 00:39:12,240
 You looked them over?

500
00:39:12,240 --> 00:39:13,240
 I've reviewed them.

501
00:39:13,240 --> 00:39:14,240
 Okay.

502
00:39:14,240 --> 00:39:28,240
 Are you denying that you were aware after reading them that you were informed in the code that the fact that someone has filed an ethics complaint is confidential and cannot be disclosed by the complainant or the respondent

503
00:39:28,240 --> 00:39:39,240
 or any city staff unless or until the complaint has gone through the process and placed on the board's agenda or dismissed?

504
00:39:39,240 --> 00:39:47,240
 Are you saying that you just didn't know that from the last complaint, didn't know that from this complaint, didn't know that from reading the city ordinance?

505
00:39:47,240 --> 00:39:48,240
 Well, I can say that.

506
00:39:48,240 --> 00:39:50,240
 No, can you answer yes or no?

507
00:39:50,240 --> 00:39:52,240
 Please repeat it.

508
00:39:52,240 --> 00:39:54,240
 Did you know?

509
00:39:54,240 --> 00:39:56,240
 Well, actually.

510
00:39:56,240 --> 00:40:10,240
 You're saying, are you denying that you were familiar with the fact that these things are confidential when you file a complaint and that you're not going to disclose it to anybody unless or until it's placed on the board's agenda or dismissed?

511
00:40:10,240 --> 00:40:14,240
 Are you denying you knew that?

512
00:40:14,240 --> 00:40:15,240
 No.

513
00:40:15,240 --> 00:40:17,240
 Okay, so you admit that you knew that.

514
00:40:17,240 --> 00:40:18,240
 Okay.

515
00:40:18,240 --> 00:40:20,240
 What can I make a statement about?

516
00:40:20,240 --> 00:40:22,240
 Okay, you can in a minute, but what I'm asking --

517
00:40:22,240 --> 00:40:31,240
 Let me, real quickly, so he's asking a question and you'll have a moment afterwards to say what you'd like if you were taking notes.

518
00:40:31,240 --> 00:40:34,240
 I think that's how we would do it here, that's how it's done in a courtroom.

519
00:40:34,240 --> 00:40:36,240
 Okay, okay, okay.

520
00:40:36,240 --> 00:40:47,240
 You can answer yes or no. Were you or were you not aware that the fact that you filed a complaint was confidential and not to be disclosed by you?

521
00:40:47,240 --> 00:40:48,240
 Yes.

522
00:40:48,240 --> 00:40:51,240
 But you did it anyway, didn't you?

523
00:40:51,240 --> 00:40:52,240
 Somewhat.

524
00:40:52,240 --> 00:40:56,240
 What do you mean some what? Yes or no? Did you just publicly disclose it?

525
00:40:56,240 --> 00:40:57,240
 Yes.

526
00:40:57,240 --> 00:41:06,240
 All right. And didn't you do that because it was right before the election and you wanted to harm Paul Messler's campaign for mayor?

527
00:41:06,240 --> 00:41:07,240
 Yeah.

528
00:41:07,240 --> 00:41:17,240
 Okay. Did you get a copy of the exhibits that were submitted to the board in connection with this hearing?

529
00:41:17,240 --> 00:41:19,240
 About, with the agenda or what are you talking about?

530
00:41:19,240 --> 00:41:20,240
 Yeah, with the agenda.

531
00:41:20,240 --> 00:41:27,240
 Okay. Could you, do you have a copy of those there with you?

532
00:41:27,240 --> 00:41:41,240
 Could you look at respondent Paul Messler's exhibit, I believe it's marked as exhibit five, and the board's packet.

533
00:41:41,240 --> 00:41:45,240
 I don't have the packet printed out, I don't believe it. I see that.

534
00:41:45,240 --> 00:41:53,240
 Well, may I approach? Oh yeah, just go for it. I mean, it's not a courtroom, I guess.

535
00:41:53,240 --> 00:41:55,240
 I think it's okay.

536
00:41:55,240 --> 00:41:59,240
 Do y'all have copies of this? Yes.

537
00:41:59,240 --> 00:42:06,240
 First of all, do you have a Facebook page that you host called If You Love Denton You May Want to Know?

538
00:42:06,240 --> 00:42:07,240
 I do.

539
00:42:07,240 --> 00:42:22,240
 And you were asked earlier by one of the members of the board whether you posted a link to the Denton Record Chronicle article concerning the notary dispute, let's say.

540
00:42:22,240 --> 00:42:25,240
 Were you remember being asked that question?

541
00:42:25,240 --> 00:42:29,240
 I don't recall putting the Record Chronicle article in there, I said no.

542
00:42:29,240 --> 00:42:37,240
 Let me pause for a second. I just want to make sure, does everybody have a copy of the Facebook post? Okay. I don't have it in front of me, I know that I've seen it.

543
00:42:37,240 --> 00:42:41,240
 I'd like it if we could put it up on the screen.

544
00:42:41,240 --> 00:42:45,240
 Yeah, Madison can do that.

545
00:42:45,240 --> 00:42:48,240
 I'm sorry, I answered for everybody. It was sent to everyone.

546
00:42:48,240 --> 00:42:50,240
 Yeah, I don't know if I had it in front of me.

547
00:42:50,240 --> 00:42:52,240
 But I did not print the copy.

548
00:42:52,240 --> 00:42:55,240
 Okay, you can proceed.

549
00:42:55,240 --> 00:43:09,240
 Okay, thank you. Now, Scott, are you denying that you posted that on Facebook?

550
00:43:09,240 --> 00:43:10,240
 No, I posted that.

551
00:43:10,240 --> 00:43:24,240
 Alright, and can you see that in that post on Facebook, you referred to someone filing a complaint against Paul Metzler the day before. Do you see that?

552
00:43:24,240 --> 00:43:27,240
 Can you answer yes or no?

553
00:43:27,240 --> 00:43:28,240
 Yes.

554
00:43:28,240 --> 00:43:37,240
 Alright, and so if you file a complaint on May 2nd, which I think we've established by the Record, you posted that on May 3rd, correct?

555
00:43:37,240 --> 00:43:39,240
 I'm not sure. Is that on there?

556
00:43:39,240 --> 00:43:42,240
 Do you see where it says yesterday?

557
00:43:42,240 --> 00:43:44,240
 Okay, yeah.

558
00:43:44,240 --> 00:43:45,240
 Do you see that?

559
00:43:45,240 --> 00:43:46,240
 Yep.

560
00:43:46,240 --> 00:43:50,240
 Alright, so that would be consistent with you posting that on May 3rd, correct?

561
00:43:50,240 --> 00:43:51,240
 Yes.

562
00:43:51,240 --> 00:43:56,240
 And you don't identify yourself as the person that filed the complaint, though, do you?

563
00:43:56,240 --> 00:43:59,240
 I've heard about another one, so yeah.

564
00:43:59,240 --> 00:44:03,240
 But you're referring to the one you posted in this post, right?

565
00:44:03,240 --> 00:44:06,240
 I assume so. It looks like it. I don't recall.

566
00:44:06,240 --> 00:44:18,240
 Alright, and this would have been four days before the city council elections, correct?

567
00:44:18,240 --> 00:44:21,240
 Four days before the election.

568
00:44:21,240 --> 00:44:24,240
 This is the 3rd, and the election was on the 7th, so it was about four days.

569
00:44:24,240 --> 00:44:25,240
 Yep.

570
00:44:25,240 --> 00:44:35,240
 Alright, and of course you also mentioned in your post that your complaint had been provided to the local newspaper, is that correct?

571
00:44:35,240 --> 00:44:36,240
 I believe so.

572
00:44:36,240 --> 00:44:45,240
 Alright, and you testified a moment ago that you knew your complaint, or the fact that you'd filed the complaint, was confidential, didn't you?

573
00:44:48,240 --> 00:44:49,240
 Repeat that, please.

574
00:44:49,240 --> 00:44:58,240
 Did you or did you not testify a moment ago that you knew the fact that you'd filed the complaint was confidential?

575
00:44:58,240 --> 00:44:59,240
 Yes.

576
00:44:59,240 --> 00:45:13,240
 So you were deliberately, by posting this Facebook post, you were deliberately violating the Denton Ethics Code, correct?

577
00:45:13,240 --> 00:45:14,240
 Yes.

578
00:45:14,240 --> 00:45:20,240
 Okay.

579
00:45:20,240 --> 00:45:27,240
 And the reason why you did that is because you were supporting the political opponent of Paul Meltzer, isn't it?

580
00:45:27,240 --> 00:45:29,240
 Not necessarily, no.

581
00:45:29,240 --> 00:45:30,240
 Well, yes, I'm not.

582
00:45:30,240 --> 00:45:31,240
 Okay, no.

583
00:45:31,240 --> 00:45:32,240
 Okay, alright.

584
00:45:32,240 --> 00:45:33,240
 No.

585
00:45:33,240 --> 00:45:40,240
 So, well, what motivated you to violate the Denton Code of Ethics deliberately?

586
00:45:40,240 --> 00:45:42,240
 Well, this is a small group.

587
00:45:42,240 --> 00:45:47,240
 Okay, can you tell us what the motivation you had was for doing this?

588
00:45:47,240 --> 00:45:49,240
 Just let people know.

589
00:45:49,240 --> 00:45:57,240
 And you want there to be consequences or to affect people's opinions about Paul Meltzer when you posted this, did you not?

590
00:45:57,240 --> 00:45:58,240
 No, I just stated the fact.

591
00:45:58,240 --> 00:45:59,240
 Oh, okay.

592
00:45:59,240 --> 00:46:05,240
 So you don't think this, you intended this to affect people's perspective of Paul Meltzer?

593
00:46:12,240 --> 00:46:21,240
 Like I said, I was just letting people know.

594
00:46:21,240 --> 00:46:22,240
 Yeah.

595
00:46:22,240 --> 00:46:29,240
 It didn't have anything to do with any intention you claim on your part to harm Metzler's political campaign.

596
00:46:29,240 --> 00:46:34,240
 Well, I could think that within four days it's going to make a difference, but yeah.

597
00:46:34,240 --> 00:46:43,240
 Well, why did you send the, why did you inform the local paper that you had filed a complaint?

598
00:46:43,240 --> 00:46:44,240
 Courtesy.

599
00:46:44,240 --> 00:46:46,240
 They had done the original article.

600
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:49,240
 I knew they wouldn't print it.

601
00:46:49,240 --> 00:46:51,240
 No way they would print it.

602
00:46:51,240 --> 00:46:56,240
 Well, I noticed you had some disparaging remarks of the Denton Record Chronicle in your post as well.

603
00:46:56,240 --> 00:47:00,240
 Was that intended to disparage the Denton Record Chronicle?

604
00:47:00,240 --> 00:47:04,240
 May we see the whole article?

605
00:47:04,240 --> 00:47:07,240
 That's the bottom right there.

606
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,240
 Okay, thank you.

607
00:47:08,240 --> 00:47:09,240
 Go ahead.

608
00:47:09,240 --> 00:47:11,240
 Yeah, I'm no fan of the Record Chronicle, I don't know.

609
00:47:11,240 --> 00:47:12,240
 Okay.

610
00:47:12,240 --> 00:47:19,240
 And of course, when you share comments about political candidates, would you agree with it?

611
00:47:19,240 --> 00:47:25,240
 It's designed to influence people to agree with your position?

612
00:47:25,240 --> 00:47:26,240
 Say it again, first part.

613
00:47:26,240 --> 00:47:34,240
 All right, when you post things or when you communicate with people about political campaigns

614
00:47:34,240 --> 00:47:42,240
 or your adversity to political candidates, don't you, aren't you doing that for the purpose of influencing?

615
00:47:42,240 --> 00:47:43,240
 Not influencing, no.

616
00:47:43,240 --> 00:47:50,240
 Okay.

617
00:47:50,240 --> 00:47:56,240
 Is there a reason why you didn't disclose that you were the person who contacted the newspaper

618
00:47:56,240 --> 00:48:04,240
 and you were about your filing complaint and that it was you that filed the complaint?

619
00:48:04,240 --> 00:48:09,240
 Why did you just say, "I filed the complaint today and I sent this complaint over to the newspaper"?

620
00:48:09,240 --> 00:48:10,240
 I don't recall.

621
00:48:10,240 --> 00:48:15,240
 It was because you knew you were violating the code, correct?

622
00:48:15,240 --> 00:48:16,240
 No.

623
00:48:16,240 --> 00:48:20,240
 Well, you already admitted that you knew you were violating the code, was it?

624
00:48:20,240 --> 00:48:22,240
 Yeah, that's not why I did that.

625
00:48:22,240 --> 00:48:27,240
 Okay, so there was another reason why you didn't disclose you were the one that filed the complaint?

626
00:48:27,240 --> 00:48:37,240
 I said I don't recall why I didn't put my name in there.

627
00:48:37,240 --> 00:48:48,240
 Now, you supported Mr. Messler's opponent, that is, Mayor Hesbitt, in this race, did you not?

628
00:48:48,240 --> 00:48:50,240
 Actively, no.

629
00:48:50,240 --> 00:48:52,240
 Well, how about inactively?

630
00:48:52,240 --> 00:48:56,240
 I prefer him over Mr. Messler.

631
00:48:56,240 --> 00:49:00,240
 And so you had some, at least maybe not a personal relationship,

632
00:49:00,240 --> 00:49:06,240
 but you had already concluded before you made this post that you were supporting Mr. Messler's opponent, correct?

633
00:49:06,240 --> 00:49:09,240
 As do most people, yes.

634
00:49:09,240 --> 00:49:14,240
 We know that the mayor won by 500 votes, right?

635
00:49:14,240 --> 00:49:16,240
 So that would be most.

636
00:49:16,240 --> 00:49:29,240
 Now, what I'm asking you though is, isn't it true that part of your reason for posting this is consistent with and designed to support the mayor?

637
00:49:29,240 --> 00:49:30,240
 No.

638
00:49:30,240 --> 00:49:32,240
 As opposed to his opponent, Mr. Messler?

639
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:34,240
 No, absolutely not.

640
00:49:34,240 --> 00:49:36,240
 And did you donate any money to?

641
00:49:36,240 --> 00:49:37,240
 No.

642
00:49:37,240 --> 00:49:39,240
 I'm going to finish the question.

643
00:49:39,240 --> 00:49:41,240
 Ask one question, go ahead.

644
00:49:41,240 --> 00:49:50,240
 Did you, in this race, donate any money to Gerard Hesbitt, the mayor who was the opponent of Mr. Messler?

645
00:49:50,240 --> 00:49:51,240
 No.

646
00:49:51,240 --> 00:49:54,240
 Have you ever met Gerard Hesbitt?

647
00:49:54,240 --> 00:49:56,240
 Sure. I know lots of people in town.

648
00:49:56,240 --> 00:49:58,240
 Are you friends with Mr. Hesbitt?

649
00:49:58,240 --> 00:50:00,240
 When they say we're friends, I'm going.

650
00:50:00,240 --> 00:50:10,240
 Okay. Did you communicate with anyone between the time you decided to make this post and when you posted?

651
00:50:10,240 --> 00:50:11,240
 No.

652
00:50:11,240 --> 00:50:22,240
 Who was it that notified you of the fact that Mr. Hesbitt was complaining about Mr. Messler's conduct in relation to the flyer?

653
00:50:22,240 --> 00:50:25,240
 Are you talking about the record Chronicle article?

654
00:50:25,240 --> 00:50:32,240
 I'm saying from any source, when you found out that Mayor Hesbitt was complaining publicly about...

655
00:50:32,240 --> 00:50:36,240
 Someone mentioned the Chronicle article.

656
00:50:36,240 --> 00:50:37,240
 Who was the someone?

657
00:50:37,240 --> 00:50:38,240
 I don't remember.

658
00:50:38,240 --> 00:50:40,240
 I've already mentioned that.

659
00:50:40,240 --> 00:50:43,240
 Okay, hold on a second.

660
00:50:43,240 --> 00:50:52,240
 So under the rules of procedure, parties are permitted 30 minutes per side to present all witness testimony, cross-examine opposing witnesses, and present evidence.

661
00:50:52,240 --> 00:50:55,240
 And I want to let you know you've used 13 minutes.

662
00:50:55,240 --> 00:50:56,240
 13 minutes, okay.

663
00:50:56,240 --> 00:51:01,240
 So you have 17 minutes left for your presentation as well.

664
00:51:01,240 --> 00:51:02,240
 And proceed.

665
00:51:02,240 --> 00:51:05,240
 Okay. I'll use just a few more minutes.

666
00:51:05,240 --> 00:51:19,240
 What kind of sanction or punishment would you think is appropriate for someone who, as you've admitted, deliberately violated the code of ethics by breaching the confidentiality four days before an election

667
00:51:19,240 --> 00:51:26,240
 in a matter that was and would likely have had an effect on the outcome of the race?

668
00:51:26,240 --> 00:51:29,240
 What kind of punishment do you think someone should get for that?

669
00:51:29,240 --> 00:51:30,240
 I hadn't read it.

670
00:51:30,240 --> 00:51:38,240
 Do you think they should be barred from continuing to file frivolous complaints for political purposes?

671
00:51:38,240 --> 00:51:39,240
 Frivolous complaints?

672
00:51:39,240 --> 00:51:40,240
 Yeah.

673
00:51:40,240 --> 00:51:50,240
 So if your complaint was found frivolous before this body, would you agree to refrain from filing any future complaints for 12 months?

674
00:51:50,240 --> 00:51:51,240
 No?

675
00:51:51,240 --> 00:51:52,240
 Okay.

676
00:51:52,240 --> 00:51:54,240
 I'll pass the witness.

677
00:51:54,240 --> 00:51:55,240
 Okay.

678
00:51:55,240 --> 00:51:57,240
 Do you have any more statements to make?

679
00:51:57,240 --> 00:51:58,240
 No.

680
00:51:58,240 --> 00:51:59,240
 All right.

681
00:51:59,240 --> 00:52:03,240
 Any more questions from board members?

682
00:52:03,240 --> 00:52:04,240
 Okay.

683
00:52:04,240 --> 00:52:05,240
 Let me read.

684
00:52:05,240 --> 00:52:09,240
 You've used 13 minutes, 52 seconds for the respondent.

685
00:52:09,240 --> 00:52:14,240
 I think you were far below, so I haven't kept.

686
00:52:14,240 --> 00:52:15,240
 Anyway.

687
00:52:15,240 --> 00:52:16,240
 All right.

688
00:52:16,240 --> 00:52:18,240
 So does anyone need a break?

689
00:52:18,240 --> 00:52:20,240
 I know we've been sitting here an hour.

690
00:52:20,240 --> 00:52:21,240
 Can we move forward?

691
00:52:21,240 --> 00:52:23,240
 I think we can move forward.

692
00:52:23,240 --> 00:52:24,240
 Okay.

693
00:52:24,240 --> 00:52:25,240
 All right.

694
00:52:25,240 --> 00:52:35,240
 So next up, and we don't have any documentary evidence that was presented, so I think we can move forward with a presentation of evidence by the respondent.

695
00:52:35,240 --> 00:52:40,240
 And Mr. Campbell, if you can take us back in, I guess, the galley.

696
00:52:40,240 --> 00:52:46,240
 And if you would like to present evidence or call witnesses, it's the floor is yours.

697
00:52:46,240 --> 00:52:47,240
 Okay.

698
00:52:47,240 --> 00:52:58,240
 At this time, the respondent, I would call the respondent, Paula Belsior, as a witness.

699
00:52:58,240 --> 00:52:59,240
 All right.

700
00:52:59,240 --> 00:53:01,240
 And raise your right hand.

701
00:53:01,240 --> 00:53:04,240
 Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

702
00:53:04,240 --> 00:53:05,240
 I do.

703
00:53:05,240 --> 00:53:06,240
 All right.

704
00:53:06,240 --> 00:53:07,240
 Proceed.

705
00:53:07,240 --> 00:53:08,240
 Okay.

706
00:53:08,240 --> 00:53:09,240
 Mr. Melser, we know each other.

707
00:53:09,240 --> 00:53:10,240
 Do we not?

708
00:53:10,240 --> 00:53:11,240
 We do.

709
00:53:11,240 --> 00:53:12,240
 I just want to make sure.

710
00:53:12,240 --> 00:53:13,240
 Is the mic on?

711
00:53:13,240 --> 00:53:14,240
 It's on.

712
00:53:14,240 --> 00:53:15,240
 Yeah.

713
00:53:15,240 --> 00:53:16,240
 I think it's up here.

714
00:53:16,240 --> 00:53:17,240
 Correct.

715
00:53:17,240 --> 00:53:18,240
 It's just a decoration.

716
00:53:18,240 --> 00:53:19,240
 Yeah.

717
00:53:19,240 --> 00:53:20,240
 I'm sorry.

718
00:53:20,240 --> 00:53:21,240
 Okay.

719
00:53:21,240 --> 00:53:22,240
 I'll start over.

720
00:53:22,240 --> 00:53:23,240
 We know each other.

721
00:53:23,240 --> 00:53:24,240
 Do we not, Paula?

722
00:53:24,240 --> 00:53:25,240
 We do.

723
00:53:25,240 --> 00:53:28,240
 As a matter of fact, you live two or three doors down from it, right?

724
00:53:28,240 --> 00:53:29,240
 That's true.

725
00:53:29,240 --> 00:53:35,240
 Now, I'm going to ask you, it sounds like we kind of got the facts straight, at least,

726
00:53:35,240 --> 00:53:38,240
 or most of them, so I don't have too many questions for you.

727
00:53:38,240 --> 00:53:46,240
 Were you a candidate for the office of mayor of the city of Denton related to the election

728
00:53:46,240 --> 00:53:48,240
 on May 7th of 2022?

729
00:53:48,240 --> 00:53:49,240
 Yes.

730
00:53:49,240 --> 00:53:50,240
 All right.

731
00:53:50,240 --> 00:53:51,240
 And who was your opponent?

732
00:53:51,240 --> 00:53:52,240
 Jordan Hudson.

733
00:53:52,240 --> 00:53:53,240
 All right.

734
00:53:53,240 --> 00:54:05,760
 At some point in time, did you become aware that the mayor was publicly making statements

735
00:54:05,760 --> 00:54:10,600
 where he had believed that you had done something wrong by sending political flyers out that

736
00:54:10,600 --> 00:54:13,080
 included a notary suit?

737
00:54:13,080 --> 00:54:19,240
 I became aware by, well, short answer is yes, I did not want to.

738
00:54:19,240 --> 00:54:20,240
 Okay.

739
00:54:20,240 --> 00:54:21,240
 All right.

740
00:54:21,240 --> 00:54:26,240
 So, in what opinion was that being made by the mayor as a more political maneuver or

741
00:54:26,240 --> 00:54:33,240
 a political issue that he wanted the voters to know about?

742
00:54:33,240 --> 00:54:39,240
 The notary seal, use of the notary seal was associated with notarized statements from

743
00:54:39,240 --> 00:54:47,240
 his campaign disclosure forms showing tens of thousands of dollars of funds received

744
00:54:47,240 --> 00:54:57,240
 from interested parties and I felt that moving the focus to the seal that indicated those

745
00:54:57,240 --> 00:55:03,240
 were true was a way to distract from facts that might feel would hurt him politically.

746
00:55:03,240 --> 00:55:04,240
 Okay.

747
00:55:04,240 --> 00:55:07,240
 First of all, Paul, you're not still running for office, okay?

748
00:55:07,240 --> 00:55:13,240
 Secondly, if you can answer my question rather than speak about things that I'm not asking

749
00:55:13,240 --> 00:55:14,240
 about, okay?

750
00:55:14,240 --> 00:55:19,240
 And I'm sorry that I'm a lawyer and I'm trying to get straight to the point where we're

751
00:55:19,240 --> 00:55:20,240
 going to run out of time.

752
00:55:20,240 --> 00:55:28,240
 What I asked you was when, or if at all, did you ever become aware that the mayor, your

753
00:55:28,240 --> 00:55:34,240
 own husband, was making a political issue out of the content of your political flyers?

754
00:55:34,240 --> 00:55:35,240
 Yes.

755
00:55:35,240 --> 00:55:36,240
 Okay.

756
00:55:36,240 --> 00:55:37,240
 You became aware of that.

757
00:55:37,240 --> 00:55:40,240
 When did you become aware of that?

758
00:55:40,240 --> 00:55:49,240
 I would say around the day before the article came out when I was approached by the reporter.

759
00:55:49,240 --> 00:55:50,240
 Okay.

760
00:55:50,240 --> 00:56:04,240
 Now, did you receive a letter dated May 2nd from the city auditor concerning this complaint?

761
00:56:04,240 --> 00:56:05,240
 Yes.

762
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:12,240
 Did that letter include a notification to you that the code, that is the Denton City

763
00:56:12,240 --> 00:56:18,240
 Ethics Code, prohibited you from disclosing the fact that you had received a complaint

764
00:56:18,240 --> 00:56:24,240
 or been the target of a complaint, at least until the time the complaint was screened

765
00:56:24,240 --> 00:56:26,240
 and placed on the agenda or dismissed?

766
00:56:26,240 --> 00:56:27,240
 Yes.

767
00:56:27,240 --> 00:56:28,240
 All right.

768
00:56:28,240 --> 00:56:36,240
 And is that something that was new to you or had you seen that warning before?

769
00:56:36,240 --> 00:56:40,240
 I was acquainted with it from previous interactions.

770
00:56:40,240 --> 00:56:41,240
 Okay.

771
00:56:41,240 --> 00:56:46,240
 Now, can you look at the screen behind you?

772
00:56:46,240 --> 00:56:48,240
 Do you recognize that?

773
00:56:48,240 --> 00:56:49,240
 Yes.

774
00:56:49,240 --> 00:56:50,240
 All right.

775
00:56:50,240 --> 00:56:51,240
 And that's actually your exhibit, is it not?

776
00:56:51,240 --> 00:56:52,240
 Yes, it is.

777
00:56:52,240 --> 00:56:53,240
 All right.

778
00:56:53,240 --> 00:56:55,240
 Can you tell us what that exhibit is?

779
00:56:55,240 --> 00:57:08,240
 It's a Facebook post on a page hosted by the complainant revealing the fact that there

780
00:57:08,240 --> 00:57:14,240
 was an ethics complaint made the day prior to its posting.

781
00:57:14,240 --> 00:57:19,240
 And of course, it also reveals that someone known to the complainant, if not the complainant

782
00:57:19,240 --> 00:57:26,240
 himself, had provided that information, the filing of a complaint, to the local newspaper,

783
00:57:26,240 --> 00:57:27,240
 correct?

784
00:57:27,240 --> 00:57:28,240
 Yes.

785
00:57:28,240 --> 00:57:34,240
 And that information violates the City Ethics Code, doesn't it, disclosing that information

786
00:57:34,240 --> 00:57:37,240
 the day after a complaint's filed?

787
00:57:37,240 --> 00:57:39,240
 Yes, it does.

788
00:57:39,240 --> 00:57:43,240
 In your opinion, what was the motivation for that post being made?

789
00:57:43,240 --> 00:57:52,240
 The motivation was evidently political, intended to discredit me in the eyes of voters.

790
00:57:52,240 --> 00:57:53,240
 All right.

791
00:57:53,240 --> 00:58:01,240
 Do you know whether or not that violation of the City Ethics Code adversely affected

792
00:58:01,240 --> 00:58:03,240
 your chances of being elected mayor?

793
00:58:03,240 --> 00:58:11,240
 You can never know for certain, but it certainly inclined in that direction.

794
00:58:11,240 --> 00:58:13,240
 All right.

795
00:58:13,240 --> 00:58:16,240
 And is it your opinion that Mr. Campbell intended it to have that effect?

796
00:58:16,240 --> 00:58:19,240
 I think it's the only reasonable explanation, yes.

797
00:58:19,240 --> 00:58:24,240
 And you didn't hear any other explanation from Mr. Campbell for him doing that, did

798
00:58:24,240 --> 00:58:25,240
 you?

799
00:58:25,240 --> 00:58:26,240
 No, I did.

800
00:58:26,240 --> 00:58:28,240
 I'll pass the witness.

801
00:58:28,240 --> 00:58:30,240
 All right.

802
00:58:30,240 --> 00:58:38,240
 Are there, Mr. Campbell, do you have any questions for Mr. Melter?

803
00:58:38,240 --> 00:58:39,240
 Sure.

804
00:58:39,240 --> 00:58:43,240
 Do you know that this particular --

805
00:58:43,240 --> 00:58:44,240
 I mean, it's down right there.

806
00:58:44,240 --> 00:58:47,240
 Do you mind sitting up here in that chair to make sure the mics catch it, if anyone's

807
00:58:47,240 --> 00:58:49,240
 watching at home for the recording?

808
00:58:49,240 --> 00:58:52,240
 Yeah, just sit there, and then when you're done with the questioning, you can go back

809
00:58:52,240 --> 00:58:53,240
 to your seat.

810
00:58:53,240 --> 00:58:54,240
 Yeah, sure.

811
00:58:54,240 --> 00:59:02,240
 Are you aware that this is a closed group, that there are very few people who are part

812
00:59:02,240 --> 00:59:03,240
 of it?

813
00:59:03,240 --> 00:59:06,240
 I mean, it's not -- I didn't blast it out on my personal page and all that.

814
00:59:06,240 --> 00:59:07,240
 It was right there.

815
00:59:07,240 --> 00:59:11,240
 On the contrary, I'm aware that it's a public group.

816
00:59:11,240 --> 00:59:18,240
 Well, I have to approve people when they come in.

817
00:59:18,240 --> 00:59:23,240
 I was able to see it without being a member.

818
00:59:23,240 --> 00:59:24,240
 Okay.

819
00:59:24,240 --> 00:59:25,240
 That's all.

820
00:59:25,240 --> 00:59:26,240
 Okay.

821
00:59:26,240 --> 00:59:27,240
 Thank you.

822
00:59:27,240 --> 00:59:28,240
 All right.

823
00:59:28,240 --> 00:59:38,240
 What about members of the Board of Ethics?

824
00:59:38,240 --> 00:59:43,240
 Do you -- anyone have any questions for Mr. Melter?

825
00:59:43,240 --> 00:59:44,240
 I'm not seeing any questions.

826
00:59:44,240 --> 00:59:45,240
 Anything else with this witness?

827
00:59:45,240 --> 00:59:46,240
 No.

828
00:59:46,240 --> 00:59:47,240
 Why aren't we going to be able to do a short close?

829
00:59:47,240 --> 00:59:48,240
 Yes.

830
00:59:48,240 --> 00:59:49,240
 Yes, we are.

831
00:59:49,240 --> 00:59:50,240
 Oh.

832
00:59:50,240 --> 00:59:51,240
 All right.

833
00:59:51,240 --> 00:59:52,240
 Madam Chair.

834
00:59:52,240 --> 00:59:53,240
 Oh, go ahead.

835
00:59:53,240 --> 00:59:54,240
 I was just reading my notes.

836
00:59:54,240 --> 00:59:55,240
 If I could ask --

837
00:59:55,240 --> 00:59:56,240
 Yes, go for it.

838
00:59:56,240 --> 01:00:01,240
 You received the May 2nd letter talking about the complaint.

839
01:00:01,240 --> 01:00:04,240
 You were aware that you were not to share it with anyone.

840
01:00:04,240 --> 01:00:09,240
 So I guess my question is, between then and when you talked with your counsel,

841
01:00:09,240 --> 01:00:11,240
 had you shared that with anyone?

842
01:00:11,240 --> 01:00:12,240
 No, I didn't.

843
01:00:12,240 --> 01:00:14,240
 Thank you.

844
01:00:14,240 --> 01:00:17,240
 Any more questions?

845
01:00:17,240 --> 01:00:18,240
 Okay.

846
01:00:18,240 --> 01:00:19,240
 All right.

847
01:00:19,240 --> 01:00:20,240
 You can take a seat.

848
01:00:20,240 --> 01:00:23,240
 And I believe we've already discussed the Respondents Exhibit.

849
01:00:23,240 --> 01:00:26,240
 Anything else on that exhibit to share?

850
01:00:26,240 --> 01:00:29,240
 Okay.

851
01:00:29,240 --> 01:00:31,240
 Let me get back to my notes.

852
01:00:31,240 --> 01:00:35,240
 I might want to have it back out there when I do my close.

853
01:00:35,240 --> 01:00:36,240
 Okay.

854
01:00:36,240 --> 01:00:37,240
 All right.

855
01:00:37,240 --> 01:00:42,240
 So closing statements under the Rules of Procedure -- or actually,

856
01:00:42,240 --> 01:00:47,240
 is there any rebuttal, evidence, or testimony from Mr. Campbell?

857
01:00:47,240 --> 01:00:48,240
 No.

858
01:00:48,240 --> 01:00:51,240
 He is indicating no in case the speakers aren't picking it up.

859
01:00:51,240 --> 01:00:56,240
 And so under Rules of Procedure E21,

860
01:00:56,240 --> 01:01:01,240
 we can now have a closing statement of five minutes per side.

861
01:01:01,240 --> 01:01:04,240
 Let me look that up real quick to make sure there's not one side

862
01:01:04,240 --> 01:01:14,240
 that's supposed to go first.

863
01:01:14,240 --> 01:01:16,240
 The complaint goes first.

864
01:01:16,240 --> 01:01:21,240
 Okay.

865
01:01:21,240 --> 01:01:23,240
 Mr. Campbell, would you like to make a closing statement?

866
01:01:23,240 --> 01:01:26,240
 If you could either sit in that seat or this seat,

867
01:01:26,240 --> 01:01:28,240
 just so the speakers pick it up.

868
01:01:28,240 --> 01:01:31,240
 Sorry to play musical chairs, but I just don't know what they pick up.

869
01:01:31,240 --> 01:01:32,240
 Sure.

870
01:01:32,240 --> 01:01:37,240
 And the time is five minutes, and you can reserve a time for a rebuttal.

871
01:01:37,240 --> 01:01:42,240
 So as he gives his closing, if you want to say something back,

872
01:01:42,240 --> 01:01:44,240
 we have five minutes altogether.

873
01:01:44,240 --> 01:01:46,240
 Okay, that'll be quick.

874
01:01:46,240 --> 01:01:53,240
 Now, the reason we're here is because of that original review panel

875
01:01:53,240 --> 01:02:02,240
 that then referred to this board stating that there was a page missing.

876
01:02:02,240 --> 01:02:08,240
 And as I've said, I absolutely maintained that it was there when I turned it in.

877
01:02:08,240 --> 01:02:13,240
 I don't know what happened to it, and that hadn't been addressed, so I don't know.

878
01:02:13,240 --> 01:02:16,240
 So we wouldn't be here -- well, I don't know.

879
01:02:16,240 --> 01:02:17,240
 I can't say that.

880
01:02:17,240 --> 01:02:35,240
 But this meeting is because of that meeting in which that was discussed.

881
01:02:35,240 --> 01:02:36,240
 That's all I have.

882
01:02:36,240 --> 01:02:38,240
 Is there anything else?

883
01:02:38,240 --> 01:02:44,240
 I just think that that's being completely dismissed

884
01:02:44,240 --> 01:02:52,240
 when the reason we're here is because of that.

885
01:02:52,240 --> 01:02:54,240
 That's all I have.

886
01:02:54,240 --> 01:02:55,240
 All right, thank you.

887
01:02:55,240 --> 01:02:56,240
 Thank you.

888
01:02:56,240 --> 01:03:00,240
 You can take a seat again.

889
01:03:00,240 --> 01:03:02,240
 All right, you can begin whenever you're ready.

890
01:03:02,240 --> 01:03:05,240
 Thank you, members of the board.

891
01:03:05,240 --> 01:03:10,240
 As I mentioned in my opening statement,

892
01:03:10,240 --> 01:03:17,240
 one of the primary issues in revising our debt and ethics code

893
01:03:17,240 --> 01:03:25,240
 was to prevent people like Mr. Campbell from using this form for political purposes.

894
01:03:25,240 --> 01:03:32,240
 You have it in the criteria for determining whether something is frivolous or not.

895
01:03:32,240 --> 01:03:37,240
 It's not by accident that you think that you look to factors.

896
01:03:37,240 --> 01:03:45,240
 3A is the timing of the complaint with respect to the date of any pending election.

897
01:03:45,240 --> 01:03:51,240
 Subsection B, the nature and type of publicity surrounding the filing

898
01:03:51,240 --> 01:03:54,240
 and the degree of participation of the complainant

899
01:03:54,240 --> 01:04:01,240
 in publicizing the fact that a complaint was filed.

900
01:04:01,240 --> 01:04:06,240
 Under D, if the respondent, meaning Mr. Meltzer in this case,

901
01:04:06,240 --> 01:04:09,240
 is a candidate for election to office,

902
01:04:09,240 --> 01:04:12,240
 any relationship between the complainant

903
01:04:12,240 --> 01:04:16,240
 and any candidate or group opposing the respondent.

904
01:04:16,240 --> 01:04:18,240
 You've heard testimony.

905
01:04:18,240 --> 01:04:21,240
 Of course, Mr. Campbell wasn't shy about it,

906
01:04:21,240 --> 01:04:24,240
 that he supported the mayor, your art husband,

907
01:04:24,240 --> 01:04:28,240
 and opposed Mr. Messler's candidacy.

908
01:04:28,240 --> 01:04:33,240
 Any evidence that the complainant knew or reasonably should have known

909
01:04:33,240 --> 01:04:38,240
 that the allegations in the complaint were groundless.

910
01:04:38,240 --> 01:04:44,240
 I don't think it's reasonable for someone to contend

911
01:04:44,240 --> 01:04:50,240
 that a document with a notary seal on it

912
01:04:50,240 --> 01:04:55,240
 creates an inference that the notary public who stamped it

913
01:04:55,240 --> 01:05:00,240
 supports the views of the person who created the document,

914
01:05:00,240 --> 01:05:03,240
 which in this case would actually be the mayor,

915
01:05:03,240 --> 01:05:09,240
 or the views of someone who has a copy of that and distributes it to others.

916
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:16,240
 As a matter of fact, if Mr. Campbell had introduced that very document

917
01:05:16,240 --> 01:05:27,240
 before this hearing panel, he could be accused of endorsing Mr. Meltzer,

918
01:05:27,240 --> 01:05:30,240
 because he gave you a copy of the document

919
01:05:30,240 --> 01:05:34,240
 that was notarizing documents that belonged to Mr. Husband.

920
01:05:34,240 --> 01:05:36,240
 I think that's baloney.

921
01:05:36,240 --> 01:05:39,240
 I think this whole mess was created as a political floy,

922
01:05:39,240 --> 01:05:42,240
 and as you heard Mr. Campbell himself admit,

923
01:05:42,240 --> 01:05:46,240
 he knew that he was violating confidentiality.

924
01:05:46,240 --> 01:05:52,240
 He put in his exhibit, "Somebody filed another complaint against Paul Meltzer.

925
01:05:52,240 --> 01:05:54,240
 Somebody sent it to the local newspaper."

926
01:05:54,240 --> 01:05:59,240
 Well, he's that person, and he knew he was violating the code.

927
01:05:59,240 --> 01:06:03,240
 Well, the problem we have here is not just the fact that it's totally obvious

928
01:06:03,240 --> 01:06:08,240
 what was going on with this, but that you don't have an ordinance that has any teeth.

929
01:06:08,240 --> 01:06:12,240
 There were drafts before this eventual ordinance was adopted

930
01:06:12,240 --> 01:06:15,240
 that provided you could ban somebody like Scott Campbell

931
01:06:15,240 --> 01:06:18,240
 from abusing your process for a year.

932
01:06:18,240 --> 01:06:22,240
 I guess I would say move on from changing the ordinance.

933
01:06:22,240 --> 01:06:24,240
 Here, we're just determining the ordinance.

934
01:06:24,240 --> 01:06:25,240
 Okay, I understand.

935
01:06:25,240 --> 01:06:29,240
 I haven't heard any possible motivation that Mr. Campbell has mentioned,

936
01:06:29,240 --> 01:06:33,240
 other than the fact that he did this for a frivolous purpose,

937
01:06:33,240 --> 01:06:37,240
 and as defined under the ordinance, he did it for political purposes.

938
01:06:37,240 --> 01:06:39,240
 He did it four days before the election.

939
01:06:39,240 --> 01:06:42,240
 He had done it before in October of 2020,

940
01:06:42,240 --> 01:06:45,240
 when he filed a complaint against Deb Armand for it,

941
01:06:45,240 --> 01:06:50,240
 if not near, during the early voting period.

942
01:06:50,240 --> 01:06:52,240
 And it was found to be baseless.

943
01:06:52,240 --> 01:06:54,240
 How many times are you going to let Mr. Campbell do it?

944
01:06:54,240 --> 01:06:57,240
 And if Mr. Campbell can do it, why don't we all get to do it?

945
01:06:57,240 --> 01:07:02,240
 Well, because we don't want an ethics ordinance as being abused in that fashion.

946
01:07:02,240 --> 01:07:07,240
 If you don't do something, I urge all of you unanimously,

947
01:07:07,240 --> 01:07:10,240
 I think we need to send a signal out here

948
01:07:10,240 --> 01:07:13,240
 that we're not going to let people like Scott Campbell

949
01:07:13,240 --> 01:07:18,240
 use your ethics board as a vehicle to break the rules.

950
01:07:18,240 --> 01:07:22,240
 He gets to go post on Facebook to who knows how many thousands of people

951
01:07:22,240 --> 01:07:24,240
 four days before an election.

952
01:07:24,240 --> 01:07:30,240
 I submit to you, you couldn't have a more classic example of a frivolous complaint,

953
01:07:30,240 --> 01:07:33,240
 and unfortunately, you can't do anything to stop it,

954
01:07:33,240 --> 01:07:36,240
 but that doesn't mean you can't vote to find a frivolous complaint.

955
01:07:36,240 --> 01:07:37,240
 Thank you.

956
01:07:37,240 --> 01:07:40,240
 Thank you.

957
01:07:40,240 --> 01:07:44,240
 Any rebuttal argument for Mr. Campbell?

958
01:07:44,240 --> 01:07:46,240
 And if you could, again, thank you.

959
01:07:46,240 --> 01:07:54,240
 I can't remember the wording that Mr. Gladden used about my support for Gerard Hutsford,

960
01:07:54,240 --> 01:08:00,240
 but I wouldn't say it was strenuous or whatever the word he used.

961
01:08:00,240 --> 01:08:05,240
 I prefer him over Paul, and everybody has their opinion.

962
01:08:05,240 --> 01:08:12,240
 So I didn't, like I said, I didn't provide any money, I didn't work for his campaign,

963
01:08:12,240 --> 01:08:16,240
 I didn't talk to him, I don't think any during the campaign.

964
01:08:16,240 --> 01:08:21,240
 So that's not correct.

965
01:08:21,240 --> 01:08:31,240
 Other than a supporter, you've got to support somebody, so he was my choice.

966
01:08:31,240 --> 01:08:32,240
 Thank you.

967
01:08:32,240 --> 01:08:33,240
 Thank you.

968
01:08:33,240 --> 01:08:41,240
 Okay, at this point, under rule of procedure E22, I will declare the hearing closed.

969
01:08:41,240 --> 01:08:46,240
 I'll again ask to make sure, does anybody need a break before we go into deliberations?

970
01:08:46,240 --> 01:08:47,240
 Everybody good?

971
01:08:47,240 --> 01:08:48,240
 Okay.

972
01:08:48,240 --> 01:08:51,240
 And then we will go straight into deliberations.

973
01:08:51,240 --> 01:08:58,240
 Madison, can you pull up the factors under 2-82, I believe it's C3?

974
01:08:58,240 --> 01:09:03,240
 Yes, I can.

975
01:09:03,240 --> 01:09:14,240
 And I guess, unless anybody wants to challenge it, I say that we keep these deliberations in open meeting.

976
01:09:14,240 --> 01:09:22,240
 My thoughts about the evidence that we've heard, you know, so there's, well first of all,

977
01:09:22,240 --> 01:09:31,240
 me and Annetta were on that panel, and while the flyer in the DRC was not in the flyer complaint,

978
01:09:31,240 --> 01:09:35,240
 and we discussed that, we also discussed even if the correct flyer was in the complaint,

979
01:09:35,240 --> 01:09:41,240
 we would have come to the same conclusion.

980
01:09:41,240 --> 01:09:47,240
 It was interesting to me, Mr. Campbell said that he never actually saw the planner to solve the DRC,

981
01:09:47,240 --> 01:09:55,240
 yet the flyer that is in the complaint that he filed is a completely different mailer from the DRC one,

982
01:09:55,240 --> 01:09:59,240
 which is confusing to me about how that all worked out.

983
01:09:59,240 --> 01:10:03,240
 He said he did not remember the Facebook post, but we saw the Facebook post,

984
01:10:03,240 --> 01:10:07,240
 and it was also online as part of this agenda.

985
01:10:07,240 --> 01:10:13,240
 He complained of not knowing about bringing evidence,

986
01:10:13,240 --> 01:10:21,240
 but I just don't think it matters because we can consider the correct flyer or the non-correct flyer.

987
01:10:21,240 --> 01:10:25,240
 The ordinance and the rules of procedure are available online,

988
01:10:25,240 --> 01:10:31,240
 and Madison did email everybody about how this would go.

989
01:10:31,240 --> 01:10:35,240
 He also said that he doesn't read or subscribe to the DRC,

990
01:10:35,240 --> 01:10:39,240
 he did share it on Facebook, which is interesting to me.

991
01:10:39,240 --> 01:10:44,240
 As far as the confidentiality of the complaint, I think that's something in our ordinance,

992
01:10:44,240 --> 01:10:49,240
 it's supposed to be confidential, but we can only do anything about public figures.

993
01:10:49,240 --> 01:10:56,240
 That doesn't really weigh into this, even though he was told it was confidential under the ordinance,

994
01:10:56,240 --> 01:11:02,240
 I don't think there's anything that can be done about that, so that doesn't really weigh into my opinion.

995
01:11:02,240 --> 01:11:08,240
 But he did send a complaint, and I'll give everybody a chance to speak,

996
01:11:08,240 --> 01:11:11,240
 but as far as the factors, when you're looking at the timing,

997
01:11:11,240 --> 01:11:14,240
 I think the timing was definitely before the election.

998
01:11:14,240 --> 01:11:23,240
 As far as the publicity under 3B, the DRC, he posted the DRC article,

999
01:11:23,240 --> 01:11:29,240
 he talked about the complaint being filed, he sent his complaint to the DRC,

1000
01:11:29,240 --> 01:11:34,240
 so he appeared to be trying to publicize it.

1001
01:11:34,240 --> 01:11:47,240
 As far as 3C and D, I guess go together, I think there's opinion tests there.

1002
01:11:47,240 --> 01:11:53,240
 Mr. Campbell did support Hudspeth, I believe he said he didn't donate,

1003
01:11:53,240 --> 01:11:57,240
 Melter believes that this was to attack him,

1004
01:11:57,240 --> 01:12:01,240
 and I guess that's what we have with that.

1005
01:12:01,240 --> 01:12:09,240
 As far as E, any evidence of complaint recently should have known,

1006
01:12:09,240 --> 01:12:13,240
 I kind of feel like he has filed complaints before,

1007
01:12:13,240 --> 01:12:20,240
 and he should have known it was groundless considering he's filed a complaint against Deb before,

1008
01:12:20,240 --> 01:12:25,240
 and is aware of our ordinance, and what's a violation,

1009
01:12:25,240 --> 01:12:28,240
 and the fact that he filed it so close to the election,

1010
01:12:28,240 --> 01:12:33,240
 and as far as F, his motives, he said it wasn't a motive,

1011
01:12:33,240 --> 01:12:38,240
 but it's clear he wanted people to know about this days before the election,

1012
01:12:38,240 --> 01:12:42,240
 and I think while he says that's not his motive,

1013
01:12:42,240 --> 01:12:47,240
 I kind of feel like the evidence shows that there was motive to do this before the election,

1014
01:12:47,240 --> 01:12:51,240
 and he had also done it before with Deb,

1015
01:12:51,240 --> 01:12:56,240
 and then the fact that he wanted to withdraw the complaint today once we're looking at it for frivolous,

1016
01:12:56,240 --> 01:12:59,240
 also makes me question voters.

1017
01:12:59,240 --> 01:13:03,240
 Anything else like to speak on this?

1018
01:13:03,240 --> 01:13:08,240
 I'm concerned about the publicity that came out,

1019
01:13:08,240 --> 01:13:11,240
 especially that article on the debt and market chronicle,

1020
01:13:11,240 --> 01:13:13,240
 because I read the comments from readers,

1021
01:13:13,240 --> 01:13:24,240
 and I do think that putting the focus on that notary gate maybe seems to have turned some people,

1022
01:13:24,240 --> 01:13:29,240
 and the second thing and the most important thing is the timing of this complaint.

1023
01:13:29,240 --> 01:13:34,240
 Coming days before the election, the election was close.

1024
01:13:34,240 --> 01:13:37,240
 That's not how the code of ethics should be used.

1025
01:13:37,240 --> 01:13:40,240
 If he really thought it was a problem,

1026
01:13:40,240 --> 01:13:44,240
 he should have waited until the election was over and then filed,

1027
01:13:44,240 --> 01:13:48,240
 but he didn't do that.

1028
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:53,240
 The timing is probably the critical issue for me.

1029
01:13:53,240 --> 01:13:55,240
 I guess I would disagree with one thing.

1030
01:13:55,240 --> 01:13:57,240
 I don't think he necessarily had to wait until the election's over,

1031
01:13:57,240 --> 01:14:03,240
 but I think it's questionable here because he's done it twice against council people,

1032
01:14:03,240 --> 01:14:07,240
 and both times have been baseless claims right before an election,

1033
01:14:07,240 --> 01:14:12,240
 where it just isn't a violation.

1034
01:14:12,240 --> 01:14:19,240
 I think that is my biggest, because we can never know the motivation,

1035
01:14:19,240 --> 01:14:22,240
 because we never will know specifically,

1036
01:14:22,240 --> 01:14:30,240
 but I think that the evidence shows that his desire was to make it more public than it had been just by the article,

1037
01:14:30,240 --> 01:14:35,240
 and that he's definitely weighing in on one side.

1038
01:14:35,240 --> 01:14:44,240
 I would agree that the Facebook post speaks to his motivation of why he longed for the complaint.

1039
01:14:44,240 --> 01:14:47,240
 I do think it is very concerning.

1040
01:14:47,240 --> 01:14:51,240
 Yes, we don't have a way of reacting to this necessarily,

1041
01:14:51,240 --> 01:14:58,240
 but I think the frivolity of the claim is a concern to me,

1042
01:14:58,240 --> 01:15:09,240
 because then the timing becomes questionable being so close to the election.

1043
01:15:09,240 --> 01:15:18,240
 I have a real concern because it's not really actionable,

1044
01:15:18,240 --> 01:15:25,240
 but at the same time it's like a key piece of evidence went missing out of a packet that was submitted,

1045
01:15:25,240 --> 01:15:29,240
 and then an email that prevented him from providing evidence that was sent out,

1046
01:15:29,240 --> 01:15:34,240
 but is not available for him to read to us either,

1047
01:15:34,240 --> 01:15:40,240
 so there's a lot of pieces missing that he's weighing very heavily on in his testimony,

1048
01:15:40,240 --> 01:15:48,240
 so that's a concern of mine.

1049
01:15:48,240 --> 01:15:50,240
 Comments? Deborah?

1050
01:15:50,240 --> 01:15:55,240
 You have pretty much stumped up my thoughts on this as well.

1051
01:15:55,240 --> 01:16:03,240
 I'm concerned about the time, but even if it was -- if he's gone ahead and submitted it,

1052
01:16:03,240 --> 01:16:12,240
 the fact that he publicized it and then denied the Facebook page when first asked about that,

1053
01:16:12,240 --> 01:16:16,240
 that also concerns me,

1054
01:16:16,240 --> 01:16:23,240
 and I think that we also need to review the ethics code of the morning frivolity.

1055
01:16:23,240 --> 01:16:30,240
 Yeah, I think whatever happens today, I think sanctions will be something we discuss at a later meeting,

1056
01:16:30,240 --> 01:16:38,240
 and just I think overall frivolous hearings and in hearings do not change things,

1057
01:16:38,240 --> 01:16:43,240
 because the hearing portions of the procedure and ordinance are just directed straight at complaints

1058
01:16:43,240 --> 01:16:47,240
 and not what we're doing here today, which today is the first frivolous hearing,

1059
01:16:47,240 --> 01:16:51,240
 so it's all good to us.

1060
01:16:51,240 --> 01:16:53,240
 Any more comments? Sorry, I might have busted it.

1061
01:16:53,240 --> 01:17:01,240
 Well, I also have a question about the testimony that there was a patient in the complaint,

1062
01:17:01,240 --> 01:17:07,240
 and I think that that needs to either be substantiated or not.

1063
01:17:07,240 --> 01:17:10,240
 I don't think it's fair to just kind of leave it hanging out there.

1064
01:17:10,240 --> 01:17:20,240
 Was it part of the process, or was it really not there? We don't know.

1065
01:17:20,240 --> 01:17:25,240
 Rob, any comments?

1066
01:17:25,240 --> 01:17:30,240
 Tiny. This is political.

1067
01:17:30,240 --> 01:17:34,240
 I don't know how many flyers you received, but I was thinking of getting a larger mailbox.

1068
01:17:34,240 --> 01:17:40,240
 I thought we were through with the scale mail, and I was getting flyers upon flyers upon flyers.

1069
01:17:40,240 --> 01:17:49,240
 How any of you could have kept it straight as to which one you got in a time frame, I marvel at you.

1070
01:17:49,240 --> 01:17:52,240
 Candles are a member of the public.

1071
01:17:52,240 --> 01:18:00,240
 Now, to that extent, this is a wonderful learning curve, I think, for the public, if they would look at this,

1072
01:18:00,240 --> 01:18:05,240
 as to what this ethics board and the document is for.

1073
01:18:05,240 --> 01:18:12,240
 But I asked myself, as I was listening to them, because Adam, excuse me, said, you know, this has motif.

1074
01:18:12,240 --> 01:18:17,240
 And we're not going to talk about that today, but we're going to see if this is frivolous or not.

1075
01:18:17,240 --> 01:18:23,240
 So my question would be, what is wrong with encouraging the public to use the ethics board?

1076
01:18:23,240 --> 01:18:29,240
 This current process was put in place to decide why we're here today.

1077
01:18:29,240 --> 01:18:36,240
 And so the question then is, are we to stifle complaints we view as unacceptable,

1078
01:18:36,240 --> 01:18:39,240
 but it is viewed as important to the public.

1079
01:18:39,240 --> 01:18:45,240
 I think we need to get, we're in a balance of, we have the frivolous and it's outlined.

1080
01:18:45,240 --> 01:18:49,240
 The public needs to understand that, because they may think that's very important,

1081
01:18:49,240 --> 01:18:54,240
 whatever Mr. Campbell thought, it was very important, because he went through the whole process.

1082
01:18:54,240 --> 01:18:57,240
 It's viewed by many that it was incorrect.

1083
01:18:57,240 --> 01:19:03,240
 But I don't think we should stifle the public from submitting this,

1084
01:19:03,240 --> 01:19:11,240
 for them to get, in a sense, their own learning curve, by not going, well, I didn't mean to point at you, sir.

1085
01:19:11,240 --> 01:19:18,240
 Mr. Campbell put away with rather quickly, maybe I will think twice before I file a complaint.

1086
01:19:18,240 --> 01:19:35,240
 But I just want to make sure that we don't stifle that in this thought of whether this was frivolous or not.

1087
01:19:35,240 --> 01:19:41,240
 More discussion, more deliberation?

1088
01:19:41,240 --> 01:19:51,240
 I mean, I would, I think, kind of made my thoughts clear that, you know, I think the timing that we have two complaints filed this close to an election,

1089
01:19:51,240 --> 01:19:55,240
 you know, while I don't want to stifle complaints in any way,

1090
01:19:55,240 --> 01:20:03,240
 I do not want to encourage people to file complaints that are not, are baseless complaints,

1091
01:20:03,240 --> 01:20:11,240
 and possibly, obviously baseless complaints, days within an election, to affect elections.

1092
01:20:11,240 --> 01:20:15,240
 Is there any comment, or is there any motion?

1093
01:20:15,240 --> 01:20:23,240
 I would actually like to make a comment, because I really do not think, I don't think that the influence

1094
01:20:23,240 --> 01:20:31,240
 that was potentially put on the election was not, was not effectuated by the actual complaint.

1095
01:20:31,240 --> 01:20:36,240
 It was effectuated by the Facebook case post about the complaint.

1096
01:20:36,240 --> 01:20:48,240
 And I think that is where, because if we're allowing a complaint, and the process remains confidential,

1097
01:20:48,240 --> 01:20:52,240
 there would have been no harm at all, potentially.

1098
01:20:52,240 --> 01:21:05,240
 The harm comes in when the ethicode was by the complainant misused, and then, and he made it public through other means.

1099
01:21:05,240 --> 01:21:15,240
 So I'm not, I don't necessarily see a concern if this is found frivolous, that it will stifle an actual complaint in the process at all,

1100
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:24,240
 because in reality, the influence was put into the public by the Facebook post.

1101
01:21:24,240 --> 01:21:28,240
 Any more questions?

1102
01:21:28,240 --> 01:21:30,240
 Can we entertain a motion?

1103
01:21:30,240 --> 01:21:32,240
 Yeah, oh yeah, go for it.

1104
01:21:32,240 --> 01:21:35,240
 I move that we find this frivolous.

1105
01:21:35,240 --> 01:21:37,240
 I second that.

1106
01:21:37,240 --> 01:21:49,240
 Okay, motion and second it. Is there more, well, you know, it's kind of deliberation, so we've been discussing it the whole time. Is there more discussion on this?

1107
01:21:49,240 --> 01:22:00,240
 And just to make the record clear, the motion is to find the complaint frivolous, because I think you used the word "this" frivolous, so we need to be clear on the motion.

1108
01:22:00,240 --> 01:22:08,240
 Alright, so the motion that has been made by that and seconded by Andrea is that the motion is frivolous.

1109
01:22:08,240 --> 01:22:10,240
 No, not the motion, it's the complaint.

1110
01:22:10,240 --> 01:22:15,240
 I'm sorry, the complaint was frivolous.

1111
01:22:15,240 --> 01:22:20,240
 Alright, so is there one more call for any further discussion?

1112
01:22:20,240 --> 01:22:29,240
 Alright, so I am going to ask for a roll call vote, you know, not to call anyone out, but since, you know, it's important how many votes there are.

1113
01:22:29,240 --> 01:22:30,240
 Deborah?

1114
01:22:30,240 --> 01:22:31,240
 Yes.

1115
01:22:31,240 --> 01:22:32,240
 Annette?

1116
01:22:32,240 --> 01:22:33,240
 Yes.

1117
01:22:33,240 --> 01:22:34,240
 And myself?

1118
01:22:34,240 --> 01:22:35,240
 Laura?

1119
01:22:35,240 --> 01:22:36,240
 Yes.

1120
01:22:36,240 --> 01:22:37,240
 Andrea?

1121
01:22:37,240 --> 01:22:38,240
 Yes.

1122
01:22:38,240 --> 01:22:39,240
 Monroe?

1123
01:22:39,240 --> 01:22:40,240
 Yes.

1124
01:22:40,240 --> 01:22:51,240
 Okay, alright, so unanimously yes, and that's five members, and Dottie, I believe you said that you need at least five, because it's the super majority of the members of the board, Andrea?

1125
01:22:51,240 --> 01:22:57,240
 Correct, so it would be two-thirds of seven, which would be four point something, but you'd round it up to five.

1126
01:22:57,240 --> 01:23:07,240
 So we have five, so we have found the complaint frivolous, and now sanctions, which I've been trying to not get into because it's-

1127
01:23:07,240 --> 01:23:36,240
 Well, I don't think sanctions apply here, because when you look at page 18, it says, "determines by simple majority vote of those present and voted at the conclusion of a hearing that a violation has occurred." So you really don't have a remedy for a frivolous complaint other than the complaint may be subject to criminal prosecution for perjury or civil liability for torts of defamation or abuse of process.

1128
01:23:36,240 --> 01:23:44,240
 And I would remind you that your ethics ordinance is an ordinance of the city, so you could be prosecuted in the municipal court.

1129
01:23:44,240 --> 01:23:51,240
 But I don't- if the board looks at sanctions, I don't- and it's up to the board if you believe sanctions-

1130
01:23:51,240 --> 01:24:04,240
 Well, I guess I would draw your attention to C2, which is up there, super majority, and it says that if it's found frivolous, the board may impose a sat sanction as provided from 2-282(b).

1131
01:24:04,240 --> 01:24:05,240
 Okay.

1132
01:24:05,240 --> 01:24:17,240
 So I feel like that two- while it says simple majority under sanctions, I feel like the super majority of two-thirds, it says then you can do any of the sanctions under the sanctions.

1133
01:24:17,240 --> 01:24:26,240
 So I don't know. I mean, you can tell me if that's wrong, but I guess that's how I read it.

1134
01:24:26,240 --> 01:24:46,240
 Make it clear that you're referring back to that if you are going to impose sanctions, it's going to be under C2, which allows you to use the sanctions for a- at a conclusion of a hearing.

1135
01:24:46,240 --> 01:24:50,240
 Because it's kind of confusing with these two words, vote and-

1136
01:24:50,240 --> 01:24:53,240
 It is. That's a very valid point.

1137
01:24:53,240 --> 01:25:04,240
 And I think once you go to sanctions, like we're kind of arguing over this, but truly the sanctions recommendation of suspension, that's just for board members, so that's not applicable.

1138
01:25:04,240 --> 01:25:09,240
 Ineligibility is just vendors, so that's not applicable.

1139
01:25:09,240 --> 01:25:26,240
 So I think the only thing we need to do is a letter. You know, it's not much, but I think we can do, you know, I think under, like Dottie had said, in a letter refer to the C2 that refers you back to 2-282(b),

1140
01:25:26,240 --> 01:25:40,240
 and you could do a letter of notification at admonation or referent. And actually, yeah, Madison, if you could go to the previous page. Like I said, I think suspension and ineligibility just doesn't apply.

1141
01:25:40,240 --> 01:25:51,240
 And I think later on we'll have to have a discussion of what do you do for frivolous folks, because you don't want to necessarily- you don't want somebody to not be able to file something because it's frivolous, because what if they got something good later?

1142
01:25:51,240 --> 01:26:01,240
 You know, I think that's going to be an interesting discussion for us to have. But for tonight, I think our only options are those three letters.

1143
01:26:01,240 --> 01:26:11,240
 So letter one is that the violation is clearly intentional, but I think by us finding it frivolous, I don't think that one applies.

1144
01:26:11,240 --> 01:26:23,240
 Letter of admonition, if the Board of Ethics finds that the violation is minor and may have been unintentional, I'm not so sure that applies since we're thinking it's intentional.

1145
01:26:23,240 --> 01:26:33,240
 And then letter of reprimand, if the violation is minor, was committed knowingly, intelligently, or in disregard of this article, or was serious and may have been unintentional.

1146
01:26:33,240 --> 01:26:42,240
 I guess I would- I would think letter of reprimand, just based on, I think by us finding it frivolous, we're finding that it was an intentional act.

1147
01:26:42,240 --> 01:26:52,240
 But I'll open it up if anybody has comments.

1148
01:26:52,240 --> 01:27:07,240
 Oh, go ahead. Oh, I thought you were trying to- I have nothing to say. Okay, I thought you were trying to get my attention. Alright, so let me go through the rules of procedure that I had to read through several times.

1149
01:27:07,240 --> 01:27:34,240
 Alright. Okay, so. Alright, so we made the determination. And as far as the sanctions, I guess, Dottie, can you just- again, not completely clear, but do we just ask for a motion and vote on it, and then we- later me and Madison get together and write a letter?

1150
01:27:34,240 --> 01:27:42,240
 I think if you're going to do a letter of reprimand, you need to first vote on whether it's under 3A or 3B.

1151
01:27:42,240 --> 01:28:11,240
 Okay. And then request that the letter be sent by the city auditor of your decision. But as far as what's in the letter of reprimand, I don't know if there's any guidance anywhere to tell you what to put in it other than

1152
01:28:11,240 --> 01:28:18,240
 we're issuing a letter of reprimand under 3A or 3B.

1153
01:28:18,240 --> 01:28:43,240
 Yeah, I guess not exactly clear. I guess, you know, if- So you can determine based on the evidence that you're issuing a letter of reprimand and say it's 3A because, you know, it was minor and committed knowingly and intentionally and disregarded the ethics ordinance.

1154
01:28:43,240 --> 01:28:50,240
 Or you could say we're issuing a letter of reprimand because it was serious but may have been unintentional.

1155
01:28:50,240 --> 01:28:51,240
 Which is another-

1156
01:28:51,240 --> 01:28:53,240
 Whatever you think kind of fits the evidence.

1157
01:28:53,240 --> 01:28:56,240
 Right, which is another interesting part of our-

1158
01:28:56,240 --> 01:28:57,240
 I don't think either one of those-

1159
01:28:57,240 --> 01:29:08,240
 Yeah, another interesting part of our sanctions that- that's kind of two choices that don't cover all situations.

1160
01:29:08,240 --> 01:29:16,240
 But I kind of think it might- I kind of think 3A would be the closest thing to fit.

1161
01:29:16,240 --> 01:29:33,240
 We didn't- we haven't really discussed whether this is minor or major. I mean, you know, it would be a lot longer hearing if we had a hearing of whether- how many votes- voters this affected and things like that to really determine how minor or committed this was.

1162
01:29:33,240 --> 01:29:46,240
 So I guess I would say, do we have any discussion or is there anyone that would like to make a motion on what kind of sanction we should file on this?

1163
01:29:46,240 --> 01:29:47,240
 Deborah?

1164
01:29:47,240 --> 01:30:03,240
 I move that we send a letter of reprimand to Mr. Cavill for 3A. So it's committed 9-way and 10-way in this regard.

1165
01:30:03,240 --> 01:30:05,240
 Do I have a second?

1166
01:30:05,240 --> 01:30:06,240
 A second, ma'am.

1167
01:30:06,240 --> 01:30:26,240
 A motion and second, and we've kind of been deliberating this whole time, but I think- I guess in the letter we would refer to the supermajority vote section, we would refer to the sanction section and to 3A.

1168
01:30:26,240 --> 01:30:29,240
 Is there any more discussion on that or should we vote?

1169
01:30:29,240 --> 01:30:30,240
 Yes, Rob?

1170
01:30:30,240 --> 01:30:35,240
 So the complainant will receive this letter.

1171
01:30:35,240 --> 01:30:36,240
 Yes.

1172
01:30:36,240 --> 01:30:41,240
 And a copy goes to the city secretary?

1173
01:30:41,240 --> 01:30:45,240
 I- do you know, Madison?

1174
01:30:45,240 --> 01:31:01,240
 The letter would be filed for your proceedings here and anybody that was requested from the city secretary would get a copy because it's a public record.

1175
01:31:01,240 --> 01:31:11,240
 So we will be submitting a motion to letter of reprimand A and what is the meat of the matter within the letter?

1176
01:31:11,240 --> 01:31:19,240
 Well, I guess we could discuss that now or after we- I mean, I think it's not clear what we have to put in it.

1177
01:31:19,240 --> 01:31:34,240
 I think we could just- honestly, I kind of think we could just put the evidence has shown that this was frivolous and maybe you can refer to this meeting and that you can go look at this meeting and watch the evidence and our discussions on it.

1178
01:31:34,240 --> 01:31:41,240
 I think you just make a finding that the board is issuing this letter of reprimand under 3A.

1179
01:31:41,240 --> 01:31:48,240
 They're making this finding and then authorize the chairman to sign it and send it to the complainant.

1180
01:31:48,240 --> 01:31:50,240
 So just very bare bones?

1181
01:31:50,240 --> 01:31:51,240
 Right.

1182
01:31:51,240 --> 01:31:52,240
 You know, this was-

1183
01:31:52,240 --> 01:31:53,240
 Because you don't have enough.

1184
01:31:53,240 --> 01:31:54,240
 Okay.

1185
01:31:54,240 --> 01:32:10,240
 And that's been discussed here today is there's really no teeth in this other than it will be on the record that it was found frivolous and that it under- and then the findings under 3A and then authorize the chairman to sign it.

1186
01:32:10,240 --> 01:32:16,240
 I think that's what we would need to comply.

1187
01:32:16,240 --> 01:32:26,240
 So just be a very kind of bare bones letter of this was violated and this is your letter of reprimand under this section of the ordinance.

1188
01:32:26,240 --> 01:32:28,240
 Any other discussion on that?

1189
01:32:28,240 --> 01:32:33,240
 I guess I'll call a vote on the motion to send the letter to Mr. Campbell.

1190
01:32:33,240 --> 01:32:36,240
 Letter of reprimand under 3A.

1191
01:32:36,240 --> 01:32:37,240
 All in favor say aye.

1192
01:32:37,240 --> 01:32:38,240
 Aye.

1193
01:32:38,240 --> 01:32:39,240
 All opposed.

1194
01:32:39,240 --> 01:32:40,240
 Aye.

1195
01:32:40,240 --> 01:32:47,240
 All right so we have the majority and we're out of the super majority so we can just go forward and put that majority, right?

1196
01:32:47,240 --> 01:32:48,240
 Simple majority.

1197
01:32:48,240 --> 01:32:49,240
 Okay.

1198
01:32:49,240 --> 01:32:58,240
 All right so then I think Madison and I will get to work on a letter and I think that that would conclude.

1199
01:32:58,240 --> 01:33:00,240
 Am I missing anything?

1200
01:33:00,240 --> 01:33:05,240
 So I think it does say somewhere that the chairman is authorized to sign that letter.

1201
01:33:05,240 --> 01:33:06,240
 Okay.

1202
01:33:06,240 --> 01:33:13,240
 Of notification but I think y'all just put that on the record to authorize the chairman to sign the letter on behalf of the board.

1203
01:33:13,240 --> 01:33:23,240
 Okay so if I could get a motion to authorize the chair, me and Laura Conlin, to sign the letter of reprimand.

1204
01:33:23,240 --> 01:33:24,240
 Cool.

1205
01:33:24,240 --> 01:33:25,240
 Cool.

1206
01:33:25,240 --> 01:33:26,240
 I'm sorry.

1207
01:33:26,240 --> 01:33:27,240
 Yes.

1208
01:33:27,240 --> 01:33:28,240
 I'll make that motion.

1209
01:33:28,240 --> 01:33:29,240
 I have a question.

1210
01:33:29,240 --> 01:33:30,240
 Okay.

1211
01:33:30,240 --> 01:33:31,240
 I second that motion.

1212
01:33:31,240 --> 01:33:32,240
 Okay.

1213
01:33:32,240 --> 01:33:33,240
 Motion is made and seconded.

1214
01:33:33,240 --> 01:33:40,240
 So if you'll sign this, does this go to the city council at all for any reason?

1215
01:33:40,240 --> 01:33:42,240
 I don't know.

1216
01:33:42,240 --> 01:33:48,240
 I mean I think it's going to be publicly available but I don't, I can't remember reading something in the ordinance or rules that it does.

1217
01:33:48,240 --> 01:33:50,240
 I think some things that we.

1218
01:33:50,240 --> 01:33:52,240
 It seems like everything we've done.

1219
01:33:52,240 --> 01:33:53,240
 Yeah.

1220
01:33:53,240 --> 01:33:55,240
 I don't know if that was the case with this or not.

1221
01:33:55,240 --> 01:34:06,240
 I'm not sure Dottie or Madison can answer but I kind of feel like that some of the issues we've found in the ordinance are going to eventually go to council when we discuss it.

1222
01:34:06,240 --> 01:34:08,240
 But you know how that timeline goes.

1223
01:34:08,240 --> 01:34:09,240
 This section here.

1224
01:34:09,240 --> 01:34:11,240
 Oh, there we go.

1225
01:34:11,240 --> 01:34:12,240
 Thank you Madison.

1226
01:34:12,240 --> 01:34:13,240
 It's right in front of our faces.

1227
01:34:13,240 --> 01:34:15,240
 I just scrolled down.

1228
01:34:15,240 --> 01:34:16,240
 Okay.

1229
01:34:16,240 --> 01:34:17,240
 Notice.

1230
01:34:17,240 --> 01:34:18,240
 There was a snake on this.

1231
01:34:18,240 --> 01:34:25,240
 Notice of all sanction imposed by the Board of Ethics shall be transmitted to the respondent, complainant, city auditor, city attorney, and city council.

1232
01:34:25,240 --> 01:34:29,240
 So yes, city council will get a copy of this.

1233
01:34:29,240 --> 01:34:30,240
 Okay.

1234
01:34:30,240 --> 01:34:32,240
 So any more discussion about me signing it?

1235
01:34:32,240 --> 01:34:34,240
 I don't know if that's necessarily a.

1236
01:34:34,240 --> 01:34:35,240
 Okay.

1237
01:34:35,240 --> 01:34:36,240
 All right.

1238
01:34:36,240 --> 01:34:40,240
 To take a vote, all in favor of the chairperson, me, Laura Tomlin.

1239
01:34:40,240 --> 01:34:44,240
 Motion for me, Laura Tomlin, the chairperson to sign the letter.

1240
01:34:44,240 --> 01:34:45,240
 All in favor say aye.

1241
01:34:45,240 --> 01:34:46,240
 Aye.

1242
01:34:46,240 --> 01:34:47,240
 All opposed.

1243
01:34:47,240 --> 01:34:49,240
 Okay.

1244
01:34:49,240 --> 01:34:50,240
 Anything else?

1245
01:34:50,240 --> 01:34:51,240
 Okay.

1246
01:34:51,240 --> 01:34:52,240
 All right.

1247
01:34:52,240 --> 01:34:58,240
 Well, if there's nothing else from the board, I will adjourn this meeting.

1248
01:34:58,240 --> 01:35:01,240
 Thank you all for your time and participation.

1249
01:35:01,240 --> 01:35:04,240
 I'll see you next time, people.