1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,800
 less easy to spell it. It's M-O-A-R. Yeah, I'm sure you get it wrong all the time.

2
00:00:04,800 --> 00:00:12,320
 All right, it's six. So everybody ready? I don't know. I guess it's probably just recording.

3
00:00:12,320 --> 00:00:20,000
 Yep. Okay. All right. So we'll call to order this specially called meeting of the Board of Ethics.

4
00:00:22,560 --> 00:00:32,640
 So we have one agenda item. BOE 22-02022. Request for an advisory opinion number 22-001. Received

5
00:00:32,640 --> 00:00:41,360
 June 15, 2022 from City Auditor Madison Warshak concerning potential pending matters, conflict of

6
00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:49,760
 interest applicability, and refusal recommendation. And since Madison is asking for this, we have Chris

7
00:00:49,760 --> 00:00:58,720
 Moore here in her place for the meeting. Let's see. So let me see. On the agenda information sheet,

8
00:00:58,720 --> 00:01:08,160
 pretty much says the same thing. She's asked for that. And we need to come up with an advisory

9
00:01:08,160 --> 00:01:12,800
 opinion within 30 days of this receipt. So we'll have this meeting tonight. And then afterwards,

10
00:01:12,800 --> 00:01:17,120
 I can write something up with our findings and we'll send it to Chris.

11
00:01:18,560 --> 00:01:24,560
 So I think that's important on there. So we'll get to what she has asked.

12
00:01:24,560 --> 00:01:37,040
 So Madison was elected as the president or the, I guess, let's see, maybe not president. Let me

13
00:01:37,040 --> 00:01:44,640
 not word that wrong. At-large board member. At-large board member for the Association of

14
00:01:44,640 --> 00:01:51,600
 Local Government Auditors. And so she asked us to consider two questions. If she has a current

15
00:01:51,600 --> 00:01:56,000
 conflicting interest by serving on the board of directors of the Association of Local Government

16
00:01:56,000 --> 00:02:02,400
 Auditors, as described in an email that we all got, saying she is a member or a board member of

17
00:02:02,400 --> 00:02:09,440
 it. And if so, under the conflict of interest prohibit prohibition 2-273A, which is conflict

18
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:15,200
 of interest, is her office prohibited from being a member of the association using city funds or

19
00:02:15,200 --> 00:02:24,480
 paying for training events using city funds? And she also sent us her contract with the city,

20
00:02:24,480 --> 00:02:30,480
 which says the city will pay for her dues and for her, you know, I guess it's her conferences.

21
00:02:31,600 --> 00:02:39,360
 Let's see, it's section 12 of her contract. Employer, the city agrees to budget and pay for

22
00:02:39,360 --> 00:02:45,680
 professional dues, memberships and subscriptions as needed and participation in national, regional,

23
00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:53,600
 state and local organizations. And then I also emailed her today. And I think Chris Moore was

24
00:02:53,600 --> 00:03:01,600
 actually CC'd on all of it. And so that Dustin and Patricia can know that I had asked her like, so how

25
00:03:01,600 --> 00:03:06,320
 does this come about when you are going to go to a conference or pay dues, you go in front of the

26
00:03:06,320 --> 00:03:12,640
 city and say like, I want this money. And she replied that, well, she gave me a long reply.

27
00:03:12,640 --> 00:03:17,360
 And I was like, so to clarify, you propose the budget for the city auditors, which includes the

28
00:03:17,360 --> 00:03:23,040
 dues, conferences and travel, and it's approved as part of the city budget instead of standalone.

29
00:03:23,040 --> 00:03:28,880
 And she said, correct. And Chris, you can jump in if I'm getting any of that wrong, but it sounds

30
00:03:28,880 --> 00:03:35,040
 like her dues and conferences and travels for conferences of this association isn't standalone.

31
00:03:35,040 --> 00:03:43,040
 It's part of the city budget, which I think is important when we go to the ordinance,

32
00:03:43,040 --> 00:03:51,120
 because under conflict of interest, it's about what deliberation is prohibited

33
00:03:51,920 --> 00:03:58,960
 and deliberation doesn't include the city budget. So if her dues are part of the city budget-

34
00:03:58,960 --> 00:04:02,560
 It's not really benefiting her, it's benefiting the city.

35
00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:09,120
 Yeah, that's correct. But I think it doesn't even, as far as whether it's a conflict of interest,

36
00:04:09,120 --> 00:04:18,800
 I think when you look at 2-273(a)(3)(f), if she serves as a board of directors or an officer

37
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:24,880
 on a non-profit corporation or on a corporate association, she is on the board of an unincorporated

38
00:04:24,880 --> 00:04:30,960
 association. But then when you go into the prohibited deliberation, there's no deliberation

39
00:04:30,960 --> 00:04:35,520
 because it doesn't fall under deliberation under the code because it's part of the city budget.

40
00:04:35,520 --> 00:04:44,320
 I think that the provision about the board of directors, I think it was probably put in place

41
00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:49,360
 to say if somebody on council is also sitting on a non-profit board, they can't vote for their

42
00:04:49,360 --> 00:04:57,200
 non-profit to get money. But I can see why Madison could possibly fit under it as well,

43
00:04:57,200 --> 00:05:02,480
 since she is a city official and she is on this board of an association. So I think unfortunately,

44
00:05:02,480 --> 00:05:18,960
 she might fall under it. But my opinion would be like you may fall under the 2-273(a)(3)(f),

45
00:05:18,960 --> 00:05:24,000
 but since it's part of the city budget, it wouldn't actually be a conflict of interest

46
00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:29,040
 because there's no prohibited deliberation because it's the budget. So it falls under

47
00:05:30,560 --> 00:05:37,600
 not being deliberation. Let's see, because I think deliberation is defined under the

48
00:05:37,600 --> 00:05:45,360
 definitions portion of the ordinance and the last sentence is this term is not applied to

49
00:05:45,360 --> 00:05:51,520
 general vote on a broad comprehensive or omnibus motion such as approval of the city budget or

50
00:05:51,520 --> 00:06:00,480
 polling places. So what do you guys think? I think that was pretty summary. I mean, I think by the

51
00:06:00,480 --> 00:06:10,720
 definition of conflicting interest and item F, I mean that describes this situation completely.

52
00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:18,800
 She's on the board and wasn't appointed there by the city council. So I think they answered her

53
00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:27,200
 question one in her email. Yes. Regarding using the city funds to pay for the training events.

54
00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:32,640
 I mean, since that is part of the budget, there is no deliberation. I mean,

55
00:06:32,640 --> 00:06:43,600
 she's not proposing any motion or any item for the council to consider other than the training funds

56
00:06:43,600 --> 00:06:51,840
 for her department. And if you, she, I think you said she provided her employment contract

57
00:06:51,840 --> 00:06:58,320
 and the contract specifically says that the city will pay for professional dues,

58
00:06:58,320 --> 00:07:08,720
 memberships and subscriptions. And this is part of her, that's section 12 and then section 13 is

59
00:07:08,720 --> 00:07:15,280
 professional development. And that covers that as well. So in her email to the council, she

60
00:07:15,280 --> 00:07:24,800
 disclosed, she disclosed her membership on the board. That's covered or that that's required

61
00:07:24,800 --> 00:07:32,880
 under section 10 of her contract. So I think she covered that. And the participation in board

62
00:07:32,880 --> 00:07:39,760
 meetings is not going to be, she's not using city funds for that. So it's kind of, I mean,

63
00:07:39,760 --> 00:07:47,600
 I think by the letter of how it's stated in the, in the ordinance, it does fall under conflicting

64
00:07:47,600 --> 00:07:57,360
 interest, but I don't think that any of the deliberation applies here. And she's already

65
00:07:57,360 --> 00:08:06,800
 disclosed this to the council and the council unanimously approved her contract that includes,

66
00:08:06,800 --> 00:08:14,320
 that doesn't preclude her from being a member of a board and does allow for her to use

67
00:08:14,320 --> 00:08:20,480
 city funds for professional dues and membership. I think, I mean, it's kind of in the best interest

68
00:08:20,480 --> 00:08:32,240
 of the city to allow participation for professional development. So I mean, to me, I'll stop there.

69
00:08:32,240 --> 00:08:37,120
 I mean, to me, I mean, I think we're doing the right thing by reviewing this, but I don't really

70
00:08:37,120 --> 00:08:44,320
 think the way the ordinance was written was for this type of, you know, to prevent this type of

71
00:08:45,120 --> 00:08:51,520
 activity. I mean, I think this is doing the right thing by asking for us to issue an opinion on this.

72
00:08:51,520 --> 00:08:57,440
 I agree with that also, just unless there's some kind of

73
00:08:57,440 --> 00:09:02,480
 scenario somebody can come up with it would see that it would be any kind of

74
00:09:02,480 --> 00:09:08,160
 conflict of interest, but I couldn't think of one. So yeah, I mean, I don't think this

75
00:09:08,160 --> 00:09:14,080
 specifically is if she had to go before the city to try to get more money to give to them. I mean,

76
00:09:14,080 --> 00:09:19,920
 I think that might get us in the realm of maybe a conflict of interest, but since this was things

77
00:09:19,920 --> 00:09:24,400
 that enter contract, the city has said they're going to pay for it. And then they also approved

78
00:09:24,400 --> 00:09:29,680
 the budget, which included paying for this. I just don't think there's, there's a problem.

79
00:09:29,680 --> 00:09:40,560
 I think we're all on the same page. So I guess to answer your question, we'll say yes, by the

80
00:09:40,560 --> 00:09:48,800
 ordinance, you are, you're an at large member of this association. And then, but number two,

81
00:09:48,800 --> 00:09:54,800
 you, the city approved your contract that they would pay for all these things.

82
00:09:54,800 --> 00:10:01,200
 And they approved the budget in which we would pay, they would pay for all these things. And

83
00:10:01,200 --> 00:10:07,520
 under the sex under, you don't fall under deliberations or conflict of interest violation

84
00:10:07,520 --> 00:10:12,320
 because it was part of the budget. So we don't have a conflict of interest. Does that sound

85
00:10:12,320 --> 00:10:18,240
 about right? Yeah. Can you think of anything that would be a conflict of interest for participating

86
00:10:18,240 --> 00:10:25,040
 in that organization? Plus being not in this instance, nothing comes up with a city that would

87
00:10:25,040 --> 00:10:32,160
 anything from city attorney's office? I'm not here to give any ethics opinions.

88
00:10:33,520 --> 00:10:39,040
 Okay. All right. Well, I'm not sure what you're hearing. You're not even going to advise this.

89
00:10:39,040 --> 00:10:45,840
 I'm here as a prolegarian for this. Okay. All right. Okay. So I think we have it and I'll just

90
00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:50,800
 write something up and I'll send it to Chris. Is there anything? I don't, that was the only thing

91
00:10:50,800 --> 00:11:01,520
 on the agenda, right? So we'll need a motion. Oh, okay. That's right. Okay. So can I get a

92
00:11:01,520 --> 00:11:08,240
 motion to write an advisory opinion as we just discussed? I'll make that motion. All right.

93
00:11:08,240 --> 00:11:13,440
 Motion and a second. Okay. All in favor of writing an advisory opinion of what we've

94
00:11:13,440 --> 00:11:20,640
 discussed today, say aye. Aye. Motion is approved. And now is there anything else?

95
00:11:20,640 --> 00:11:27,760
 All right. Well, then I'll adjourn. Thank you for your time.