less easy to spell it. It's M-O-A-R. Yeah, I'm sure you get it wrong all the time.
All right, it's six. So everybody ready? I don't know. I guess it's probably just recording.
Yep. Okay. All right. So we'll call to order this specially called meeting of the Board of Ethics.
So we have one agenda item. BOE 22-02022. Request for an advisory opinion number 22-001. Received
June 15, 2022 from City Auditor Madison Warshak concerning potential pending matters, conflict of
interest applicability, and refusal recommendation. And since Madison is asking for this, we have Chris
Moore here in her place for the meeting. Let's see. So let me see. On the agenda information sheet,
pretty much says the same thing. She's asked for that. And we need to come up with an advisory
opinion within 30 days of this receipt. So we'll have this meeting tonight. And then afterwards,
I can write something up with our findings and we'll send it to Chris.
So I think that's important on there. So we'll get to what she has asked.
So Madison was elected as the president or the, I guess, let's see, maybe not president. Let me
not word that wrong. At-large board member. At-large board member for the Association of
Local Government Auditors. And so she asked us to consider two questions. If she has a current
conflicting interest by serving on the board of directors of the Association of Local Government
Auditors, as described in an email that we all got, saying she is a member or a board member of
it. And if so, under the conflict of interest prohibit prohibition 2-273A, which is conflict
of interest, is her office prohibited from being a member of the association using city funds or
paying for training events using city funds? And she also sent us her contract with the city,
which says the city will pay for her dues and for her, you know, I guess it's her conferences.
Let's see, it's section 12 of her contract. Employer, the city agrees to budget and pay for
professional dues, memberships and subscriptions as needed and participation in national, regional,
state and local organizations. And then I also emailed her today. And I think Chris Moore was
actually CC'd on all of it. And so that Dustin and Patricia can know that I had asked her like, so how
does this come about when you are going to go to a conference or pay dues, you go in front of the
city and say like, I want this money. And she replied that, well, she gave me a long reply.
And I was like, so to clarify, you propose the budget for the city auditors, which includes the
dues, conferences and travel, and it's approved as part of the city budget instead of standalone.
And she said, correct. And Chris, you can jump in if I'm getting any of that wrong, but it sounds
like her dues and conferences and travels for conferences of this association isn't standalone.
It's part of the city budget, which I think is important when we go to the ordinance,
because under conflict of interest, it's about what deliberation is prohibited
and deliberation doesn't include the city budget. So if her dues are part of the city budget-
It's not really benefiting her, it's benefiting the city.
Yeah, that's correct. But I think it doesn't even, as far as whether it's a conflict of interest,
I think when you look at 2-273(a)(3)(f), if she serves as a board of directors or an officer
on a non-profit corporation or on a corporate association, she is on the board of an unincorporated
association. But then when you go into the prohibited deliberation, there's no deliberation
because it doesn't fall under deliberation under the code because it's part of the city budget.
I think that the provision about the board of directors, I think it was probably put in place
to say if somebody on council is also sitting on a non-profit board, they can't vote for their
non-profit to get money. But I can see why Madison could possibly fit under it as well,
since she is a city official and she is on this board of an association. So I think unfortunately,
she might fall under it. But my opinion would be like you may fall under the 2-273(a)(3)(f),
but since it's part of the city budget, it wouldn't actually be a conflict of interest
because there's no prohibited deliberation because it's the budget. So it falls under
not being deliberation. Let's see, because I think deliberation is defined under the
definitions portion of the ordinance and the last sentence is this term is not applied to
general vote on a broad comprehensive or omnibus motion such as approval of the city budget or
polling places. So what do you guys think? I think that was pretty summary. I mean, I think by the
definition of conflicting interest and item F, I mean that describes this situation completely.
She's on the board and wasn't appointed there by the city council. So I think they answered her
question one in her email. Yes. Regarding using the city funds to pay for the training events.
I mean, since that is part of the budget, there is no deliberation. I mean,
she's not proposing any motion or any item for the council to consider other than the training funds
for her department. And if you, she, I think you said she provided her employment contract
and the contract specifically says that the city will pay for professional dues,
memberships and subscriptions. And this is part of her, that's section 12 and then section 13 is
professional development. And that covers that as well. So in her email to the council, she
disclosed, she disclosed her membership on the board. That's covered or that that's required
under section 10 of her contract. So I think she covered that. And the participation in board
meetings is not going to be, she's not using city funds for that. So it's kind of, I mean,
I think by the letter of how it's stated in the, in the ordinance, it does fall under conflicting
interest, but I don't think that any of the deliberation applies here. And she's already
disclosed this to the council and the council unanimously approved her contract that includes,
that doesn't preclude her from being a member of a board and does allow for her to use
city funds for professional dues and membership. I think, I mean, it's kind of in the best interest
of the city to allow participation for professional development. So I mean, to me, I'll stop there.
I mean, to me, I mean, I think we're doing the right thing by reviewing this, but I don't really
think the way the ordinance was written was for this type of, you know, to prevent this type of
activity. I mean, I think this is doing the right thing by asking for us to issue an opinion on this.
I agree with that also, just unless there's some kind of
scenario somebody can come up with it would see that it would be any kind of
conflict of interest, but I couldn't think of one. So yeah, I mean, I don't think this
specifically is if she had to go before the city to try to get more money to give to them. I mean,
I think that might get us in the realm of maybe a conflict of interest, but since this was things
that enter contract, the city has said they're going to pay for it. And then they also approved
the budget, which included paying for this. I just don't think there's, there's a problem.
I think we're all on the same page. So I guess to answer your question, we'll say yes, by the
ordinance, you are, you're an at large member of this association. And then, but number two,
you, the city approved your contract that they would pay for all these things.
And they approved the budget in which we would pay, they would pay for all these things. And
under the sex under, you don't fall under deliberations or conflict of interest violation
because it was part of the budget. So we don't have a conflict of interest. Does that sound
about right? Yeah. Can you think of anything that would be a conflict of interest for participating
in that organization? Plus being not in this instance, nothing comes up with a city that would
anything from city attorney's office? I'm not here to give any ethics opinions.
Okay. All right. Well, I'm not sure what you're hearing. You're not even going to advise this.
I'm here as a prolegarian for this. Okay. All right. Okay. So I think we have it and I'll just
write something up and I'll send it to Chris. Is there anything? I don't, that was the only thing
on the agenda, right? So we'll need a motion. Oh, okay. That's right. Okay. So can I get a
motion to write an advisory opinion as we just discussed? I'll make that motion. All right.
Motion and a second. Okay. All in favor of writing an advisory opinion of what we've
discussed today, say aye. Aye. Motion is approved. And now is there anything else?
All right. Well, then I'll adjourn. Thank you for your time.