1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:11,180
 Okay, so it's 6 o'clock, so we'll go ahead and begin the meeting.

2
00:00:11,180 --> 00:00:15,080
 So let's start with the first item for consideration, A.

3
00:00:15,080 --> 00:00:26,740
 Oh, it's 6 p.m. and we have six regular board members here, so we have a forum, and so we'll

4
00:00:26,740 --> 00:00:37,760
 jump in, item A, BOE 23-001, receive nominations and hold an election of a chair and vice chair.

5
00:00:37,760 --> 00:00:42,680
 And so, guests will receive nominations and vote on that.

6
00:00:42,680 --> 00:01:00,580
 I've been chair since 2019, I'm open to someone else wanting to do it, yeah, nominations.

7
00:01:00,580 --> 00:01:05,580
 Are you open like you don't want to do it anymore, or you're open like someone else

8
00:01:05,580 --> 00:01:06,940
 wants to do it?

9
00:01:06,940 --> 00:01:11,420
 I'm open if somebody else wants to do it, nobody else wants to do it, I can, but my

10
00:01:11,420 --> 00:01:17,200
 term ends in August, and I'm pretty sure it's the end, so whoever's vice chair would be

11
00:01:17,200 --> 00:01:18,200
 taking over then.

12
00:01:18,200 --> 00:01:22,060
 I thought it was two years ago, but I think this one really is the end, of like, you can

13
00:01:22,060 --> 00:01:28,220
 only serve like three in a row, so.

14
00:01:28,220 --> 00:01:32,780
 Are you volunteering?

15
00:01:32,780 --> 00:01:38,420
 No, absolutely not, I would not like to be vice chair this year.

16
00:01:38,420 --> 00:01:45,060
 I don't want to be chair either, so, preference, but Laura, if you'd like to stay on, I'd

17
00:01:45,060 --> 00:01:47,700
 like to nominate you.

18
00:01:47,700 --> 00:01:51,380
 I guess I can, I don't know, I mean, I don't want this, like, I haven't been chair since

19
00:01:51,380 --> 00:01:57,140
 2019, so if anybody else is like one and two, or, I'm not trying to be, you know, dictator

20
00:01:57,140 --> 00:02:03,940
 here or anything, but, so we have, I guess, motion for me to be chair.

21
00:02:03,940 --> 00:02:09,420
 Do you have a second?

22
00:02:09,420 --> 00:02:16,620
 Second, from Annetta, and I guess we'll hold a vote on that, all voting for me being chair

23
00:02:16,620 --> 00:02:17,620
 again, say aye.

24
00:02:17,620 --> 00:02:18,620
 Aye.

25
00:02:18,620 --> 00:02:21,620
 I'll go ahead and abstain so I don't vote for myself.

26
00:02:21,620 --> 00:02:28,620
 Now we need a vice chair, Hannah says she's not interested again this year, anybody else

27
00:02:28,620 --> 00:02:29,620
 interested?

28
00:02:29,620 --> 00:02:32,260
 I would love to be vice chair.

29
00:02:32,260 --> 00:02:36,540
 All right, I'll make a motion, I think I'm going to make a motion as chair, I'll make

30
00:02:36,540 --> 00:02:38,660
 a motion for Annetta to be vice chair.

31
00:02:38,660 --> 00:02:39,660
 I'll second that.

32
00:02:39,660 --> 00:02:45,660
 Seconded by Andrea, right, okay.

33
00:02:45,660 --> 00:02:50,140
 All in, and I'll, is there any discussion?

34
00:02:50,140 --> 00:02:53,380
 All in favor of Annetta being vice chair, say aye.

35
00:02:53,380 --> 00:02:54,380
 Aye.

36
00:02:54,380 --> 00:03:02,020
 All right, so we have our chair and vice chair, all right, consider approval of minutes for

37
00:03:02,020 --> 00:03:06,540
 November 7th, 2022, I mean, I looked through them, I was not at that meeting, does anybody

38
00:03:06,540 --> 00:03:09,540
 have any issues with those minutes?

39
00:03:09,540 --> 00:03:14,460
 I looked through them and I just, if I have any issues, I'll make a motion to approve.

40
00:03:14,460 --> 00:03:15,460
 Motion?

41
00:03:15,460 --> 00:03:16,460
 I'll second it.

42
00:03:16,460 --> 00:03:21,580
 All right, so Dustin made motion to approve the minutes, and then I second it.

43
00:03:21,580 --> 00:03:23,580
 Any more discussion?

44
00:03:23,580 --> 00:03:26,580
 All in favor of approving the minutes?

45
00:03:26,580 --> 00:03:27,580
 Say aye.

46
00:03:27,580 --> 00:03:28,580
 Aye.

47
00:03:28,580 --> 00:03:29,580
 Any opposed?

48
00:03:29,580 --> 00:03:32,180
 All right, motion carries unanimously.

49
00:03:32,180 --> 00:03:39,740
 Sorry Laura, I did want to say there is one instance where my last name is misspelled,

50
00:03:39,740 --> 00:03:40,740
 but I think other than that it's fine.

51
00:03:40,740 --> 00:03:41,740
 Oh no, that was a different sheet.

52
00:03:41,740 --> 00:03:42,740
 Sorry, yes, that's fine.

53
00:03:42,740 --> 00:03:47,340
 All right, so approved as written, unless there's anything else.

54
00:03:47,340 --> 00:03:48,340
 Okay.

55
00:03:48,340 --> 00:03:58,580
 All right, CBOE 23-003, hold a discussion and consider adoption of a 2023 meeting schedule.

56
00:03:58,580 --> 00:04:06,540
 Okay, so we got an agenda information sheet about that.

57
00:04:06,540 --> 00:04:12,220
 Madison has put together February, March, April, May, June, skip July, August, skip September,

58
00:04:12,220 --> 00:04:13,220
 October, November, December.

59
00:04:13,220 --> 00:04:14,220
 Is September a holiday?

60
00:04:14,220 --> 00:04:15,220
 It's a holiday, I believe.

61
00:04:15,220 --> 00:04:20,220
 Okay, all right, so, I mean, I think every Monday.

62
00:04:20,220 --> 00:04:25,220
 I move approval of it.

63
00:04:25,220 --> 00:04:26,220
 Okay.

64
00:04:26,220 --> 00:04:31,700
 I move to approval of the first Monday in every month except, I guess, July, August

65
00:04:31,700 --> 00:04:32,700
 as written here.

66
00:04:32,700 --> 00:04:33,700
 Any second?

67
00:04:33,700 --> 00:04:34,700
 Ask a question.

68
00:04:34,700 --> 00:04:38,460
 Is there really this much work to require that?

69
00:04:38,460 --> 00:04:46,100
 My concern, having served on different types of committees and boards, is that we commit

70
00:04:46,100 --> 00:04:51,740
 to having meetings and then we end up making work for the staff because, well, we're going

71
00:04:51,740 --> 00:04:52,740
 to meet.

72
00:04:52,740 --> 00:04:58,980
 In the past, sometimes there's not quorums or whatever and we cancel them.

73
00:04:58,980 --> 00:05:01,340
 I would say we cancel if we don't have them.

74
00:05:01,340 --> 00:05:07,540
 I mean, I think there's people on the board that are always coming up with new things

75
00:05:07,540 --> 00:05:13,140
 they want to discuss about the Board of Ethics, so I could foresee us having a meeting every

76
00:05:13,140 --> 00:05:14,140
 time.

77
00:05:14,140 --> 00:05:18,540
 I think me and Madison have talked about trying to keep these meetings hour, hour and a half

78
00:05:18,540 --> 00:05:26,740
 so nobody gets burned out, but, so yeah, I guess I could see us having that and I'm trying

79
00:05:26,740 --> 00:05:33,300
 to, you might have seen the last agenda item today is to discuss future meetings to try

80
00:05:33,300 --> 00:05:36,500
 to plan out, hey, this is what we're going to talk about at least two months in advance,

81
00:05:36,500 --> 00:05:40,460
 so if we're like, hey, we don't have anything we want to talk about, we can cancel then,

82
00:05:40,460 --> 00:05:41,460
 right?

83
00:05:41,460 --> 00:05:46,100
 And so I think that will help at least not make more work for us if there's not quorums

84
00:05:46,100 --> 00:05:47,100
 to be done.

85
00:05:47,100 --> 00:05:48,100
 Yes.

86
00:05:48,100 --> 00:05:52,280
 I guess we might have, whether we're going to have meetings or not, done this so she

87
00:05:52,280 --> 00:05:58,980
 can reserve the room, make sure everything can set up so we can have a meeting if needed

88
00:05:58,980 --> 00:05:59,980
 too.

89
00:05:59,980 --> 00:06:00,980
 Right.

90
00:06:00,980 --> 00:06:06,420
 We're required by the board handbook that the city has to set a schedule at the beginning

91
00:06:06,420 --> 00:06:11,860
 of the year so that those are the regular meetings, and then obviously we can have special

92
00:06:11,860 --> 00:06:17,560
 meetings if we need to if like an ethics complaint happens or advisory opinion, but yeah, this

93
00:06:17,560 --> 00:06:22,460
 way we have the rooms scheduled and we know that we could meet these days if we need to.

94
00:06:22,460 --> 00:06:23,460
 Okay.

95
00:06:23,460 --> 00:06:27,260
 And I would say we have been pretty busy the last few months.

96
00:06:27,260 --> 00:06:28,260
 Yeah.

97
00:06:28,260 --> 00:06:29,260
 We are busy.

98
00:06:29,260 --> 00:06:30,260
 So.

99
00:06:30,260 --> 00:06:34,660
 There's a lot of things on that future tapas.

100
00:06:34,660 --> 00:06:35,660
 There are.

101
00:06:35,660 --> 00:06:36,660
 There are.

102
00:06:36,660 --> 00:06:37,660
 Okay.

103
00:06:37,660 --> 00:06:38,660
 Anymore discussion?

104
00:06:38,660 --> 00:06:39,660
 Questions?

105
00:06:39,660 --> 00:06:45,660
 Did we get a second for approving this meeting schedule?

106
00:06:45,660 --> 00:06:46,660
 No.

107
00:06:46,660 --> 00:06:47,660
 Okay.

108
00:06:47,660 --> 00:06:50,060
 Inclusion in this was the moving of the time.

109
00:06:50,060 --> 00:06:54,660
 I thought we'd maybe discuss that in a separate kind of.

110
00:06:54,660 --> 00:06:59,660
 By understanding from the motion, but even obviously corrected, was it just the dates?

111
00:06:59,660 --> 00:07:00,660
 I'll second.

112
00:07:00,660 --> 00:07:01,980
 Seconded by Dustin.

113
00:07:01,980 --> 00:07:04,980
 Anymore discussion on just the dates?

114
00:07:04,980 --> 00:07:05,980
 All in favor say aye.

115
00:07:05,980 --> 00:07:06,980
 Aye.

116
00:07:06,980 --> 00:07:07,980
 Aye.

117
00:07:07,980 --> 00:07:10,980
 Anybody opposed or abstained?

118
00:07:10,980 --> 00:07:14,940
 I think it carries unanimously.

119
00:07:14,940 --> 00:07:23,940
 All right so Madison has suggested or proposed maybe moving the meetings to 5.30 from 6.

120
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,260
 It doesn't really matter for me.

121
00:07:27,260 --> 00:07:32,540
 Does anybody have any strong feelings about 5.30 or 6 or Madison you can say why.

122
00:07:32,540 --> 00:07:33,540
 It was just a suggestion.

123
00:07:33,540 --> 00:07:38,540
 Like I said a little earlier I have another week or that needs at 5.30 so it's another

124
00:07:38,540 --> 00:07:44,620
 time we could meet to get done a little earlier in the day but it's obviously up to you all.

125
00:07:44,620 --> 00:07:49,340
 But I know people you know you might get off work at 5 and then it's harder so does anybody

126
00:07:49,340 --> 00:07:51,420
 have any opinions 5.30 or 6?

127
00:07:51,420 --> 00:07:52,420
 I'm good with it.

128
00:07:52,420 --> 00:07:53,420
 5.30 or 6?

129
00:07:53,420 --> 00:07:54,420
 5.30.

130
00:07:54,420 --> 00:07:55,420
 I would like 5.30 if no one else has a strong opinion.

131
00:07:55,420 --> 00:07:56,420
 I would prefer 5.30 as well.

132
00:07:56,420 --> 00:07:57,420
 Sounds like everybody likes 5.30.

133
00:07:57,420 --> 00:07:58,420
 Does anybody want to make a motion?

134
00:07:58,420 --> 00:07:59,420
 I'll make a motion to move the meetings to 5.30.

135
00:07:59,420 --> 00:08:00,420
 I'll second.

136
00:08:00,420 --> 00:08:01,420
 All right.

137
00:08:01,420 --> 00:08:02,420
 Motion by Dustin, second by Tom.

138
00:08:02,420 --> 00:08:03,420
 Anymore discussion?

139
00:08:03,420 --> 00:08:04,420
 All in favor say aye.

140
00:08:04,420 --> 00:08:05,420
 Aye.

141
00:08:05,420 --> 00:08:06,420
 Anymore discussion?

142
00:08:06,420 --> 00:08:07,420
 All in favor say aye.

143
00:08:07,420 --> 00:08:08,420
 Aye.

144
00:08:08,420 --> 00:08:09,420
 Anymore discussion?

145
00:08:09,420 --> 00:08:10,420
 All in favor say aye.

146
00:08:10,420 --> 00:08:14,740
 All in favor say aye.

147
00:08:14,740 --> 00:08:15,740
 Aye.

148
00:08:15,740 --> 00:08:16,740
 Anymore discussion?

149
00:08:16,740 --> 00:08:17,740
 All in favor of moving the meetings to 5.30 say aye.

150
00:08:17,740 --> 00:08:18,740
 Aye.

151
00:08:18,740 --> 00:08:19,740
 All opposed?

152
00:08:19,740 --> 00:08:20,740
 Abstain?

153
00:08:20,740 --> 00:08:21,740
 None.

154
00:08:21,740 --> 00:08:24,740
 Carries unanimously we will now have the meetings at 5.30.

155
00:08:24,740 --> 00:08:27,580
 Okay so now we're like going to do real stuff.

156
00:08:27,580 --> 00:08:34,180
 Item D, being OE 23-004, receive a report, hold a discussion and take necessary action

157
00:08:34,180 --> 00:08:41,700
 regarding potential proposals to amend City of Van Hoodwarts' Chapter 2 Article 11 Ethics

158
00:08:41,700 --> 00:08:43,700
 to the City Council.

159
00:08:43,700 --> 00:08:50,640
 So Madison has now put like time, well I guess they're not time limits, we could go over

160
00:08:50,640 --> 00:08:53,460
 but kind of how long each thing will take.

161
00:08:53,460 --> 00:08:57,180
 She put 60 minutes here but I don't know if we're all in agreement this might go a lot

162
00:08:57,180 --> 00:08:58,180
 faster.

163
00:08:58,180 --> 00:09:02,340
 So I'll just give it to you and you can do the presentation and we can discuss I guess

164
00:09:02,340 --> 00:09:04,460
 as we go.

165
00:09:04,460 --> 00:09:10,060
 So just a clarification, this is stuff we've already talked about right?

166
00:09:10,060 --> 00:09:15,300
 Yes and I guess it's kind of the, correct me if I'm wrong, the presentation we'll be

167
00:09:15,300 --> 00:09:21,220
 giving to City Council just to double check that she's got everything right that we want.

168
00:09:21,220 --> 00:09:22,220
 Right.

169
00:09:22,220 --> 00:09:28,620
 So just in the interest of time what if we just start at the top and go through and stop

170
00:09:28,620 --> 00:09:33,940
 if any of us have concerns with any of the things we're talking about so we could potentially

171
00:09:33,940 --> 00:09:35,900
 go past scenario.

172
00:09:35,900 --> 00:09:41,060
 So this is the first time that y'all have, will have seen actual draft language in the

173
00:09:41,060 --> 00:09:45,060
 ordinance and so I would like to get at least direction that that's what you want to go

174
00:09:45,060 --> 00:09:48,980
 forward to Council for each one basically.

175
00:09:48,980 --> 00:09:53,820
 So would you like a vote or us to just kind of have consensus of yeah that's what we want.

176
00:09:53,820 --> 00:09:56,820
 What do you think is better?

177
00:09:56,820 --> 00:10:00,540
 Ultimately there'll be a packet which will have all the.

178
00:10:00,540 --> 00:10:05,300
 Yeah I think the packet will definitely need a vote on but if we want to just do hey yeah

179
00:10:05,300 --> 00:10:10,220
 we agree with that language as direction that's fine with me as long as that's good with you.

180
00:10:10,220 --> 00:10:14,700
 It's posted as take action so.

181
00:10:14,700 --> 00:10:16,220
 Take necessary action.

182
00:10:16,220 --> 00:10:21,020
 Yeah I think yeah I think that I mean I agree with that normally just giving directions

183
00:10:21,020 --> 00:10:27,020
 is fine but I think take action I don't know take necessary action that's a fine distinction

184
00:10:27,020 --> 00:10:28,540
 I'll leave it up to your discretion sure.

185
00:10:28,540 --> 00:10:31,060
 Because there's 26 pages.

186
00:10:31,060 --> 00:10:32,980
 Yes and today we're just going to go over four.

187
00:10:32,980 --> 00:10:38,740
 I would say since take necessary action I know there's one place where we need to decide

188
00:10:38,740 --> 00:10:43,580
 on which language maybe we'll we can vote on that but I would say consensus on the rest

189
00:10:43,580 --> 00:10:50,060
 and if there's a problem like you know raise your hand yell at Madison if anything's wrong

190
00:10:50,060 --> 00:10:53,260
 that way we you know we don't we're not bogged down all night.

191
00:10:53,260 --> 00:10:58,500
 Yes yeah and yeah so basically this is just to illustrate where we've been we've talked

192
00:10:58,500 --> 00:11:02,580
 about we give directions in the draft language I've drafted the language and we're on step

193
00:11:02,580 --> 00:11:07,580
 three where you're going to approve give directions forward with language for the proposals I've

194
00:11:07,580 --> 00:11:10,980
 got four for us today even though there is a total of 11 that we're talking about for

195
00:11:10,980 --> 00:11:18,140
 the packet and so I'll just go forward unless anybody has further questions about that so

196
00:11:18,140 --> 00:11:24,900
 go forward and okay so the first one is actually proposal four which was originally developed

197
00:11:24,900 --> 00:11:33,140
 by the board in in October 2021 it was included originally in the June 22 packet of amendments

198
00:11:33,140 --> 00:11:37,580
 to the City Council however the City Council postponed it with its request for clarity

199
00:11:37,580 --> 00:11:43,260
 basically sent it back to the board and then it was rediscussed in August and they discussed

200
00:11:43,260 --> 00:11:48,220
 the clarity issues brought by council and that kind of resulted in creating definitions

201
00:11:48,220 --> 00:11:53,220
 for a campaign contribution as well as election cycle which are shown on the slide you can

202
00:11:53,220 --> 00:11:57,860
 see it over this and then we've also added a definition of City Secretary just to make

203
00:11:57,860 --> 00:12:04,940
 some of this all work for sure and then yeah this is this was basically the original language

204
00:12:04,940 --> 00:12:11,460
 just added that y'all had approved in the original packet just with adding most recent

205
00:12:11,460 --> 00:12:21,700
 election cycle as evidenced by the requirement required filings and then adding the definitions

206
00:12:21,700 --> 00:12:29,660
 basically to try to tighten up what that means any questions concerns about this looks good

207
00:12:29,660 --> 00:12:36,300
 and this just to be clear this is supposed to take into account any run-offs that may

208
00:12:36,300 --> 00:12:41,140
 occur basically so it's starting at the last day of the regular election we go all the

209
00:12:41,140 --> 00:12:45,540
 way until the next election was declared there was a person declared winner for the next

210
00:12:45,540 --> 00:12:53,300
 election and it's kind of based on language that's in the charter I think that makes sense

211
00:12:53,300 --> 00:13:03,700
 seeing head nods yep does anybody have any questions or anything about this one all right

212
00:13:03,700 --> 00:13:14,620
 okay this is proposal seven which was developed in October of 2022 and it is to add to the

213
00:13:14,620 --> 00:13:19,700
 definition of conflicting interests the existence of a client relationship with a person or

214
00:13:19,700 --> 00:13:26,140
 business entity the draft language that's at the top that's included in draft ordinance

215
00:13:26,140 --> 00:13:30,820
 right now is based on San Antonio's ethics ordinance and it does not include a monetary

216
00:13:30,820 --> 00:13:35,940
 threshold for the existence of this relationship the other option is based on the western

217
00:13:35,940 --> 00:13:43,300
 model code and has kind of a it's a little more complicated you could say but it has

218
00:13:43,300 --> 00:13:51,700
 a financial threshold it's a little more clear-cut also and so and just to give you some information

219
00:13:51,700 --> 00:13:56,060
 based on we talked to council about this a little bit in December and they stated that

220
00:13:56,060 --> 00:14:02,180
 they some of them say they prefer the San Antonio definition over the model code and

221
00:14:02,180 --> 00:14:09,460
 so yeah this is kind of where we need some clear direction on which one you prefer I

222
00:14:09,460 --> 00:14:24,220
 like the first one so if we sent this to council they won't take the first one I mean they

223
00:14:24,220 --> 00:14:30,100
 could have met it themselves right and put in a money amount they could yeah I kind of

224
00:14:30,100 --> 00:14:39,620
 I kind of like the first one this is more simple it's not always about money yeah and

225
00:14:39,620 --> 00:14:45,660
 I think then that's I think that's an issue in half in the past with client relationships

226
00:14:45,660 --> 00:14:58,320
 with city council members I would think we set forth the first one too any other opinions

227
00:14:58,320 --> 00:15:01,140
 and I guess this is the one maybe we should have a motion on because we haven't really

228
00:15:01,140 --> 00:15:06,860
 talked about language yes I mean if we accept the first one Adnetta has moved to accept

229
00:15:06,860 --> 00:15:12,660
 the first one do we have a second seconded by Hannah any more discussion on this one

230
00:15:12,660 --> 00:15:22,020
 not seeing any all in favor of the first definition here on this slide existence of a client relationship

231
00:15:22,020 --> 00:15:26,300
 with a person or this standing including any business financial or professional relationship

232
00:15:26,300 --> 00:15:30,780
 to which a duty of care confident trust or privilege applies to city council city official

233
00:15:30,780 --> 00:15:38,420
 be added to conflict of interest that's the one you want say aye any opposed or abstaining

234
00:15:38,420 --> 00:15:49,380
 carries unanimously that we'll use that first definition yep okay nine was developed in

235
00:15:49,380 --> 00:15:55,740
 October of 2022 and it adds to the definition of conflict of interest having a business

236
00:15:55,740 --> 00:16:00,660
 relationship with an individual or business entity the draft language for this proposal

237
00:16:00,660 --> 00:16:05,860
 is based on San Antonio's ethics ordinance as well as the current business disclosures

238
00:16:05,860 --> 00:16:11,420
 requirement and the ethics ordinance which is this right here the but the part that's

239
00:16:11,420 --> 00:16:18,940
 black that's taken out so this proposal would essentially remove that disclosures requirement

240
00:16:18,940 --> 00:16:25,660
 and instead replace it with a recusal requirement which will still require disclosure by having

241
00:16:25,660 --> 00:16:33,660
 to file an affidavit of abstention the addition of this language also requires would require

242
00:16:33,660 --> 00:16:41,260
 us to define affiliated and partner as part of what the language that's shown on the slide

243
00:16:41,260 --> 00:16:47,020
 and those definitions the definition of affiliated is taken from San Antonio and the definition

244
00:16:47,020 --> 00:16:54,420
 of partner is taken from the current business disclosures requirement and that is what that

245
00:16:54,420 --> 00:17:07,020
 proposal will do any questions about that so that knowledge of an individual that's

246
00:17:07,020 --> 00:17:11,780
 added to conflict of interest correct yeah this of this piece would be added to conflict

247
00:17:11,780 --> 00:17:21,620
 of interest and then this would be removed and these two at the bottom would be definitions

248
00:17:21,620 --> 00:17:27,180
 would be added to the definition section of the ordinance basically to explain what this

249
00:17:27,180 --> 00:17:39,140
 means i like this like the partner one better to me it's more clear oh i i think they're

250
00:17:39,140 --> 00:17:46,140
 are they both they're both in it yes oh okay so i think these are um she's saying like

251
00:17:46,140 --> 00:17:49,500
 we're going to add that conflict of interest change business disclosures and those two

252
00:17:49,500 --> 00:17:53,780
 on the bottom are both going to go like kind of correct yes all right so you just need

253
00:17:53,780 --> 00:18:00,580
 an upper down yeah basically yeah i set it up and i don't i don't think i was here for

254
00:18:00,580 --> 00:18:05,540
 these discussions so if everybody believes this is kind of what everybody agreed on at

255
00:18:05,540 --> 00:18:21,100
 the previous meetings then we can we can move to the next one any discussion okay i think

256
00:18:21,100 --> 00:18:28,940
 that's good all right last one so okay this is uh proposal 11 was developed in october

257
00:18:28,940 --> 00:18:34,100
 and november and it's intended to clarify how the board may find a complaint to the

258
00:18:34,100 --> 00:18:40,340
 frivolous to do this it creates an order of order to show cause process which is described

259
00:18:40,340 --> 00:18:46,860
 illustrated here on the slide some critical changes here include that the board either

260
00:18:46,860 --> 00:18:52,260
 a preliminary assessment or an evidentiary hearing must formally dismiss a complaint before

261
00:18:52,260 --> 00:18:58,620
 it can issue this order to show cause and it also has to issue an order to show cause

262
00:18:58,620 --> 00:19:04,340
 in order for it to find a complaint to be frivolous the change is intended to provide

263
00:19:04,340 --> 00:19:09,980
 closure to the respondent as quickly as possible in addition requires that the complainant

264
00:19:09,980 --> 00:19:14,020
 be given a chance to show why their complaint is not frivolous by allowing for written responses

265
00:19:14,020 --> 00:19:19,580
 to be submitted as well as allowing for the complainant to present a defense at the frivolity

266
00:19:19,580 --> 00:19:25,780
 hearing though that's not required and then should be noted that the change prohibits

267
00:19:25,780 --> 00:19:30,300
 the complainant from requesting reconsideration uh if the complaint has been determined to

268
00:19:30,300 --> 00:19:37,420
 be frivolous which was something we discussed in November and this is the actual language

269
00:19:37,420 --> 00:19:43,340
 these are significant changes for the proposal there's been a couple little minor minor changes

270
00:19:43,340 --> 00:19:48,380
 to clarify that a hearing can be scheduled if an order to show cause is issued and to

271
00:19:48,380 --> 00:19:54,180
 create just a definition of what order to show causes are we also changing the rules

272
00:19:54,180 --> 00:20:00,060
 of procedure for all this I have not drafted that yet but I will bring that back next time

273
00:20:00,060 --> 00:20:27,700
 okay I get it okay I guess I'll give everybody a minute to read

274
00:20:27,700 --> 00:20:56,360
 it really just kind of puts in the words what we didn't have in words yeah what we made

275
00:20:56,360 --> 00:21:04,140
 up on the fly yeah I mean if it worked out I think because Laura did a good job but I'm

276
00:21:04,140 --> 00:21:11,440
 glad it's written down because it was a little frightening yeah there was no direction there's

277
00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:30,900
 currently no direction so I think anything we add is going to be an improvement that

278
00:21:30,900 --> 00:21:35,900
 I like what you wrote there's one typo that I heard in two last sentence in order to so

279
00:21:35,900 --> 00:21:36,900
 cause I think it's meant to say show so there's just meant to be an age on that one into the

280
00:21:36,900 --> 00:21:37,900
 last sentence uh not the last sentence I'm sorry last sentence of the first paragraph

281
00:21:37,900 --> 00:21:44,900
 that would be more helpful for me to say in order to yeah all right we will correct that

282
00:21:44,900 --> 00:21:58,620
 yeah other than that yeah I think it looks great um and I guess I missed some meetings

283
00:21:58,620 --> 00:22:03,700
 so the respond is prohibited from presenting a defense did everybody agree on that at the

284
00:22:03,700 --> 00:22:15,300
 November meeting there was consensus that that would be the decision okay as well as

285
00:22:15,300 --> 00:22:23,260
 that there was the complainant could not ask for reconsideration okay it was a firm list

286
00:22:23,260 --> 00:22:29,700
 decision may I ask a question does every city that has an ethics ordinance include a frivolity

287
00:22:29,700 --> 00:22:38,060
 hearing yeah may I ask why we chose to do that I think we have because we've had some

288
00:22:38,060 --> 00:22:47,260
 really frivolous complaints I think it's really because the burden of proof is on the complainant

289
00:22:47,260 --> 00:22:53,180
 if the in most cities the burden of proof is like the complainant makes a complaint

290
00:22:53,180 --> 00:23:00,140
 and then the ethics board investigates it and the complainant fades into the background

291
00:23:00,140 --> 00:23:04,420
 and then they decide to move forward with it they're not and that's something we should

292
00:23:04,420 --> 00:23:13,940
 definitely be talking about because it really is puts a citizen who may be trying to do

293
00:23:13,940 --> 00:23:20,900
 something really important into a bad position in other cities I don't think I know of any

294
00:23:20,900 --> 00:23:30,780
 other city we we have that coming up okay that's fine okay and I was to say the concept

295
00:23:30,780 --> 00:23:36,340
 of complaining frivolous is from the original draft of the or the original approved version

296
00:23:36,340 --> 00:23:42,700
 of the ordinance so this has been trying to refine that process and we had one that we

297
00:23:42,700 --> 00:23:50,700
 thought was frivolous and there was no framework of how to find it frivolous so then we discussed

298
00:23:50,700 --> 00:23:55,300
 like well at the time we had a hearing we kind of made it up as we went but we were

299
00:23:55,300 --> 00:23:59,460
 like we really like direction in the ordinance and the rules of procedure so we know exactly

300
00:23:59,460 --> 00:24:05,140
 how we're supposed to be doing this because it is in the ordinance currently whether you

301
00:24:05,140 --> 00:24:09,420
 know whether that you know there's any changes or not like currently it is the way it is

302
00:24:09,420 --> 00:24:17,500
 so if something can be frivolous we need to know how to do that it is to me again I'm

303
00:24:17,500 --> 00:24:26,000
 new to this if this board or the I guess the group that assigned the case decides it's

304
00:24:26,000 --> 00:24:30,860
 without merit then to come on and say now we're going to decide whether it's frivolous

305
00:24:30,860 --> 00:24:39,660
 or not to me just feels like jumping on again I guess and if I'm a if I'm a citizen it's

306
00:24:39,660 --> 00:24:48,220
 like why would you know you're picking this adjective this kind of attack yeah yeah well

307
00:24:48,220 --> 00:24:54,420
 and like I said currently the ordinance does have frivolous so you know it does so we gotta

308
00:24:54,420 --> 00:24:58,500
 you know I think I think it's good for us to have these so we know how to do it whether

309
00:24:58,500 --> 00:25:04,380
 we suggest to change that or not I think it's for the future but I mean I think I think

310
00:25:04,380 --> 00:25:10,340
 what they you know speculating is is why they put it in there is so that people don't you

311
00:25:10,340 --> 00:25:14,640
 know for instance the elections coming up and they just make up something to try to

312
00:25:14,640 --> 00:25:21,660
 hurt you know the person that's running for office so it gets in the paper you know that's

313
00:25:21,660 --> 00:25:30,660
 what I think so with the May election when might we expect some yeah that's about when

314
00:25:30,660 --> 00:25:38,460
 we see them for better or worse because we've actually talked to about you know should we

315
00:25:38,460 --> 00:25:41,780
 have it where we don't file a complaint for a certain amount before the election but then

316
00:25:41,780 --> 00:25:46,840
 if we have we didn't we didn't agree on that I think because you know if there is an actual

317
00:25:46,840 --> 00:25:52,300
 ethics complaint it does need to be filed so I guess the frivolous thing is kind of a way

318
00:25:52,300 --> 00:25:57,900
 to try to get people to not file frivolous complaints right before an election just to

319
00:25:57,900 --> 00:26:03,460
 try to hurt a candidate they don't like but in cities where they do it differently from

320
00:26:03,460 --> 00:26:09,220
 us there's no need to worry about frivolous complaints because well I mean you could still

321
00:26:09,220 --> 00:26:15,300
 you know even if Madison was doing the investigation I could still make up a fake complaint and

322
00:26:15,300 --> 00:26:19,740
 leak it to the paper yeah so you know I think there could be a frivolous complaint either

323
00:26:19,740 --> 00:26:25,140
 way but not getting too much in the weeds about a future discussion I think these are

324
00:26:25,140 --> 00:26:34,860
 just in the framework we have now we should know how to decide so other questions other

325
00:26:34,860 --> 00:26:40,640
 discussion questions for Madison or anything and I think I think like I said some key differences

326
00:26:40,640 --> 00:26:48,140
 between now right now the preliminary assessment and the way they do it at a preliminary assessment

327
00:26:48,140 --> 00:26:55,500
 is they recommend to have a frivolity hearing before they determine the complaint if it's

328
00:26:55,500 --> 00:27:03,820
 baseless or true basically and so this process requires first that it be dismissed basically

329
00:27:03,820 --> 00:27:10,100
 saying to the respondent you're okay don't worry I guess and then and then requires that

330
00:27:10,100 --> 00:27:15,020
 the board issue in order to go cause so not just dismiss it but issue a whole separate

331
00:27:15,020 --> 00:27:21,980
 process essentially and then have a hearing to decide on that so it puts more steps into

332
00:27:21,980 --> 00:27:30,300
 the process basically some ways to say we have to really be clear that we think this

333
00:27:30,300 --> 00:27:40,420
 is frivolous before we go down that road all right anything else does this look good as

334
00:27:40,420 --> 00:27:44,940
 far as I think we do need to have figure out what we're going to put in the rule of procedure

335
00:27:44,940 --> 00:27:52,280
 that will mirror this but this will be for the ordinance any does it sound like everything

336
00:27:52,280 --> 00:28:01,900
 y'all discussed or we agree on it all right I think it looks good to you know so far you

337
00:28:01,900 --> 00:28:09,820
 have direction that everything looks good for the future packet and then we voted on

338
00:28:09,820 --> 00:28:27,380
 the one definition we wanted clarity on all right so e item e BoE 23-005 receiver report

339
00:28:27,380 --> 00:28:33,540
 full discussion and give staff direction regarding future meetings topics all right so how do

340
00:28:33,540 --> 00:28:43,100
 you want yes so yes I can show the list these are in the slide I just have so the amended

341
00:28:43,100 --> 00:28:48,820
 proposals are kind of we went over four of them tonight and I think you previously said

342
00:28:48,820 --> 00:28:57,940
 like you so the proposals you kind of broke them up not knowing how long it would take

343
00:28:57,940 --> 00:29:02,300
 to go over all of them and I think you said it's kind of more difficult ones are tonight

344
00:29:02,300 --> 00:29:07,340
 and then February ones that we can maybe get through each one quicker which I mean we would

345
00:29:07,340 --> 00:29:15,460
 do this much quicker than I did yeah but I mean I don't know like something could have

346
00:29:15,460 --> 00:29:19,980
 been on there that somebody disagreed with and it could have taken longer so you know

347
00:29:19,980 --> 00:29:25,100
 I appreciate you your foresight into maybe you know making sure we didn't you weren't

348
00:29:25,100 --> 00:29:30,140
 here all night but so okay so the proposals on this agenda information sheet proposal

349
00:29:30,140 --> 00:29:35,820
 one through eleven we've already talked about and then we'll have to do packet finalization

350
00:29:35,820 --> 00:29:40,580
 and do you want to do that in February or because mark is March cutting it too close

351
00:29:40,580 --> 00:29:46,900
 to the so the March meeting I believe it's like the first or something like that and

352
00:29:46,900 --> 00:29:53,720
 the the meeting with the city council will be the 21st so we should have enough time

353
00:29:53,720 --> 00:29:58,500
 okay all right you like any concerns of like should we do it in February just in case like

354
00:29:58,500 --> 00:30:04,180
 we don't get a quorum or something in March we could try to do it it's just that like

355
00:30:04,180 --> 00:30:10,540
 that direction that you're okay with all the language and these to have the final okay

356
00:30:10,540 --> 00:30:19,060
 all right so I guess we can try well I guess maybe I don't know if anybody has a better

357
00:30:19,060 --> 00:30:25,500
 idea maybe in February maybe we could post like take necessary action to conclude maybe

358
00:30:25,500 --> 00:30:29,620
 improving the packet and we'll see if we can that night and if we can't we'll just revisit

359
00:30:29,620 --> 00:30:36,540
 it in March that way if we do like if we are able to vote on all the proposals and agree

360
00:30:36,540 --> 00:30:41,980
 we won't have you know March meeting can we won't have to go over it again you know we

361
00:30:41,980 --> 00:30:51,500
 can like start on the top new topics and if you know and if you do have to go back and

362
00:30:51,500 --> 00:30:59,140
 right we'll just move it to March does that sound good and so then in March we'll start

363
00:30:59,140 --> 00:31:12,140
 on new topics and so I guess you have four here review complaint reconsideration process

364
00:31:12,140 --> 00:31:18,620
 review conference of review of current sanctions conference review of definition of relatives

365
00:31:18,620 --> 00:31:25,180
 and comprehensive review of burden of proof requirements I know in the past you had us

366
00:31:25,180 --> 00:31:32,020
 you kind of emailed us all we all ranked them and then we just like whatever got first amongst

367
00:31:32,020 --> 00:31:36,260
 the board I mean do you like what do you what do you propose what do you think we should

368
00:31:36,260 --> 00:31:41,380
 which we should do we can do that we have this meaning don't we give direction right

369
00:31:41,380 --> 00:31:49,220
 now so we could change the order right yeah these are just currently these four just listed

370
00:31:49,220 --> 00:31:54,660
 in order of when they were there was direction to talk about them last meeting if there was

371
00:31:54,660 --> 00:32:02,700
 direction to start with burden of proof I would really like to move order to show pause

372
00:32:02,700 --> 00:32:14,180
 up next as soon as possible because for an approver show cause that is in the February

373
00:32:14,180 --> 00:32:19,380
 meeting for us to approve right we just we just yeah we all did the order to ship that's

374
00:32:19,380 --> 00:32:24,740
 part of I'm sorry I mean burden of proof yeah you know because I I feel like that is way

375
00:32:24,740 --> 00:32:33,500
 more important than one of these other things but I mean I certainly want to hear what other

376
00:32:33,500 --> 00:32:39,620
 people think well it looks like it's listed here that we're meant to start that in March

377
00:32:39,620 --> 00:32:45,980
 yes that's here we've got that listed based on direction from last meeting to have the

378
00:32:45,980 --> 00:32:52,300
 first discussion about that okay and I and Madison's thinking that that will be a longer

379
00:32:52,300 --> 00:32:58,140
 discussion that maybe we can break up so we keep the meetings at a reasonable amount of

380
00:32:58,140 --> 00:33:06,140
 time right right now I am I haven't done all the research I need to do for that but I guess

381
00:33:06,140 --> 00:33:12,820
 you would have done by March yeah I'll know by March so I I would think I mean yeah just

382
00:33:12,820 --> 00:33:18,060
 move the burden of proof up first and maybe have that the only topic in March if we think

383
00:33:18,060 --> 00:33:24,860
 it might take a while and then I mean is it that if we just kind of have this discussion

384
00:33:24,860 --> 00:33:33,460
 for next future for next meetings topic every month and maybe as things change we can I

385
00:33:33,460 --> 00:33:39,820
 really like that and then just as a reminder if you have other options or other topics

386
00:33:39,820 --> 00:33:43,260
 that you would like to submit you can always email them to me and as long as it's 10 days

387
00:33:43,260 --> 00:33:48,540
 before the next meeting I'll make sure that they're in this item basically for for the

388
00:33:48,540 --> 00:33:54,460
 next that makes sense yeah and I think that's what we've kind of been operating on a little

389
00:33:54,460 --> 00:33:59,060
 while so yeah I would say burden of proof in March and we'll just kind of see where

390
00:33:59,060 --> 00:34:03,780
 the discussion goes and then at the end of that meeting decide we want to do we need

391
00:34:03,780 --> 00:34:09,780
 to have we figured that one out for the time being do we want to discuss it more kind of

392
00:34:09,780 --> 00:34:15,020
 side after that then that's how good everybody do we need to vote on that or is that just

393
00:34:15,020 --> 00:34:26,300
 like direction okay all right well then I think are you satisfied with what we've given

394
00:34:26,300 --> 00:34:35,420
 you for e yeah I just want the top point on there just are we good in general meetings

395
00:34:35,420 --> 00:34:44,740
 to be an hour I would yeah I would say I guess we're starting at 530 hour to hour and a half

396
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:50,020
 like and I would say you know if we get done before that you know good yeah all agreed

397
00:34:50,020 --> 00:34:55,900
 on everything but I think that you know at some point you know we plan to be finished

398
00:34:55,900 --> 00:35:02,260
 around 7 yeah I wouldn't want to say that stuff and tonight you know with the national

399
00:35:02,260 --> 00:35:10,020
 championship hope you know we'll be able to catch it maybe kick off but okay so I think

400
00:35:10,020 --> 00:35:17,260
 is that everything yep all right if everybody's satisfied with how everything's done done

401
00:35:17,260 --> 00:35:22,980
 I guess we'll adjourn at 630 I have a question what was the purpose of sending us Neil Durance's

402
00:35:22,980 --> 00:35:28,340
 letter because it's it's related to the burden of proof issue that that was received over

403
00:35:28,340 --> 00:35:34,100
 the weekend there's not necessarily if I received public comments it's not a clear process for

404
00:35:34,100 --> 00:35:45,100
 how to get those to you so I figured I received a public comment I forwarded it on I'm hoping

405
00:35:45,100 --> 00:35:51,700
 we can have a discussion about how that y'all want that to occur in the future potentially

406
00:35:51,700 --> 00:35:58,580
 in March you know what you might if you might add that to like you know after approving

407
00:35:58,580 --> 00:36:02,860
 the minutes I think that might as if you want a discussion yeah that could probably be a

408
00:36:02,860 --> 00:36:07,420
 quick discussion so maybe you could add that after approving the minutes for maybe even

409
00:36:07,420 --> 00:36:11,660
 February's meeting just so you know what to do because I mean yeah we're kind of got it

410
00:36:11,660 --> 00:36:16,140
 we're like okay what's this about and that way if we know like this is a public comment

411
00:36:16,140 --> 00:36:21,780
 and we know that it's just a public comment and we do what we want so how about we add

412
00:36:21,780 --> 00:36:29,940
 that to February that's good to me yeah okay it's related to the topic of proof of proof

413
00:36:29,940 --> 00:36:43,620
 yeah yeah I'll have comments on that person in his letter so all right anything else okay

414
00:36:43,620 --> 00:36:47,940
 so if there's nothing else we'll adjourn at 636 thank you