1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,260 >> All right, ready? 2 00:00:04,260 --> 00:00:06,260 All right, hello, welcome to this meeting, 3 00:00:06,260 --> 00:00:08,240 special call meeting of the Board of Ethics. 4 00:00:08,240 --> 00:00:10,740 It is Monday, March 13th. 5 00:00:10,740 --> 00:00:15,440 It is 5.30 p.m. We have our full panel. 6 00:00:15,440 --> 00:00:19,420 And the first order of business is for the panel 7 00:00:19,420 --> 00:00:21,940 to select the presiding officer. 8 00:00:21,940 --> 00:00:24,220 Hand it over to you all. 9 00:00:24,220 --> 00:00:25,980 >> And I said I wouldn't do it before. 10 00:00:25,980 --> 00:00:27,420 >> I would love for you to do that. 11 00:00:27,420 --> 00:00:30,800 I was going to nominate you since you were vice-chair 12 00:00:30,800 --> 00:00:31,660 in the past. 13 00:00:31,660 --> 00:00:33,220 >> Yep. 14 00:00:33,220 --> 00:00:36,160 >> I don't think we need to -- do they need to have a motion? 15 00:00:36,160 --> 00:00:38,160 >> If you can say if there's no objection, 16 00:00:38,160 --> 00:00:40,600 Hannah will serve as the chairman. 17 00:00:40,600 --> 00:00:42,880 >> If there's no objections, I will -- 18 00:00:42,880 --> 00:00:45,680 Hannah, you can take over as presiding officer. 19 00:00:45,680 --> 00:00:46,980 >> Excellent. 20 00:00:46,980 --> 00:00:48,220 All right. 21 00:00:48,220 --> 00:00:52,280 And then how are we running this one? 22 00:00:52,280 --> 00:00:53,580 Just same -- 23 00:00:53,580 --> 00:00:55,860 >> Yeah, I think just call the first item and then -- 24 00:00:55,860 --> 00:00:58,320 >> Okay, great, thank you. 25 00:00:58,320 --> 00:01:05,400 So we have item for consideration, BOE 23-017. 26 00:01:05,400 --> 00:01:08,500 It says 001. 27 00:01:08,500 --> 00:01:09,300 >> That's the item number. 28 00:01:09,300 --> 00:01:10,800 This is the advisory opinion number. 29 00:01:10,800 --> 00:01:11,460 >> Got it. 30 00:01:11,460 --> 00:01:15,300 Request for advisory opinion number 23-001, 31 00:01:15,300 --> 00:01:19,340 received February 28th, 2023 from Council Member McGee, 32 00:01:19,340 --> 00:01:23,580 concerning potential acceptance of a gift, applicability 33 00:01:23,580 --> 00:01:26,680 of exceptions, and disclosure recommendations. 34 00:01:26,680 --> 00:01:33,720 Okay, so we need to discuss the request 35 00:01:33,720 --> 00:01:35,800 for the advisory opinion. 36 00:01:35,800 --> 00:01:37,160 >> I can't hold the request. 37 00:01:37,160 --> 00:01:37,860 >> Yeah, thank you. 38 00:01:37,860 --> 00:01:39,260 Sorry, I didn't download it. 39 00:01:39,260 --> 00:01:41,760 I thought -- didn't -- 40 00:01:41,760 --> 00:01:42,540 >> I didn't say that. 41 00:01:42,540 --> 00:01:45,740 >> -- nominate myself and then not download this, so my bad. 42 00:01:45,740 --> 00:01:46,540 >> You're good. 43 00:01:46,540 --> 00:01:50,300 >> So do you want me to read the email in its entirety or -- 44 00:01:53,840 --> 00:01:56,180 >> I think this is the best summary of it. 45 00:01:56,180 --> 00:02:02,180 >> Okay. So I believe we've all read it. 46 00:02:02,180 --> 00:02:02,660 >> Yes. 47 00:02:02,660 --> 00:02:04,020 >> Do you want me to read it aloud? 48 00:02:04,020 --> 00:02:04,960 >> I don't think you have to. 49 00:02:04,960 --> 00:02:06,820 >> Okay. 50 00:02:06,820 --> 00:02:08,300 >> It's posted. 51 00:02:08,300 --> 00:02:12,460 >> Great. So discussion -- yeah. 52 00:02:12,460 --> 00:02:14,360 Do you want to summarize it? 53 00:02:14,360 --> 00:02:17,040 >> Yeah, I went through this and it's -- 54 00:02:17,040 --> 00:02:23,100 the request is for an advisory opinion regarding accepting 55 00:02:23,100 --> 00:02:27,640 transportation to the All In for Equality Advocacy Day 56 00:02:27,640 --> 00:02:29,540 at the Texas Capitol. 57 00:02:29,540 --> 00:02:34,160 And I think the date is the 30th, is that right? 58 00:02:34,160 --> 00:02:36,060 >> I think it's the 20th or something along the line. 59 00:02:36,060 --> 00:02:38,220 >> Twenty -- it's a week from today. 60 00:02:38,220 --> 00:02:41,060 Yeah, March 20th, 2023. 61 00:02:41,060 --> 00:02:48,640 And so I think the question is does this fall 62 00:02:48,640 --> 00:02:54,800 under the ethics ordinance under accepting a gift? 63 00:02:54,800 --> 00:02:57,840 And that's why Councilmember McGee asked 64 00:02:57,840 --> 00:02:59,820 for an advisory opinion. 65 00:02:59,820 --> 00:03:05,160 And I looked at this -- I looked at the request. 66 00:03:05,160 --> 00:03:08,120 I looked at the event publication. 67 00:03:08,120 --> 00:03:11,560 It's put on by Equality Texas. 68 00:03:11,560 --> 00:03:14,120 And on their website, they list themselves 69 00:03:14,120 --> 00:03:17,600 as a 501(c)(4) nonprofit. 70 00:03:17,600 --> 00:03:24,900 And the event announcement lists itself as a community event. 71 00:03:24,900 --> 00:03:30,740 And in our ordinance under exceptions, 72 00:03:30,740 --> 00:03:43,160 this is Section 2-273(b)(5)(C) under exceptions. 73 00:03:43,160 --> 00:03:47,700 It lists acceptable exceptions as meals, lodging, 74 00:03:47,700 --> 00:03:50,540 transportation, or entertainment furnished in connection 75 00:03:50,540 --> 00:03:54,140 with public events, appearances, or ceremonies related 76 00:03:54,140 --> 00:03:57,000 to official city business, nonprofit functions, 77 00:03:57,000 --> 00:04:00,740 or charity functions, or community events if furnished 78 00:04:00,740 --> 00:04:04,420 by the sponsor of such events who is in attendance. 79 00:04:04,420 --> 00:04:09,720 So unless I'm missing something, it seems like this event falls 80 00:04:09,720 --> 00:04:16,360 under the community events part of Paragraph C. It's 81 00:04:16,360 --> 00:04:18,820 by a nonprofit organization. 82 00:04:18,820 --> 00:04:21,400 And this would be accepting transportation provided 83 00:04:21,400 --> 00:04:24,800 by the event sponsor, which falls directly 84 00:04:24,800 --> 00:04:26,800 under that exception. 85 00:04:26,800 --> 00:04:32,200 I don't know if you guys saw something different in this, 86 00:04:32,200 --> 00:04:35,640 but I mean that's what I could find on the website listing 87 00:04:35,640 --> 00:04:38,020 about the event and the organization sponsoring 88 00:04:38,020 --> 00:04:39,220 the event. 89 00:04:39,220 --> 00:04:43,880 So this would fall under the exception guideline under gifts. 90 00:04:43,880 --> 00:04:50,020 >> We know that I'd like to ask just to make sure 91 00:04:50,020 --> 00:04:51,860 that I understand correctly. 92 00:04:51,860 --> 00:04:56,200 It is transportation only that the question is about, correct? 93 00:04:56,200 --> 00:04:59,240 There's nothing else involved other than the transportation 94 00:04:59,240 --> 00:05:00,900 from Denton to Austin. 95 00:05:00,900 --> 00:05:02,180 >> That is my understanding. 96 00:05:02,180 --> 00:05:04,340 >> And the only other question 97 00:05:04,340 --> 00:05:09,040 that I would have was this offer and gift of transportation made 98 00:05:09,040 --> 00:05:16,020 to any other council members or other members of the community. 99 00:05:16,020 --> 00:05:19,520 >> I believe that the event website says it's any 100 00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:21,420 transportation for anybody is available. 101 00:05:21,420 --> 00:05:24,720 >> And that is what I thought I read when I was looking at it, 102 00:05:24,720 --> 00:05:27,200 is that there was more or less a car tour, 103 00:05:27,200 --> 00:05:30,340 whatever you want to call it, organized to get people 104 00:05:30,340 --> 00:05:32,340 from different places to the event. 105 00:05:32,340 --> 00:05:33,940 >> Yeah, I don't know if it was specifically offered 106 00:05:33,940 --> 00:05:34,800 to other council members. 107 00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:38,280 >> Okay. All right. 108 00:05:38,280 --> 00:05:40,440 >> Yeah. I mean, from what I saw on the website, 109 00:05:40,440 --> 00:05:43,720 it was publicly available to accept transportation, 110 00:05:43,720 --> 00:05:47,020 regardless of your position in the city. 111 00:05:47,020 --> 00:05:50,380 I could access that, so I could have signed up. 112 00:05:50,380 --> 00:05:56,300 And I think even if it were, I think it would still be, 113 00:05:56,300 --> 00:05:58,800 I think it would still fall under that exception, 114 00:05:58,800 --> 00:06:01,460 regardless of what it was. 115 00:06:01,460 --> 00:06:04,860 And since it's a community event and not a ticketed event, 116 00:06:04,860 --> 00:06:07,700 it falls under that exception. 117 00:06:07,700 --> 00:06:09,540 And I just wanted to double-check on that, 118 00:06:09,540 --> 00:06:11,580 because that is how, when I looked at the website, 119 00:06:11,580 --> 00:06:14,320 it looked like it was an open event, it wasn't ticketed, 120 00:06:14,320 --> 00:06:16,120 there was nothing, there was nothing other 121 00:06:16,120 --> 00:06:18,240 than just a community event. 122 00:06:18,240 --> 00:06:20,820 So yeah, that was my impression when I saw it, 123 00:06:20,820 --> 00:06:24,820 when I looked at the information. 124 00:06:24,820 --> 00:06:26,560 >> So, it sounds like we have consensus. 125 00:06:26,560 --> 00:06:29,000 Do you need us to like call a vote, 126 00:06:29,000 --> 00:06:32,360 or how do we offer that advice? 127 00:06:32,360 --> 00:06:38,340 >> Yes, take direction. 128 00:06:38,340 --> 00:06:39,640 >> Do you need direction? 129 00:06:39,640 --> 00:06:43,200 >> I would think, so you have to issue an advisory opinion, 130 00:06:43,200 --> 00:06:47,520 so I think you would want to make a motion or have a vote, 131 00:06:47,520 --> 00:06:50,720 certainly, to issue an advisory opinion to some extent, 132 00:06:50,720 --> 00:06:53,560 in some direction, does that make sense? 133 00:06:53,560 --> 00:06:59,520 >> I move that we draft an advisory opinion stating this 134 00:06:59,520 --> 00:07:03,200 would fall under the exceptions portion of the give section 135 00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:06,160 of the ordinance, and there's no conflict 136 00:07:06,160 --> 00:07:08,840 of interest because of that. 137 00:07:08,840 --> 00:07:09,900 >> Do I have a second? 138 00:07:09,900 --> 00:07:11,000 >> I second that. 139 00:07:11,000 --> 00:07:13,740 >> Okay, so all in favor? 140 00:07:13,740 --> 00:07:14,940 >> Aye. 141 00:07:14,940 --> 00:07:16,180 >> Opposed? 142 00:07:16,180 --> 00:07:18,640 It passes unanimously. 143 00:07:18,640 --> 00:07:23,120 Do you need me to re-say what Dustin said, or you got it? 144 00:07:23,120 --> 00:07:26,220 >> What I heard was that you made a motion 145 00:07:26,220 --> 00:07:32,920 that this would fall under section B, 146 00:07:32,920 --> 00:07:34,820 exception of letter C? 147 00:07:34,820 --> 00:07:36,100 >> Yes. 148 00:07:36,100 --> 00:07:38,500 >> Under the give section of the ethics ordinance, 149 00:07:38,500 --> 00:07:44,140 and as such would be an exception to the ordinance? 150 00:07:44,140 --> 00:07:46,640 And she seconded it, and then it was C&S? 151 00:07:46,640 --> 00:07:49,600 >> Yes. 152 00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:52,080 >> And to write an advisory opinion to that? 153 00:07:52,080 --> 00:07:53,540 >> Yes. 154 00:07:57,180 --> 00:07:59,380 >> I believe there was a question 155 00:07:59,380 --> 00:08:02,680 about if a disclosure was required as part of this. 156 00:08:02,680 --> 00:08:07,260 I mean, I think that goes back to our last meeting. 157 00:08:07,260 --> 00:08:08,620 Done. 158 00:08:08,620 --> 00:08:11,100 >> I don't think we've created anything 159 00:08:11,100 --> 00:08:14,560 that requires either way right now. 160 00:08:14,560 --> 00:08:18,940 It's still in limbo from my understanding. 161 00:08:18,940 --> 00:08:22,800 So the disclosure, like a formal disclosure, 162 00:08:22,800 --> 00:08:25,280 is that the question? 163 00:08:25,280 --> 00:08:30,320 I mean, the way this reads now is that disclosure is only 164 00:08:30,320 --> 00:08:32,880 required if the city official has a conflicting interest 165 00:08:32,880 --> 00:08:37,480 in a pending matter, and since this is an exception, 166 00:08:37,480 --> 00:08:40,160 there's no conflicting interest, right? 167 00:08:40,160 --> 00:08:44,420 I think there was a question at the last meeting was do we -- 168 00:08:44,420 --> 00:08:46,700 does there have to be a disclosure if there -- 169 00:08:46,700 --> 00:08:50,200 if it does fall under an exception? 170 00:08:50,200 --> 00:08:53,840 >> Right. That has not taken effect yet, though, so. 171 00:08:53,840 --> 00:08:58,140 So I think -- and we -- part of having that entire section -- 172 00:08:58,140 --> 00:09:03,480 proposal is it's not clear if disclosure is required, so. 173 00:09:03,480 --> 00:09:05,940 >> Okay. So we would need to advise whether 174 00:09:05,940 --> 00:09:09,280 or not disclosure was required based on our interpretation 175 00:09:09,280 --> 00:09:13,280 of this is what I'm understanding? 176 00:09:13,280 --> 00:09:15,360 >> I think you can give -- you can give, yeah, 177 00:09:15,360 --> 00:09:18,600 advice on whether the council member should disclose this 178 00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:20,360 acceptance or not. 179 00:09:20,360 --> 00:09:22,260 >> Based on what's written right now, 180 00:09:22,260 --> 00:09:24,360 I don't believe there's anything to say 181 00:09:24,360 --> 00:09:27,000 that it needs to be disclosed. 182 00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:28,360 >> That's my opinion. 183 00:09:28,360 --> 00:09:32,640 >> Yeah. So again, I think we're consensus-y on that, 184 00:09:32,640 --> 00:09:35,940 but should we motion to get a vote? 185 00:09:35,940 --> 00:09:36,940 >> I think so. 186 00:09:36,940 --> 00:09:41,080 >> Any motion that there -- in the disclosure? 187 00:09:41,080 --> 00:09:43,520 >> I will make the motion that we -- 188 00:09:43,520 --> 00:09:49,180 that there is -- based on our reading, there is no need 189 00:09:49,180 --> 00:09:53,960 for disclosure based on the ordinance at this point. 190 00:09:53,960 --> 00:09:55,400 >> I second that. 191 00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:57,060 >> So all in favor? 192 00:09:57,060 --> 00:09:58,460 >> Aye. 193 00:09:58,460 --> 00:10:00,960 >> This is your name missing. 194 00:10:00,960 --> 00:10:05,360 The advice would be to not need to disclose. 195 00:10:05,360 --> 00:10:10,680 >> I'm just going to pull up the received request again. 196 00:10:10,680 --> 00:10:13,920 >> So when you have your opinion written -- 197 00:10:13,920 --> 00:10:15,320 and my name is Dorothy Colombo. 198 00:10:15,320 --> 00:10:16,580 I'm with the Vortez Law Firm. 199 00:10:16,580 --> 00:10:19,380 I'm the special counsel for your meeting. 200 00:10:19,380 --> 00:10:22,260 So when you're writing your opinion on the section 201 00:10:22,260 --> 00:10:25,820 of disclosure, do you want to make a simple statement 202 00:10:25,820 --> 00:10:28,600 that the ethics ordinance does not require disclosure 203 00:10:28,600 --> 00:10:29,600 at this time? 204 00:10:29,600 --> 00:10:31,400 >> Yes. 205 00:10:45,140 --> 00:10:47,940 >> I believe that addresses the questions. 206 00:10:47,940 --> 00:10:51,620 Do you agree? 207 00:10:51,620 --> 00:10:55,460 >> Yes. The only other thing we looked at was whether the value 208 00:10:55,460 --> 00:10:58,360 of the transportation was less than $50. 209 00:10:58,360 --> 00:11:03,660 And in these types of groups that take people to the Capitol, 210 00:11:03,660 --> 00:11:09,200 typically by bus, and we did find two values 211 00:11:09,200 --> 00:11:13,640 for bus transportation from this area to Austin. 212 00:11:13,640 --> 00:11:16,480 One was on mega bus, it was less than $50. 213 00:11:16,480 --> 00:11:20,440 And the other was on the Flix bus, it's also less than $50. 214 00:11:20,440 --> 00:11:28,860 So since you already decided that it's under your 273B5C 215 00:11:28,860 --> 00:11:32,360 portion of the ordinance, you don't have to put 216 00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:35,660 that in there, but if you so choose, you could also look 217 00:11:35,660 --> 00:11:39,900 at the value of the transportation. 218 00:11:39,900 --> 00:11:42,260 >> So that -- but that value doesn't apply 219 00:11:42,260 --> 00:11:43,700 since it's an exception? 220 00:11:43,700 --> 00:11:49,480 >> Right. So the way I looked at it was if you found the value 221 00:11:49,480 --> 00:11:51,840 of the transportation to be under $50, 222 00:11:51,840 --> 00:11:54,280 the ethics ordinance doesn't apply. 223 00:11:54,280 --> 00:11:57,680 But however, if the value of the transportation is over 50, 224 00:11:57,680 --> 00:12:02,320 then section 273B5C would apply. 225 00:12:02,320 --> 00:12:05,860 So you could put both of those things in your opinion 226 00:12:05,860 --> 00:12:08,800 or just the one that you voted on. 227 00:12:12,400 --> 00:12:14,760 >> Which I would like to add. 228 00:12:14,760 --> 00:12:17,260 >> I think it would be harder. 229 00:12:17,260 --> 00:12:18,400 >> Yeah, I don't think it would -- 230 00:12:18,400 --> 00:12:21,280 I don't know that it's necessary since that falls 231 00:12:21,280 --> 00:12:24,680 under an exception, but I have a problem including 232 00:12:24,680 --> 00:12:29,140 that the council suggested that the value is -- 233 00:12:29,140 --> 00:12:32,280 the value of the travel is less than $50. 234 00:12:32,280 --> 00:12:33,720 >> My only concern with including 235 00:12:33,720 --> 00:12:37,460 that would then potentially create precedent that if it was, 236 00:12:37,460 --> 00:12:39,660 it were $50, now we've created something 237 00:12:39,660 --> 00:12:42,220 where there's this loophole of if it's over $50, 238 00:12:42,220 --> 00:12:44,520 but potentially an exception, does that now cause 239 00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:47,000 like a disclosure thing to fire? 240 00:12:47,000 --> 00:12:49,800 So that's my only concern about including it. 241 00:12:49,800 --> 00:12:52,640 >> So the disclosure doesn't apply regardless 242 00:12:52,640 --> 00:12:55,900 of whether it's under 50 or over 50. 243 00:12:55,900 --> 00:13:00,140 And for the gifts disclosure, and I used 244 00:13:00,140 --> 00:13:02,940 to be the senior assistant city attorney in Denton 245 00:13:02,940 --> 00:13:06,980 from the years 2000 to 2005. 246 00:13:06,980 --> 00:13:09,140 And there was always -- 247 00:13:09,140 --> 00:13:12,720 council would always just voluntarily file if they received 248 00:13:12,720 --> 00:13:16,360 a gift, and as a disclosure, I don't know what the current 249 00:13:16,360 --> 00:13:20,160 practice is for that gifts disclosure form. 250 00:13:20,160 --> 00:13:21,800 It was always voluntary. 251 00:13:21,800 --> 00:13:24,600 >> Yeah, the current practice is we have a gifts disclosure form. 252 00:13:24,600 --> 00:13:29,040 There's nothing that requires it clearly in the code. 253 00:13:29,040 --> 00:13:34,800 So sometimes they file -- they disclose a gift, or sometimes -- 254 00:13:34,800 --> 00:13:37,040 I mean, I don't know if they don't disclose it, right? 255 00:13:37,040 --> 00:13:40,380 >> Yeah, so it's typically a council choice 256 00:13:40,380 --> 00:13:45,380 for transparency, but it's not required. 257 00:13:45,380 --> 00:13:48,160 >> So maybe in our advisory opinion, we can say 258 00:13:48,160 --> 00:13:51,660 that it is not required according to the -- 259 00:13:51,660 --> 00:13:54,920 because it falls under exceptions, 260 00:13:54,920 --> 00:13:58,760 and leave it to councilmember McGee to choose to file 261 00:13:58,760 --> 00:14:03,900 on affidavit stating that it accepted this. 262 00:14:03,900 --> 00:14:08,400 I don't see why that would be required at all. 263 00:14:08,400 --> 00:14:18,680 >> It's voluntary, whether they want to do that or not. 264 00:14:18,680 --> 00:14:24,220 >> So would it be -- would you advise to just put it in there 265 00:14:24,220 --> 00:14:27,620 that if he chooses to disclose that we found also 266 00:14:27,620 --> 00:14:30,620 that the baton was less than $50 and -- 267 00:14:30,620 --> 00:14:35,540 but still disclosed it for full transparency if he chooses to? 268 00:14:35,540 --> 00:14:41,400 >> So the way that I would word it is voluntary -- 269 00:14:41,400 --> 00:14:46,700 let me call that one. 270 00:14:46,700 --> 00:14:48,080 >> The gifts disclosure? 271 00:14:48,080 --> 00:14:51,580 >> Yeah, affidavit -- it's on your website, 272 00:14:51,580 --> 00:14:55,780 affidavit regarding gifts received. 273 00:14:55,780 --> 00:14:59,820 That's typically the form. 274 00:14:59,820 --> 00:15:02,260 So you would say in the paragraph 275 00:15:02,260 --> 00:15:05,960 that no disclosure is required under the ethics ordinance 276 00:15:05,960 --> 00:15:11,100 at this time, and you would go on to say however the councilmember 277 00:15:11,100 --> 00:15:17,900 is -- may file the affidavit regarding gifts received. 278 00:15:17,900 --> 00:15:20,880 >> I like that personally. 279 00:15:20,880 --> 00:15:26,420 I find it -- I find it just because it is an ethics question 280 00:15:26,420 --> 00:15:28,860 and a transparency, you know, airing on the side 281 00:15:28,860 --> 00:15:30,960 of being more transparent and less transparent, 282 00:15:30,960 --> 00:15:34,620 I think is always something we should look for, 283 00:15:34,620 --> 00:15:38,100 but at the end of this is towards right, but you can remind 284 00:15:38,100 --> 00:15:40,600 him of that availability. 285 00:15:40,600 --> 00:15:42,000 >> Yeah. 286 00:15:42,000 --> 00:15:48,100 [ Inaudible ] 287 00:15:48,100 --> 00:15:50,900 >> Do you need a motion for that? 288 00:15:50,900 --> 00:15:55,880 >> The chairman can say if there's no objection we'll add that. 289 00:15:55,880 --> 00:15:58,320 >> Yeah, if there are no objections we can add that. 290 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:02,720 [ Inaudible ] 291 00:16:02,720 --> 00:16:06,960 >> And so in directing your opinion, do you want to make a 292 00:16:06,960 --> 00:16:10,160 motion to include if the value of the transportation is found 293 00:16:10,160 --> 00:16:15,460 to be less than $50, then the ethics ordinance would not apply? 294 00:16:15,460 --> 00:16:20,240 Or do you want to leave that out? 295 00:16:20,240 --> 00:16:27,280 >> I -- so my feeling towards it, just since this is already 296 00:16:27,280 --> 00:16:33,620 a discussion, I don't know if I want to add any more calls 297 00:16:33,620 --> 00:16:38,060 to the fire right now on that one, just to keep it simple 298 00:16:38,060 --> 00:16:43,460 with section 5C and leave it there, 299 00:16:43,460 --> 00:16:45,620 I think would be my preference, 300 00:16:45,620 --> 00:16:47,600 but I don't know if you all have any discussion 301 00:16:47,600 --> 00:16:49,060 on a different preference. 302 00:16:49,060 --> 00:16:50,940 >> Okay, I agree with you. 303 00:16:50,940 --> 00:16:54,300 >> And I will go with -- I could have been swayed, but if both 304 00:16:54,300 --> 00:16:56,740 of you -- if both of you feel that that's the way to go, 305 00:16:56,740 --> 00:16:59,080 then I'll go -- I'll go with the clear thought. 306 00:16:59,080 --> 00:17:05,080 I wouldn't think we need a motion to not do so. 307 00:17:05,080 --> 00:17:06,580 >> No, no. 308 00:17:06,580 --> 00:17:14,460 So the advisory opinion is going to be limited to section 273B5C 309 00:17:14,460 --> 00:17:18,960 and then the last part of the opinion will deal 310 00:17:18,960 --> 00:17:21,700 with whether disclosure is required 311 00:17:21,700 --> 00:17:23,460 and that disclosure is not required 312 00:17:23,460 --> 00:17:24,800 under the ethics ordinance. 313 00:17:24,800 --> 00:17:29,140 However, council member chooses that council member can file 314 00:17:29,140 --> 00:17:31,740 that half a day if the recording gets. 315 00:17:31,740 --> 00:17:33,240 >> Yes. 316 00:17:33,240 --> 00:17:50,220 >> So it is 546 and the meeting is adjourned.