WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.520
 it's been a Monday for most of us yeah all right so I guess I'll call the order on the meeting of

00:00:07.520 --> 00:00:16.720
 the Board of Ethics and we have a quorum here uh you know now let me know if I miss anything I'm

00:00:16.720 --> 00:00:27.360
 supposed to say it's 5 30 Monday Monday May 1st 2023 um all right so just go into the items

00:00:27.360 --> 00:00:36.560
 consideration Board of Ethics 1A BOE 23-018 consider approval of minutes March 6th and March

00:00:36.560 --> 00:00:45.120
 13th 2023 I believe uh March 6th was the regular meeting I was absent so I mean I didn't see any

00:00:45.120 --> 00:00:52.800
 glaring obvious like any glaring obvious approval that's approval any discussion everybody want to

00:00:52.800 --> 00:00:58.560
 say anything about all right is there a second second all right uh moved by Annetta second by

00:00:58.560 --> 00:01:05.920
 Tom Pryor uh I don't know can I call on the first names are y'all planning like that okay no um

00:01:05.920 --> 00:01:13.280
 all right so all in favor of approving the March 6th minutes say aye aye all opposed

00:01:13.280 --> 00:01:22.720
 right so uh everybody unanimous approval and then the March 13th minutes our advisory board

00:01:22.720 --> 00:01:31.040
 of um I think it was Hannah and Dustin and Andrea and um so anything any discussion those look good

00:01:31.040 --> 00:01:40.400
 to you guys motion for Dustin for approval second by Hannah all in favor say aye all opposed all

00:01:40.400 --> 00:01:49.120
 right unanimous approval of that okay uh item 1B BOE 23-022 receive a report and hold a discussion

00:01:49.120 --> 00:01:54.480
 regarding the 2023 packet of proposed amendments to the ethics ordinance and board of ethics

00:01:54.480 --> 00:02:00.160
 rules and procedure and I will throw that to you Hanson all right so as you all know the board of

00:02:00.160 --> 00:02:04.400
 ethics uh boarded a packet of nine proposed amendments the ethics ordinance and rules of

00:02:04.400 --> 00:02:09.920
 procedure to the city council and they discussed that on April 4th uh based on that discussion the

00:02:09.920 --> 00:02:16.400
 city council generally gave direction to include proposals one and five uh in in amended ethics

00:02:16.400 --> 00:02:22.000
 ordinance as the board intended in addition the council gave direction to amend the ordinance to

00:02:22.000 --> 00:02:27.120
 create clear procedures for submitting affiliated or partner business entity relationship disclosures

00:02:27.120 --> 00:02:32.640
 as well as require the city auditor to provide a copy of a submitted complaint to the complainant

00:02:32.640 --> 00:02:37.680
 once it's accepted those two amendments were related to proposals nine and ten but not did

00:02:37.680 --> 00:02:43.280
 not include the entire part of them did not include their in their entirety and then no

00:02:43.280 --> 00:02:48.320
 direction was given to move forward with any of the other five proposals uh the next steps are to

00:02:48.320 --> 00:02:53.680
 bring revise language forward to the city council for adoption probably a junior no five uh as an

00:02:53.680 --> 00:03:00.800
 individual consideration item so that's the update on that so um the ones that they didn't have

00:03:00.800 --> 00:03:05.920
 direction um I mean I don't want to get too lost in the weeds on this uh did they just not say

00:03:05.920 --> 00:03:10.400
 anything or there was like like for instance the campaign contribution is what I'm interested in

00:03:10.400 --> 00:03:15.440
 was there any discussion or they did they did discuss them I would have to go back I think I

00:03:15.440 --> 00:03:21.040
 provided some backup a small summary in the backup um so I could pull that up I can't remember off

00:03:21.040 --> 00:03:28.320
 my head what the discussion was you can look at it on the it's also reported yeah I I didn't watch

00:03:28.320 --> 00:03:34.960
 it they had a lot to say actually we talked for about two hours for a certain discussion about

00:03:34.960 --> 00:03:43.200
 all of them yeah not just that one pretty heated really I guess maybe like people four people

00:03:43.200 --> 00:03:48.240
 against and I got here or this is just harder reading there was a real circular discussion

00:03:48.240 --> 00:03:55.440
 that was hard paying anybody down they were kind of unwilling to take so we just kind of went nowhere

00:03:55.440 --> 00:04:02.080
 this is a very divided council and I have watched some council meetings where it just kind of raised

00:04:02.080 --> 00:04:07.680
 my blood pressure to watch but let me say it was two or three times worse being in the room oh you

00:04:07.680 --> 00:04:20.240
 were you were there oh yeah that's right I think I know it was body yelling wow some yelling by a

00:04:20.240 --> 00:04:27.840
 couple of people and then body language that was really fearful from some I mean it's not nice to

00:04:27.840 --> 00:04:36.080
 sit here and watch just stuff you don't see on the video it was very circular interesting if there's

00:04:36.080 --> 00:04:43.920
 no direction what are we what are we supposed to do with them um that means that they didn't give

00:04:43.920 --> 00:04:48.640
 direction to include the amendment and didn't give direction to the board to continue working

00:04:48.640 --> 00:04:53.280
 on the proposal it doesn't mean that you can't bring it up again just that they did not give

00:04:53.280 --> 00:05:00.960
 direction for you to do so that sounds like answer your question I mean it just doesn't sound very

00:05:00.960 --> 00:05:09.760
 productive but I mean we work really hard and then they are just well that yeah I guess I'm

00:05:09.760 --> 00:05:14.880
 just wondering or are we supposed to revisit this now and change the language are we supposed to

00:05:14.880 --> 00:05:21.440
 review the notes from the meeting and there were some that I would say some of the issue was just

00:05:21.440 --> 00:05:31.520
 like we need more clarification on what this means okay so if and so if you would like to revisit

00:05:31.520 --> 00:05:41.760
 those we can okay all right I guess we might consider we might bring this slide back up when

00:05:41.760 --> 00:05:46.160
 we get to the end and talk about future meetings because we might want to change what our future

00:05:46.160 --> 00:05:54.000
 meetings are based on this based on what we're going to do um yeah I would say a lot would

00:05:54.000 --> 00:06:02.240
 depend on how the election turns out yeah I think if I mean potentially city council could

00:06:02.240 --> 00:06:06.880
 change a lot and we could potentially if we still believe in some of these bringing again

00:06:06.880 --> 00:06:11.840
 into different people maybe different so maybe not so they're literally split three and three

00:06:11.840 --> 00:06:20.800
 yeah so it's well I think that's on a lot of issues currently no I don't know okay um I felt

00:06:20.800 --> 00:06:34.080
 badly for um well she's the only well she's one of a few people in this room that gets paid to do

00:06:34.080 --> 00:06:42.080
 it at least the rest of us for taking that's true yes can I ask a question please I'm sorry yes go

00:06:42.080 --> 00:06:53.520
 for it with the election result I mean could we literally just we you know take the I mean could

00:06:53.520 --> 00:07:00.560
 we just resubmit it after the election is over and the new the new city council I think they can

00:07:00.560 --> 00:07:05.600
 correct me if I'm wrong but I don't there's nothing saying we can't if we wanted to have you wanted

00:07:05.600 --> 00:07:12.560
 to submit any another packet of proposals in July or whenever um well not July but because we don't

00:07:12.560 --> 00:07:16.720
 meet in July but uh whenever you would like you can bring any proposals you would like forward

00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:29.200
 adjust it however you would like okay that's a long list I guess my advice to submit would be to

00:07:29.760 --> 00:07:35.680
 reduce us down to two or three items that we feel are the most important like in the future in the

00:07:35.680 --> 00:07:42.640
 future as opposed to if especially if I'm a new council person and I see this long list of changes

00:07:42.640 --> 00:07:48.000
 I'm gonna kind of be deer in the headlights but if you just say here are the two or three

00:07:48.000 --> 00:07:54.320
 we're recommending at this time we're still working on others then we're saying this is

00:07:54.320 --> 00:08:01.440
 not everything but these are three of importance that we really recommend at this time I think

00:08:01.440 --> 00:08:06.960
 that's not that's a pretty good idea and devil's advocate some of these are pretty clear and short

00:08:06.960 --> 00:08:12.240
 but that might be a better idea and that way we're not stuck for two hours people getting mad and

00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:20.160
 yelling at each other um something for us to consider any other discussion on this

00:08:21.200 --> 00:08:28.240
 I have a downer well we did work and they're like I'm great I mean I can wait until we

00:08:28.240 --> 00:08:33.760
 until we discuss our our future meeting topics but if we have direction on nine and ten

00:08:33.760 --> 00:08:39.440
 we can revise that language and submit those to you that that is going to happen they give that

00:08:39.440 --> 00:08:44.640
 direction to me oh that's just once once that language is adopted I'll make sure you all are

00:08:44.640 --> 00:08:48.800
 aware of what exactly is the ordinance that's unchanged oh I see so they took they were like

00:08:48.800 --> 00:08:52.560
 we want it revised in this way and you're just going to do that and send back okay correct so

00:08:52.560 --> 00:08:57.680
 we don't have to do that's what I was thinking we have to do that no we have that basically done

00:08:57.680 --> 00:09:08.000
 okay more wins than I realized yeah yeah four then all right uh any more discussion about this

00:09:09.360 --> 00:09:21.200
 okay um anything else on that uh not at this time okay um all right item 1c boe 23-019

00:09:21.200 --> 00:09:26.800
 receiver report hold the discussion and take necessary action regarding the creation of a

00:09:26.800 --> 00:09:36.720
 public comment period for the board of ethics meeting um let me see that's um do you want to

00:09:36.720 --> 00:09:42.400
 kind of just go over I can go over really quick and then yeah sure so during the february meeting

00:09:42.400 --> 00:09:47.280
 of the board gave direction to set up a method to receive public comment based on discussion with

00:09:47.280 --> 00:09:51.120
 the city secretary's office there are two main methods of public comment that are used by other

00:09:51.120 --> 00:09:56.800
 cities and boards in general one is basically to specifically comment on agenda items and the other

00:09:56.800 --> 00:10:04.720
 is to just present on items that are not necessarily included on the agenda so two two is agenda items

00:10:04.720 --> 00:10:11.360
 and then three is presentations which just means not necessarily on the agenda essentially um and

00:10:11.360 --> 00:10:19.280
 so uh based on that information these are all the options essentially um and then just as a note if

00:10:19.280 --> 00:10:23.920
 uh you would like to allow for public comment we may need to change the rules of procedure I think

00:10:23.920 --> 00:10:27.440
 I'm not entirely sure but it's certainly if it's one of the you want to allow it at

00:10:27.440 --> 00:10:31.600
 meetings where it's currently prohibited we would have to do that so that would have to go to council

00:10:31.600 --> 00:10:37.680
 for adoption essentially I have one thought um I think we should we can discuss because I

00:10:37.680 --> 00:10:42.080
 think there's people with opinions as far as regular meetings when it comes to advisory and

00:10:42.080 --> 00:10:47.840
 preliminary evidentiary hearings I'm kind of hesitant to want to have any public comment because

00:10:47.840 --> 00:10:53.840
 like I don't want the people on this board to feel intimidated by maybe someone powerful that

00:10:53.840 --> 00:11:01.040
 comes in and makes some statement and it just it's it seems like it would make it not as uh I guess

00:11:01.040 --> 00:11:09.920
 you know maybe fair and you know I think that's a whole different creature yeah so I in my head

00:11:09.920 --> 00:11:18.240
 that's not I don't think there should be public comment at a hearing but I definitely would like

00:11:18.240 --> 00:11:24.000
 to consider it for regular meetings is there anybody who thinks we should have public comment

00:11:24.000 --> 00:11:35.280
 and what's bc and one bc and d up there I do not um Madison first of all I thought you did an

00:11:35.280 --> 00:11:39.840
 excellent job of kind of splitting this up and where we can kind of look at these individually

00:11:39.840 --> 00:11:45.040
 as far as the regular meetings and I think that's that's really a great way to look at

00:11:45.040 --> 00:11:50.000
 I agree um with what war has just mentioned I think we need to take these individually

00:11:50.800 --> 00:11:57.440
 and discuss all of them um one at a time because I really think that like you already mentioned in

00:11:57.440 --> 00:12:04.400
 the case of of advisories or without the full participation of the board I think it would be

00:12:04.400 --> 00:12:10.800
 extremely difficult to allow the public end of that discussion with half the board missing from

00:12:10.800 --> 00:12:17.680
 that meeting so um yeah I think when you're going on like a specific issue like and something has

00:12:17.680 --> 00:12:22.800
 maybe happened it just seems I don't know I don't like the thought of like the public to just come

00:12:22.800 --> 00:12:28.400
 and say what they want and then you know it could sway people on things that aren't actually in the

00:12:28.400 --> 00:12:33.120
 evidence we've also had a discussion about whether or not the complainant should be involved in those

00:12:33.120 --> 00:12:41.840
 hearings that so I don't see why we would open that up for a comment yeah the complaint is not

00:12:41.840 --> 00:12:48.080
 yeah so how about we just if everybody's in agreement it's just we're just going to go on

00:12:48.080 --> 00:12:53.680
 regular meetings and move to number two does that sound good all right so should comment on

00:12:53.680 --> 00:13:00.320
 Jenna items be allowed so um did you want to say anything about this Madison of like how different

00:13:00.320 --> 00:13:04.640
 how it's done or do you have any I mean so there are a couple of different ways you could either do

00:13:04.640 --> 00:13:10.240
 it in person where someone would have to come in person um and literally come up to the mic and

00:13:10.240 --> 00:13:16.240
 speak um there's also an e-comment where the cards would basically be with their they're included in

00:13:16.240 --> 00:13:24.800
 the agenda and then also I believe distributed to y'all um I don't know if it's necessarily before

00:13:24.800 --> 00:13:30.000
 but I know that you guys would see them and then the city council allows for comment by phone at

00:13:30.000 --> 00:13:34.080
 the beginning of the meeting as well so that's typically when this happens well that's true

00:13:34.080 --> 00:13:40.640
 about all these um but that's also all of those methods are possible for presentations does that

00:13:40.640 --> 00:13:46.720
 make sense so and then apart from that generally most other boards and commissions have like a time

00:13:46.720 --> 00:13:51.440
 limit for whoever is speaking and then some of them have a speaker limit to say like only two

00:13:51.440 --> 00:13:58.400
 people can speak or something like that for each meeting that makes sense well and I know we talked

00:13:58.400 --> 00:14:03.040
 last time I mean I kind of like the e-comment because it opens it up to everybody like I know

00:14:03.040 --> 00:14:08.320
 I was like super rushed getting here at 5 30 from work and then people at work at night and I kind

00:14:08.320 --> 00:14:13.840
 of think that way you can have e-comments they can come to all of us and if one of us agrees and feels

00:14:13.840 --> 00:14:19.520
 strongly then we can you know maybe put it on the next agenda or something like that that's that's

00:14:19.520 --> 00:14:26.080
 my thought and then you know we're not having it I guess we'd only have our regular meetings and

00:14:26.080 --> 00:14:30.800
 I kind of think the in-person could just bog us down versus e-comment we could all get it we can

00:14:30.800 --> 00:14:36.480
 all look at it and decide if it's something we need to talk about or not that's my thoughts

00:14:36.480 --> 00:14:47.120
 I agree I think that that is my preferred method as well like you said it's more accessible to

00:14:47.120 --> 00:14:51.680
 everyone rather than it being kind of limited to those who can make it in person they're calling it

00:14:51.680 --> 00:14:59.120
 this time but they could still come in person right I mean I guess if we put it well I don't

00:14:59.120 --> 00:15:04.080
 know how that would work I mean since you put it as a agenda item we'd have to that's probably

00:15:04.080 --> 00:15:08.640
 something else to look at can I guess we could ask whoever we want to come speak I don't know

00:15:08.640 --> 00:15:13.680
 yeah so you can do both where you have an e-comment as well as an in-person

00:15:13.680 --> 00:15:18.240
 if you would like you would just I believe you have to sign up so that we know somebody's coming

00:15:18.240 --> 00:15:23.520
 well I guess are you saying like have e-comment but also add that person or have e-comment and

00:15:23.520 --> 00:15:27.440
 then if it's something we want to talk about let like allow that person to come like make a

00:15:27.440 --> 00:15:32.640
 presentation at the board which one are you saying I'm saying I'd like to see both oh I'm actually

00:15:32.640 --> 00:15:39.840
 I've actually gone to the historic well in the city council and you fill out a form and they call

00:15:39.840 --> 00:15:45.520
 your name the chair calls your name and you you have however many minutes that we wanted

00:15:45.520 --> 00:15:53.440
 so I like that method personally but I can see how the e-comments I mean I noticed that

00:15:54.960 --> 00:16:01.280
 one of the boards does it both ways and I think that's would be good for us if it's the e-comment

00:16:01.280 --> 00:16:06.000
 does that not get included in the agenda automatically and then become part of the

00:16:06.000 --> 00:16:10.800
 minutes for our meeting e-comment would be any e-comments we would see would be included as part

00:16:10.800 --> 00:16:17.200
 of the agenda or the minutes sorry like we want to go over them specifically we would just say we got

00:16:17.200 --> 00:16:23.520
 right so like for city council if you've seen the mayor says like we've got this many blue cards for

00:16:23.520 --> 00:16:27.600
 this agenda item I think it's blue I don't know what the color of the cards are and they're you

00:16:27.600 --> 00:16:34.080
 know I think maybe he says this many things of course something um for some that like that and

00:16:34.080 --> 00:16:42.000
 the council sees them they all get to see them yes I'm not sure at what point yeah okay if it's before

00:16:42.000 --> 00:16:48.640
 or as part of the minutes after we're actually uh in my opinion we're about eight years behind the

00:16:48.640 --> 00:16:56.640
 curve getting the citizens involved in this entire epic process other cities uh I don't know about

00:16:56.640 --> 00:17:02.160
 the e-comments and how much technology is involved there we also have to kind of consider whether or

00:17:02.160 --> 00:17:06.960
 not open meetings are going to apply here in other words if we have a scheduled agenda item

00:17:06.960 --> 00:17:12.800
 do we allow the public to weigh in on that agenda item work and we have essentially cross discussion

00:17:12.800 --> 00:17:18.400
 between this board and the citizens that might attend or want to speak so you never have cross

00:17:18.400 --> 00:17:26.080
 discussion the the comments just get made and the people on the board listen well in city council

00:17:26.080 --> 00:17:30.720
 I mean they're free to actually ask questions so those are some of the things here I think we need

00:17:30.720 --> 00:17:35.600
 to be very careful and take these individuals and consider every circumstance that might apply

00:17:35.600 --> 00:17:40.800
 because the e-comments I don't know how much if we have the same technology for this particular

00:17:40.800 --> 00:17:46.640
 board as the city council might but it's like to say it's been about eight years and the citizens

00:17:46.640 --> 00:17:51.520
 it's not like they're clamoring at the door to get into these meetings but I think the more we

00:17:51.520 --> 00:17:57.280
 open this up and the more we make it available to citizens that this is your board unlike

00:17:57.280 --> 00:18:03.840
 unlike most other boards in the city of Denton this is your board and I think the citizens do

00:18:03.840 --> 00:18:08.720
 not yet understand that and the way to do that is to open it up whether it's in-person speak

00:18:08.720 --> 00:18:15.840
 or or anything that we choose I would rather open it up and just see what happens to invite

00:18:15.840 --> 00:18:21.600
 the public in at some point in the future if it proves to be a burden then we can adjust as we go

00:18:21.600 --> 00:18:27.680
 but I would really discourage limiting this in any way after eight years I would like to see it

00:18:27.680 --> 00:18:33.680
 opened up to any way that we can to involve the citizens of this town in ethics in any way and I

00:18:33.680 --> 00:18:40.400
 would not really recommend shutting this down or making it too narrow from the we can always fix

00:18:40.400 --> 00:18:46.560
 it later if we have to but again it's been eight years and an ethics board is the one board in any

00:18:46.560 --> 00:18:53.600
 city that should have just an open invitation to discuss their feelings about how things are going

00:18:53.600 --> 00:19:00.880
 so can I just clarify something on that real quick if you do it if you all go for a like a

00:19:00.880 --> 00:19:08.800
 public comment any topic then there can't be discussion if it's whereas if if someone's come

00:19:08.800 --> 00:19:13.360
 then they sign up to speak on a specific agenda topic then there can be discussion because I

00:19:13.360 --> 00:19:18.080
 guess then it's on the agenda yeah but if someone just comes in and just talks about whatever they

00:19:18.080 --> 00:19:23.840
 want to and y'all can't discuss it because it won't be posted but we didn't put that on a future

00:19:23.840 --> 00:19:28.960
 agenda yes so and that's the difference between item two and three so this one you can discuss

00:19:28.960 --> 00:19:39.680
 this one you could not essentially what you've just said that complies completely with the open

00:19:39.680 --> 00:19:45.120
 meetings act and I get that completely I've been an advocate for many many years on the open meetings

00:19:45.120 --> 00:19:49.840
 act so what I don't want to do is have someone show up in a meeting and be told well we can't

00:19:49.840 --> 00:19:54.640
 we can't discuss that with you at this meeting whether it's on an agenda whether it's a scheduled

00:19:54.640 --> 00:20:00.480
 agenda item or it's something that is on the mind of a citizen I would really I would really

00:20:00.480 --> 00:20:06.960
 discourage us putting any roadblocks in discussion well but we can't we're putting any roadblocks

00:20:06.960 --> 00:20:12.640
 they can come in and say what they want I'm sorry if y'all want to do that that's fine

00:20:12.640 --> 00:20:16.000
 but it's not going to be a situation where y'all going back and forth with that person

00:20:16.000 --> 00:20:21.600
 unless it's already unless it's already yeah well within the time within a four-minute timeline

00:20:21.600 --> 00:20:29.760
 or whatever an ethics board is is a different it's a quasi-judicial body and I understand

00:20:29.760 --> 00:20:35.520
 completely where you're coming from but I'm just suggesting that an ethics board is a citizen

00:20:35.520 --> 00:20:41.360
 is the only citizen-driven board in this town or would be and so I would just suggest that

00:20:41.360 --> 00:20:49.040
 a little bit of dialogue shouldn't be a problem up to a point so I understand so I've heard people

00:20:49.040 --> 00:20:55.680
 talk about e-comment in person there's also like phone but kind of seems to me like you could do

00:20:55.680 --> 00:21:05.440
 an e-comment or show up phone I think be the most difficult to implement yeah because I feel like

00:21:05.440 --> 00:21:10.080
 e-comment I mean you could throw something up on the website probably relatively quickly and just

00:21:10.080 --> 00:21:14.560
 get us the comments and I don't even know how many how many changes we would have to do to any of our

00:21:15.120 --> 00:21:23.280
 rules or anything so I don't know like I think maybe unless I'm wrong we can kind of focus on

00:21:23.280 --> 00:21:28.320
 in-person or e-comment and how everybody feels and I guess we're going on too so this is like

00:21:28.320 --> 00:21:37.360
 her agenda item right so what would happen is at the beginning of any meeting there would be an

00:21:37.360 --> 00:21:42.400
 agenda item that would allow for comment on agenda items and so they have somebody if you wanted to

00:21:42.400 --> 00:21:47.840
 do in person they could they would have to come in person and present whatever they wanted within

00:21:47.840 --> 00:21:54.880
 the time limit all set and then that would be how in-person worked or e-comment that would just be

00:21:54.880 --> 00:21:58.560
 it would still have that agenda item but the minute it would be included in the minutes whatever was

00:21:58.560 --> 00:22:04.800
 submitted it's like it's like e-capital comment is that like some kind of program or this is just a

00:22:04.800 --> 00:22:10.000
 way of saying like somebody to email in a comment uh there's a there's like a form that the city

00:22:10.000 --> 00:22:15.600
 secretary's office would help us set up to where that would be on the website yes okay

00:22:15.600 --> 00:22:23.440
 all right other thoughts I just think anything we can do to let people know that

00:22:23.440 --> 00:22:31.680
 we at least want to hear what they have to say I think that's an ethical code is here for everyone's

00:22:31.680 --> 00:22:41.920
 trust it is not here to make elected officials comfortable it's not here to make them uncomfortable

00:22:41.920 --> 00:22:48.080
 either it's just here for trust and sometimes I think we've lost that and I think that

00:22:48.080 --> 00:22:51.440
 there is a perception then that that's not

00:22:51.440 --> 00:22:54.640
 important

00:22:57.360 --> 00:23:01.760
 all right so would y'all like to just start voting like maybe we vote on it get a motion

00:23:01.760 --> 00:23:05.840
 vote on in-person motion vote on e-comment and then maybe we'll just leave out phone unless

00:23:05.840 --> 00:23:11.360
 somebody feels strongly can I ask a question in person would be from what I'm understanding

00:23:11.360 --> 00:23:16.960
 via online sign up or it would be like someone just walks in because I think that would make

00:23:16.960 --> 00:23:28.080
 difference I believe both are possible okay yes you would walk in and fill out a blue card at the

00:23:28.080 --> 00:23:31.040
 door blue card would be handed to the chair right

00:23:31.040 --> 00:23:40.480
 so I'm hearing all or none like it's both or neither if we were to vote or you're saying like

00:23:40.480 --> 00:23:45.440
 we could vote for just one or the other you could you could you can give direction for

00:23:45.440 --> 00:23:55.840
 whichever whatever you take it one at a time we consider comment on agenda items via e-comment

00:23:55.840 --> 00:24:02.080
 all right so having and I guess with e-comment we're not going to have time limit or speaker

00:24:02.080 --> 00:24:06.240
 limit so we don't have to get into that right or you comment that's correct so I know that his

00:24:06.240 --> 00:24:13.440
 motion for e-comment for agenda items from the public which madison would help implement I assume

00:24:13.440 --> 00:24:18.800
 to allow that I'm sorry I wasn't um I guess you don't really need to get make a motion

00:24:18.800 --> 00:24:25.600
 I'm just to be clear oh I just get oh this is just all right on the in the exhibit for this

00:24:25.600 --> 00:24:31.200
 agenda item it's there's a table that has what the other boards and commissions currently do

00:24:31.200 --> 00:24:36.720
 I don't know if that would that would be I think that would be helpful just so everyone can see

00:24:36.720 --> 00:24:43.920
 what if what the other boards are doing because on all of them there is some level of public

00:24:43.920 --> 00:24:49.200
 participation in the meetings some of them this isn't all the other boards and commissions to be

00:24:49.200 --> 00:24:56.560
 okay sorry but the ones that are listed allow for citizen comment on agenda items and public presentations

00:25:01.680 --> 00:25:08.560
 well are we kind of all in agreement to allow the e-comment that I guess would we can have it you

00:25:08.560 --> 00:25:13.280
 would have them all and it would be distributed to us and there'd be like something agenda there

00:25:13.280 --> 00:25:18.480
 were comments and we can choose to discuss or not am I saying it right that's how it would work

00:25:18.480 --> 00:25:26.560
 is everybody okay with that anybody seems like I think the majority is in favor of that so I think

00:25:26.560 --> 00:25:32.800
 we'll move forward with the comment if if that makes sense max yes we can clarify more if needed

00:25:32.800 --> 00:25:43.440
 okay so then the next thing on your slide was in person I don't know I personally kind of think

00:25:43.440 --> 00:25:47.920
 like the e-comment would take care of it and we could then decide whether we want to talk about

00:25:47.920 --> 00:25:53.760
 or not and not you know just spend time on things we think are important and not on things that are

00:25:53.760 --> 00:26:00.160
 not important I think two of you want in person I just think we're going to deal with some residents

00:26:00.160 --> 00:26:06.560
 who are not computer savvy and then we prefer them so that for that reason I think it's important to

00:26:06.560 --> 00:26:15.280
 to have in person if they want that option and what does everybody else think you agree

00:26:15.280 --> 00:26:21.280
 to have in person I would agree to have it in person yes let's say it's fine woman okay well

00:26:21.280 --> 00:26:24.000
 I lose out on this one we will also have in person

00:26:24.000 --> 00:26:31.520
 okay and for in person is that uh are we still speaking of just on agenda I think we're just

00:26:31.520 --> 00:26:38.240
 talking agenda items though right we're going one by one so we don't get confused um okay so definitely

00:26:38.240 --> 00:26:44.720
 I think we should have time limits and speaker limits just because oh for sure I also think we

00:26:44.720 --> 00:26:48.960
 should have on the e-comments I think there should be a there should be a limit as well because I

00:26:48.960 --> 00:26:56.080
 don't want to type a 30 page yeah I'm not gonna read that I mean we have time is there is there a

00:26:56.080 --> 00:27:02.080
 word limit on the e-comment like I believe that the I have to look I don't know if that's something

00:27:02.080 --> 00:27:07.040
 we can do or not so I have to come back with that okay well I mean I guess the thing is if somebody

00:27:07.040 --> 00:27:12.640
 sends us 30 pages it's not likely everybody's gonna read that and maybe a citizen is just gonna have

00:27:12.640 --> 00:27:20.800
 to understand that like you know versus just a few pages or not even that much a paragraph um okay

00:27:20.800 --> 00:27:33.600
 yeah that's what it looks like yeah most of them have so um now citizen comment on agenda these

00:27:33.600 --> 00:27:38.880
 other ones don't have a speaker limit but they have a speaker limit on presentation I'm not sure

00:27:38.880 --> 00:27:45.280
 why they it seems to make sense to have speaking on both so what do you guys like three minutes

00:27:45.280 --> 00:27:54.240
 and what this is two and five speakers I think it to me makes sense to have a limit of speakers on

00:27:54.240 --> 00:28:01.360
 public presentations because those are current agenda items but for the citizen comment if if

00:28:01.360 --> 00:28:06.320
 someone wants to comment on an agenda item for that meeting that's their only opportunity so if

00:28:06.320 --> 00:28:12.720
 there's some controversial agenda item on that meeting agenda for whatever reason I don't know

00:28:12.720 --> 00:28:18.400
 that we should exclude somebody's opportunity to get their thoughts up that's a good point maybe

00:28:18.400 --> 00:28:23.840
 we just go with that and then if we start having meetings with 20 people wanting to comment maybe

00:28:23.840 --> 00:28:43.200
 we agree look at it but I kind of don't think that's gonna happen okay so if everybody's in

00:28:43.200 --> 00:28:49.680
 agreement we'll open that up three minute in person no speaker limit on agenda and then the

00:28:49.680 --> 00:28:54.080
 next thing do you want to bring up your slide again yes so we kind of know what we're talking

00:28:54.080 --> 00:29:00.640
 about so I think we we've covered one two so we're on three should presentations be allowed if yes

00:29:00.640 --> 00:29:07.760
 for my direction on in person e-comment phone time limit and speaker limit okay so all the boards

00:29:07.760 --> 00:29:13.120
 interestingly enough only have in person on that do you know is it just like maybe it's just too

00:29:13.120 --> 00:29:20.320
 broad to be sending in whatever yeah and I may not be correct that you can have e-comment because

00:29:20.320 --> 00:29:27.200
 I think it's meant to indicate like yes I am in favor of this or no oh wait are you saying like

00:29:27.200 --> 00:29:32.800
 you might not for number three this might not actually be an option oh okay I think there's

00:29:32.800 --> 00:29:36.880
 still email we still have that process where they could email me and then I can distribute it

00:29:37.600 --> 00:29:44.000
 okay yeah we already talked about that yeah that's already in place I would just say presentation

00:29:44.000 --> 00:29:49.680
 should just be in person there's a few of these that don't have presentations

00:29:49.680 --> 00:29:56.000
 but I don't know I guess you know we have I know we have a couple board members that feel very

00:29:56.000 --> 00:30:02.240
 strongly I'm not sure everybody else feels but maybe we could try it out and see you know if it

00:30:02.240 --> 00:30:06.240
 bogs us all down and we can't get anything done we've got you know we don't spend more than an

00:30:06.240 --> 00:30:12.320
 hour we can talk about it again but you know maybe just come up with one of these for four minutes

00:30:12.320 --> 00:30:19.680
 up to five speakers I don't know how's everybody feel I think there should be a time limit obviously

00:30:19.680 --> 00:30:23.760
 but one of the things that would be a little bit different possibly about this board then

00:30:23.760 --> 00:30:29.200
 for example city council you sign up for city council you've got four minutes now here we could

00:30:29.200 --> 00:30:35.120
 have a time limit but let's say I have I have I show up in a meeting I'm a citizen I have two

00:30:35.120 --> 00:30:40.160
 concerns on the agenda can I split it up can I talk two minutes on this one and two minutes on

00:30:40.160 --> 00:30:44.800
 that one I don't want to confuse it too much here but I'm trying to draw citizens into this ethics

00:30:44.800 --> 00:30:55.280
 process as well I mean I would just say it's for agenda item it yes so I don't like it before in

00:30:55.280 --> 00:31:05.520
 a total per item or just four minutes from John no I would look at it or I thought he said three minutes

00:31:05.520 --> 00:31:12.640
 unless anybody like feels differently three minutes per posted item yes okay now are they allowed to

00:31:12.640 --> 00:31:17.920
 three minutes on in an unposted topic not over can't be discussion well now we're getting into

00:31:17.920 --> 00:31:25.040
 number three yeah okay so what we're saying is number three should I suggest that we just have

00:31:25.040 --> 00:31:33.840
 three minute limits for one presentation for up to five people per meeting okay now backing up what

00:31:33.840 --> 00:31:38.240
 what was I missed what was decided about evidence for hearing someone we already skipped over there

00:31:38.240 --> 00:31:43.200
 are we done with I thought that we all decided we just not going to have any comments on b through

00:31:43.200 --> 00:31:51.840
 d because those are like hearings like um that would would there be a reason for that I'm just

00:31:51.840 --> 00:32:01.520
 curious I already mentioned some of them I don't know what everybody else thinks I think we're if

00:32:01.520 --> 00:32:06.240
 we're having a hearing your advisory panel we are deciding on current issues with current council

00:32:06.240 --> 00:32:11.280
 people and we might not want every person off the street to come and try to influence us when we're

00:32:11.280 --> 00:32:16.240
 trying to stay above the board and not be influenced in any way and just go back Dustin brought up a

00:32:16.240 --> 00:32:22.000
 good point that the complaint actually we have discussed like complaint and you know who can eat

00:32:22.000 --> 00:32:26.640
 like people involved can't even present some kind of a reason why we would have you know we should

00:32:26.640 --> 00:32:34.080
 bring in private citizens yeah okay I think if they're I think if if someone not involved in the

00:32:34.080 --> 00:32:41.760
 process not the person that the complaint is about wants to us to review something they should submit

00:32:41.760 --> 00:32:47.600
 a complaint very good and they should be that should be a separate complaint yeah they should

00:32:47.600 --> 00:32:53.280
 not like tag along to another complaint by someone else because rather than involve someone that is

00:32:53.280 --> 00:32:59.120
 going to speak to that item on that that so that would be the the respondent could ask someone to

00:32:59.120 --> 00:33:03.440
 speak at their hearing but that would be separate from public comment and if they have a comment

00:33:03.440 --> 00:33:11.680
 about one of those things we're on number three they could present at the next meeting right okay

00:33:11.680 --> 00:33:20.000
 okay so so for number three is everybody kind of I mean does anybody have any thoughts or opinions

00:33:20.000 --> 00:33:25.680
 on just going with kind of what the other boards go and present it time limit five speakers in

00:33:25.680 --> 00:33:31.840
 person yes I don't know if we even do phone or any comment like Madison was saying I don't think

00:33:31.840 --> 00:33:38.000
 that would be feasible does this all seem like things you could implement right now I think so

00:33:38.000 --> 00:33:42.720
 okay I mean if there's trouble we'll talk about it we'll put on each other for next meeting

00:33:42.720 --> 00:33:48.640
 okay um I will I just want to say I will do the make this direction and work with the city

00:33:48.640 --> 00:33:54.000
 secretary's office I cannot promise it'll be ready by June but we'll do our best yeah I I mean I

00:33:54.000 --> 00:34:00.000
 I think everybody understands that like I mean just you know put it in place correctly and

00:34:00.000 --> 00:34:06.240
 I can see it's not being ready in one month that's happens I guess he just said it took eight years

00:34:06.240 --> 00:34:14.480
 what's one more month right all right so agenda item is there anything else on that okay I'm going

00:34:14.480 --> 00:34:21.520
 to take a motion to amend the rules of procedure do you think we need to do that well I think city

00:34:21.520 --> 00:34:27.440
 council's gonna have to approve it yeah okay they're gonna have to so are we gonna have to come up with

00:34:27.440 --> 00:34:30.880
 language for that is this just going to be something we're going to have to revisit I think that

00:34:30.880 --> 00:34:38.320
 do you think we could include it in the ICA in the ICA for that work session for this next

00:34:38.320 --> 00:34:41.360
 no because this is going to be well

00:34:41.360 --> 00:34:48.080
 if you have presentation on it talk about but I think they're going to want to split out because

00:34:48.080 --> 00:34:50.640
 it's going to be a new thing that's too different

00:34:54.560 --> 00:35:03.760
 okay I think if you would like to make a motion we'll take it and then I don't think that the

00:35:03.760 --> 00:35:08.720
 language unless you really want to review it necessarily needs to just a motion that yeah

00:35:08.720 --> 00:35:14.320
 okay and then we can take it to council whenever as best we can as fast as possible okay and then

00:35:14.320 --> 00:35:20.480
 maybe at the next meeting um we can maybe discuss what happens and then one of us if we don't like

00:35:20.480 --> 00:35:25.280
 the language we can talk about it then but it already may be in place there's there's no way

00:35:25.280 --> 00:35:32.640
 that we will be able to get an ordinance adopted by council in may okay so okay all right so um

00:35:32.640 --> 00:35:41.680
 look I think that we amend the rules of procedure to allow comment on agenda items

00:35:42.320 --> 00:35:50.640
 with a three via e in-person or e comment with a three-minute time limit right now and speakers

00:35:50.640 --> 00:36:00.080
 yeah we said no limit on agenda and then that we further amend it to allow presentations um

00:36:02.320 --> 00:36:16.960
 yeah in-person but honestly I don't know how much I haven't made presentations before and

00:36:16.960 --> 00:36:23.760
 I swear four minutes comes up lightning fast well that gets people on you know on topic

00:36:23.760 --> 00:36:32.000
 true so we do it are we going to do I think we talked discuss three three okay with five

00:36:32.720 --> 00:36:38.480
 I'm not trying to say as maybe as discussed as discussed

00:36:38.480 --> 00:36:48.160
 second second by Hannah not repeating it but so just as a point of just to make sure I understand

00:36:48.160 --> 00:36:53.440
 yes the motion correctly to amend the rules of procedure to allow in-person and e comment

00:36:53.440 --> 00:36:59.280
 comments on agenda items with a three-minute limit and no speaking limit and allow in-person

00:36:59.280 --> 00:37:03.520
 presentations from members of the public with three minute limit and by a speaker limit what

00:37:03.520 --> 00:37:09.920
 you said correct yes do we have the fact that this is only applied to regular meetings

00:37:09.920 --> 00:37:15.520
 not currently in the motion can you add that to the motion

00:37:15.520 --> 00:37:25.360
 okay and then I guess do we second again yeah I still second

00:37:26.720 --> 00:37:33.440
 with the amendment only to regular meetings thank you for pointing that out okay anything else

00:37:33.440 --> 00:37:41.360
 okay all in favor aye all opposed all right motion carries unanimously

00:37:41.360 --> 00:37:45.840
 we have something in place and we'll see over the next couple months how it works

00:37:45.840 --> 00:37:54.560
 um all right so agenda item 1d receive a report hold the discussion and take necessary action

00:37:54.560 --> 00:38:02.560
 regarding the format of discussion regarding code of ordinance chapter 2 article 11 ethics

00:38:02.560 --> 00:38:09.120
 well let's burden proof I think we'll know we're having happen to say that um and then let's see

00:38:09.120 --> 00:38:16.880
 all right did you want to start by talking about I would do a quick intro so during the November

00:38:16.880 --> 00:38:20.800
 2022 meeting the board gave direction to have a full discussion on the burden proof requirements

00:38:20.800 --> 00:38:27.040
 and the ethics ordinance as such staff reviewed Wessler's model code and found five points of

00:38:27.040 --> 00:38:33.440
 consideration or at least for today's meeting which included one what entities are capable

00:38:33.440 --> 00:38:38.320
 of initiating a complaint two if complainants are required to swear to their allegations

00:38:38.320 --> 00:38:43.120
 three what sources of evidence are used to evaluate whether allegations are actionable

00:38:43.120 --> 00:38:49.120
 four what the evidence requirements are to move to a hearing and five if the complainant is required

00:38:49.120 --> 00:38:54.640
 to attend a hearing on their allegations based on those kind of five points of consideration

00:38:54.640 --> 00:38:59.600
 staff conducted research on the practices of the 10 adopted benchmarks and socialities which is

00:38:59.600 --> 00:39:06.320
 summarized in the table on the slide so I can take direction on if you potentially want to change

00:39:06.320 --> 00:39:10.640
 you need to bring back draft language or if you want me to do additional research on anything

00:39:10.640 --> 00:39:16.560
 basically whatever you would like so in these cities that have individual or commission they

00:39:16.560 --> 00:39:20.640
 have like an ethics commission is it like our ethics board or is it something else

00:39:20.640 --> 00:39:28.320
 the ones that are that say commission generally have something very similar to what we have some

00:39:28.320 --> 00:39:35.120
 of the other ones like better that say individual or council members council members some of them

00:39:35.120 --> 00:39:41.040
 don't have a board at all it's just like an ethics code that then the council members enforce on each

00:39:41.040 --> 00:39:49.600
 other in some ways and then uh like san marcos has a code similar to our board similar to ours

00:39:49.600 --> 00:39:54.080
 I believe Richardson does as well it's not clear in their code who exactly can submit complaints

00:39:54.080 --> 00:40:00.960
 but like McAllen McAllen and Mesquite and they don't have a board like this essentially

00:40:00.960 --> 00:40:07.040
 I don't know my thought like if an individual can file a complaint can any individual like

00:40:07.600 --> 00:40:13.120
 people on the board of ethics can file complaints as well I don't know if it's happened yet I can't

00:40:13.120 --> 00:40:19.440
 remember it's happened twice actually I think that that is intended to mean that the commission

00:40:19.440 --> 00:40:24.960
 itself can say we need to initiate a complaint against and essentially not an individual board

00:40:24.960 --> 00:40:34.800
 member but the board as a whole yeah well I mean then can't anyone on the board initiate a complaint

00:40:34.800 --> 00:40:40.640
 I don't know it's kind of like if there isn't if there's an issue like have individuals speak up

00:40:40.640 --> 00:40:45.520
 like why does it have to be voted on somebody believes in it strongly they should just file it

00:40:45.520 --> 00:40:53.600
 but my opinion um so uh like I guess how do we want to do this do y'all want to like go over these

00:40:53.600 --> 00:40:57.120
 these five um considerations that Madison came up with

00:41:00.800 --> 00:41:07.040
 can we just talk more generally about where the garden improve the lie and why that might

00:41:07.040 --> 00:41:13.440
 well I guess I mean what like what are what are the actual things we're going to get from that

00:41:13.440 --> 00:41:20.560
 versus just going through these specific items that can be actionable

00:41:28.320 --> 00:41:35.600
 I'm just just a general comment kind of addresses what's your this this in my opinion has been

00:41:35.600 --> 00:41:42.400
 one of the biggest problems in this code that's existed existed for since it was initially passed

00:41:42.400 --> 00:41:49.680
 we have weaponized this code and placed any complaint in position that I don't think anybody

00:41:49.680 --> 00:41:56.080
 in this room wants to be in and we have a number of neighboring cities we have a model code

00:41:57.360 --> 00:42:05.040
 this is really not that difficult in my opinion that once a complaint is sworn to and filed by

00:42:05.040 --> 00:42:12.080
 a complainant and the facts have been verified in 95 of the other jurisdictions that complaint

00:42:12.080 --> 00:42:17.440
 is no longer part of the process I don't know if that's true based on Madison's research here

00:42:17.440 --> 00:42:21.920
 well but and also it's interesting you say weaponized because if you have a complaint

00:42:22.720 --> 00:42:28.240
 that is filing a complaint and then washes their hands of it and never does anything again

00:42:28.240 --> 00:42:36.240
 it can be weaponized that way in other jurisdictions the complainant can be required

00:42:36.240 --> 00:42:43.040
 to attend a hearing if there would be any questions but to put the complaint in the prosecutor's seat

00:42:43.040 --> 00:42:49.920
 happens nowhere else that I know of in Texas this has been a problem since this code was passed

00:42:49.920 --> 00:42:55.920
 well what about Dallas and San Marcos it well it's not no the complainant does not prosecute

00:42:55.920 --> 00:43:00.960
 the complaint in Dallas or no well that's the source of evidence for the hearing

00:43:00.960 --> 00:43:10.800
 but I don't think the burden is on the burden is the burden is very clearly on the complainant

00:43:10.800 --> 00:43:16.880
 and the problem with it is if the complainant well first of all they're not going to have access

00:43:18.160 --> 00:43:27.760
 to a lot of information that somebody in a city position would have but if they're really emotional

00:43:27.760 --> 00:43:34.880
 that's not well I guess so what would what would y'all say that Madison does it that the city hire

00:43:34.880 --> 00:43:41.120
 an investigator to investigate the crimes or the ethics complaint that comes under the purview of

00:43:41.120 --> 00:43:48.560
 the board of ethics that is the job of this board so you're saying we would go out and investigate

00:43:48.560 --> 00:43:55.680
 well actually in San Antonio they have an entire office exactly um it's I mean this I like the way

00:43:55.680 --> 00:44:00.720
 she divided it out but it doesn't tell the whole story because in San Antonio they have an entire

00:44:00.720 --> 00:44:05.360
 staff well and that's I guess that's what I'm getting at like if it's not on the complaint

00:44:06.080 --> 00:44:11.520
 there will like I don't think I think there might be kind of a conflict for Madison because she

00:44:11.520 --> 00:44:16.080
 works for city council to be investigating city council so you're going to need some outside

00:44:16.080 --> 00:44:23.680
 commission or like hired person to do it and then as far as the volunteer board and we don't like

00:44:23.680 --> 00:44:28.160
 first of all we don't even we couldn't do any better than complain anyway I don't think I don't

00:44:28.160 --> 00:44:32.480
 know if that's what anybody signed up for to be an investigator helpful my understanding of how it

00:44:32.480 --> 00:44:37.840
 works in the model code and I may not be completely correct is that a complainant submits a complaint

00:44:37.840 --> 00:44:43.360
 as long along with evidence that they believe applies the commission essentially holds um like

00:44:43.360 --> 00:44:50.240
 a pre-hearing where they review that evidence they might issue subpoenas um or or request other

00:44:50.240 --> 00:44:54.720
 documents basically request other documentation and evidence be gathered if they think that it

00:44:54.720 --> 00:45:01.600
 needs to be and then um decide if an evidentiary here if like a hearing to decide sanctions and

00:45:01.600 --> 00:45:07.680
 things needs to be like take that and have another hearing to say like we would have a hearing

00:45:07.680 --> 00:45:13.360
 basically of like um you know present your cases and things like that this complainant is not

00:45:13.360 --> 00:45:20.000
 required to attend but they might be required if subpoenaed essentially and then does that make

00:45:20.000 --> 00:45:24.960
 sense and then the respondent is allowed to come and testify as well so where where does the evidence

00:45:24.960 --> 00:45:30.240
 come from who it comes it does come from the complainant but then also at that free evidentiary

00:45:30.240 --> 00:45:35.760
 here in my understanding is that the board basically might require more evidence to be brought for and

00:45:35.760 --> 00:45:41.680
 so that's our board our ethics ordinance lets us file subpoenas but and even if the model

00:45:41.680 --> 00:45:47.200
 code says that but we like they have no teeth like we can we could put out a subpoena and

00:45:47.200 --> 00:45:54.080
 somebody can ignore it and nothing will happen so can i give you i think i think andrea raise

00:45:54.080 --> 00:46:00.720
 your hand she hasn't spoken yet so if what i do like what i do like is the fact that it would be

00:46:00.720 --> 00:46:06.800
 a multi-step process right you know when there's a complaint we we look at the complaint and then

00:46:06.800 --> 00:46:14.720
 we could request additional evidence that that's true and that that is already the board is already

00:46:14.720 --> 00:46:21.680
 capable of that okay it's just not we don't it's not required as part of the process well the

00:46:21.680 --> 00:46:28.640
 problem is like i said we had this discussion in 2018 when this board started and jesse was actually

00:46:28.640 --> 00:46:34.000
 on it with me we're both attorneys it's like okay we can subpoena but we have no power like they can

00:46:34.000 --> 00:46:37.840
 say they can they would just vote i mean and maybe you can correct me if i'm wrong they

00:46:37.840 --> 00:46:43.440
 like what is our power power is we're not judges all we can do is file an ethics ordinance against

00:46:43.440 --> 00:46:47.360
 them for not bringing forth the information but if it's information that hurts them they're not

00:46:47.360 --> 00:46:54.560
 going to bring it forward so it's kind of i don't know what the answer is but and i will say i have

00:46:54.560 --> 00:47:00.240
 access to records that the city has that i could get yeah so i mean there are some like there there's

00:47:00.240 --> 00:47:04.480
 some things we can but i would not be comfortable conducting an investigation an ethics investigation

00:47:04.480 --> 00:47:10.160
 yes well i know umesh had said like at a previous city he worked at it was it was set up like that

00:47:10.160 --> 00:47:15.280
 but he was totally separate from counsel when he was an investigator i believe that's like how in

00:47:15.280 --> 00:47:19.200
 houston the inspector general's office works and that's why they're allowed they can do that but

00:47:19.200 --> 00:47:28.640
 i'm not certain because i think that's i mean you know we can't get the council to agree to not

00:47:28.640 --> 00:47:35.920
 vote for things they got money for in a campaign i doubt they're going to agree to hire investigators

00:47:35.920 --> 00:47:44.160
 to investigate them just putting it that out there i think you make an excellent point let me make

00:47:44.160 --> 00:47:52.320
 give you an example um in my profession for licensed professional counselors if a complaint

00:47:52.320 --> 00:47:59.840
 gets filed it has to be investigated whether it has any sort of merit or not psychologists on the

00:47:59.840 --> 00:48:06.400
 other hand if a complaint is filed against them the the um psychology board has some kind of

00:48:06.400 --> 00:48:11.920
 internal way to determine if there's merit to it and it doesn't move forward unless there is

00:48:12.560 --> 00:48:19.040
 so guess which which board has a year backlog on all the complaints they have to hear

00:48:19.040 --> 00:48:27.200
 licensed counselors because a psychologist you know a lot of them they're able to go oh that's

00:48:27.200 --> 00:48:32.320
 not a big deal and and they close it it's it's over well don't we have that in our ethics ordinance

00:48:32.320 --> 00:48:38.240
 with the preliminary hearings there's a preliminary assessment which is intended to say

00:48:40.160 --> 00:48:45.920
 on on the face of the complaint would this be a violation if everything is true essentially

00:48:45.920 --> 00:48:50.640
 and then if not then it's considered baseless because it wouldn't be a violation even if what

00:48:50.640 --> 00:48:54.640
 was in the complaint was true and like going to other things like with lawyers the state bar if

00:48:54.640 --> 00:49:00.080
 there's a grievance or something there is a office of lawyers and investigators that investigate and

00:49:00.080 --> 00:49:09.760
 prosecute it and so changing some of these things like you you would need that here and so i don't

00:49:09.760 --> 00:49:16.640
 know i mean if that like i just don't see that we basically end up hearing everything that

00:49:16.640 --> 00:49:23.440
 comes right at least every complaint a preliminary assessment panel is held for

00:49:23.440 --> 00:49:33.840
 as fast as can be held go ahead i think we've talked about some of this before um with the

00:49:33.840 --> 00:49:39.680
 source of evidence pre-hearing and all that coming from the complainant we also talked about what

00:49:39.680 --> 00:49:46.880
 or not the board members could add to that evidence and i think everyone i could be wrong

00:49:46.880 --> 00:49:54.480
 on this but i think we all agree that we could um and i think some of the concern about the

00:49:54.480 --> 00:50:00.960
 burden of proof being on the complainant is focused on the last column there whether or not they

00:50:00.960 --> 00:50:08.640
 have to attend and present at the hearing and to me that that's the part that would

00:50:09.680 --> 00:50:15.680
 maybe discourage someone from submitting a complaint or the other things i mean the

00:50:15.680 --> 00:50:21.040
 source of evidence the complainant should have some evidence whatever if that's an email or an

00:50:21.040 --> 00:50:28.000
 ad flyer or a comment at a meeting whatever it is they need to have some sort of evidence or they

00:50:28.000 --> 00:50:34.800
 shouldn't be submitting a complaint they shouldn't be the only source for that evidence or maybe they

00:50:34.800 --> 00:50:40.320
 are the only source but we shouldn't limit the sources for evidence to only the complainant

00:50:40.320 --> 00:50:48.160
 well then where would we get the other evidence i mean maybe it's from a board member um maybe

00:50:48.160 --> 00:50:57.200
 it's from the respondent we've talked about that as well um i i just i i think some of the concern

00:50:57.200 --> 00:51:02.640
 that you guys may have is is over the last column whether or not the complainant is supposed to come

00:51:02.640 --> 00:51:08.800
 in here and act as a prosecutor and i and i don't really think that's the the point of the board or

00:51:08.800 --> 00:51:17.680
 the point of the complaint process but i i think for us to actually review a complaint and actually

00:51:17.680 --> 00:51:23.360
 do something with it if it's actionable we have to have some sort of evidence both from the complainant

00:51:23.360 --> 00:51:29.760
 and then from whatever sources are available i mean i'm not an investigator and none of us want

00:51:29.760 --> 00:51:34.320
 that role and i don't think we're gonna get a council or further emails or whatever

00:51:34.320 --> 00:51:40.400
 but if there is evidence that we gather in part of the normal course of reviewing the complaint

00:51:40.400 --> 00:51:46.400
 that should be allowed in the hearing and we should be allowed to use that to make a judgment on the

00:51:46.400 --> 00:51:53.120
 complaint yeah i agree completely the problem is that very last word up there and present

00:51:53.760 --> 00:51:59.760
 now we've already discussed previously that if that complainant is not particularly skilled in in

00:51:59.760 --> 00:52:07.040
 working groups of people then the option by our code is that that complaint is torn up and thrown

00:52:07.040 --> 00:52:12.800
 in the trash well that's not true that's changed we even if it's a valid complaint

00:52:12.800 --> 00:52:19.280
 that thing is ripped up and thrown in the trash i think we've changed that the complainant is no

00:52:19.280 --> 00:52:28.240
 longer required and i think they're they're required to for a complaint that they presented

00:52:28.240 --> 00:52:34.320
 or that they submitted they're required to attend and and provide testimony it's not that it's it's

00:52:34.320 --> 00:52:39.920
 not that it's ripped up we go through a preliminary hearing we go to an evidentiary hearing but if they

00:52:39.920 --> 00:52:45.840
 do not attend this board is essentially required to say that it's dismissed that's that part is

00:52:45.840 --> 00:52:52.560
 true i'm thinking that was the whole other order the respondent going to frivolous well i sorry

00:52:52.560 --> 00:52:59.440
 i think that also goes to you know so far most of our complaints have been people that are

00:52:59.440 --> 00:53:07.840
 well they're frivolous and so if you take away one more thing as far as what a complaint needs to do

00:53:07.840 --> 00:53:14.480
 then we have the bad actors that will file whatever complaint they want right around the election

00:53:14.480 --> 00:53:19.600
 about whoever they want that may or may not have merit just to try to get things going

00:53:19.600 --> 00:53:25.360
 but those are the places that don't get by madison if they're frivolous in the past we have that

00:53:25.360 --> 00:53:30.400
 supposedly we have fixed that well up to a point i don't think that's true because we've found

00:53:30.400 --> 00:53:35.200
 we've found complaints frivolous that have gotten all the way to the end frivolous comes at the end

00:53:35.200 --> 00:53:40.160
 the beginning what madison does is you know have you followed have you followed the form

00:53:40.160 --> 00:53:47.280
 my dad has shored up our frivolous provisions in this code so far my you know to my understanding

00:53:47.280 --> 00:53:53.600
 right now we are much less likely to end up where we were with campbell in prior years that's so i

00:53:53.600 --> 00:53:58.880
 don't i don't think the council really didn't accept any of those amendments well yeah you know

00:53:58.880 --> 00:54:04.720
 eight years two complaints yeah they simply said we understand what you're trying to do you're

00:54:04.720 --> 00:54:09.760
 trying to so i want to get back to the beginning of this conversation okay we've talked for about

00:54:09.760 --> 00:54:14.640
 20 minutes about all this what are the actionable things that we can do that we can vote on as a

00:54:14.640 --> 00:54:20.640
 board because i think there's different opinions what are the actual things we can do i don't think

00:54:20.640 --> 00:54:29.120
 the person should go ahead so what i'm hearing is that if we can change and present and uh in the

00:54:29.120 --> 00:54:38.960
 last column and sources of evidence pre-hearing allow other parties specifically this board that

00:54:38.960 --> 00:54:46.400
 would meet the need am i is that what i'm hearing no and that is saying well i would say there should

00:54:46.400 --> 00:54:52.880
 be no requirements on the complaint so they don't need to attend and they don't need to present

00:54:52.880 --> 00:54:58.800
 well i i think that's going to get you are going to get frivolous complaints like we already get them

00:54:58.800 --> 00:55:02.800
 when they have to do things and that's kind of all we get almost

00:55:06.000 --> 00:55:09.760
 that just requires a much better job on the front end of handling

00:55:09.760 --> 00:55:14.560
 frivolous complaints and making sure they don't know that's the whole point but then but then

00:55:14.560 --> 00:55:19.600
 depending on who's on this board you can get rid of all the complaints that way i mean i think we

00:55:19.600 --> 00:55:23.520
 need to think about how this ordinance has been used as a sword and not a shield

00:55:23.520 --> 00:55:32.720
 well that's true i mean i can certainly understand that i do not have the authority to dismiss a

00:55:32.720 --> 00:55:38.960
 complaint so as long as it is correct the form is correctly filled out it's my job to pour it to the

00:55:38.960 --> 00:55:43.920
 chair who then assigns it to a preliminary panel no offense i kind of don't want you to because

00:55:43.920 --> 00:55:50.000
 while i trust you're an ethical person whoever's in that position would have a lot of power and

00:55:50.000 --> 00:55:58.800
 you work for city council so i guess like hannah had the comments and i guess that didn't like

00:55:58.800 --> 00:56:03.840
 still what what is actionable because we can talk all night about oh you know what's in wishlers

00:56:03.840 --> 00:56:09.600
 what should we do like what can we what actionable things do we want to try to put forward and i

00:56:09.600 --> 00:56:12.960
 guess you know whether the city council will take her or not because they don't take a lot of what

00:56:12.960 --> 00:56:16.960
 we say and whether we want to put it forth whether we want to go forward on this one

00:56:16.960 --> 00:56:23.760
 like i said i mean not that i'm bitter anything but they can't even approve our campaign contribution

00:56:26.960 --> 00:56:36.400
 i believe yeah i think we tried to fix this and i think we should move forward with that again maybe

00:56:36.400 --> 00:56:47.760
 i think we need to wait and see as far as making changes about burden of proof

00:56:47.760 --> 00:56:56.160
 because i mean i'm open but like what what is actual that we can do that will make sense that

00:56:56.160 --> 00:57:02.240
 will not result in more frivolous complaints that will not result in having to hire an investigative

00:57:02.240 --> 00:57:08.560
 team or commission or for somebody outside of madison i'm just like what what can we do

00:57:08.560 --> 00:57:14.000
 is there consent it sounds like these are two separate points so if i may

00:57:14.000 --> 00:57:18.000
 is there consensus that pre-hearing we add and commission i think that's what i was hearing

00:57:18.000 --> 00:57:26.640
 dustin say earlier like we can bring forth evidence i mean i guess why not but uh yeah i would say i

00:57:26.640 --> 00:57:31.920
 think right now we can't do anything all we can do is review the evidence that was submitted with

00:57:31.920 --> 00:57:38.000
 the complaint so i wouldn't want to be just on us because i i think you know the complaint well

00:57:38.000 --> 00:57:43.360
 first of all like we might not have anything like we aren't there and the complaint is the one who's

00:57:43.360 --> 00:57:49.040
 bringing forth the evidence but i mean i guess what what is the harm in us as the board as far

00:57:49.040 --> 00:57:54.480
 as letting the whole city bring forth evidence i don't know if we want to open that up but i don't

00:57:54.480 --> 00:58:05.360
 know do you have any thoughts tom i think the complaint must show up yeah right it's like if

00:58:05.360 --> 00:58:12.480
 i were to say and this is the you know what uh so dustin when did you have that affair with that

00:58:12.480 --> 00:58:22.080
 lady but i don't know yeah so i fill out a form send it in and i agree with that and i get y'all's

00:58:22.080 --> 00:58:27.760
 concern but like that is my concern because of like i said how the ordinance has been used i want

00:58:27.760 --> 00:58:33.200
 the complaint to have some kind of skin in the game yeah because otherwise i'm just starting a

00:58:33.200 --> 00:58:38.640
 rumor yeah which is kind of what we've gotten in our complaints that we found frivolous and should

00:58:38.640 --> 00:58:44.960
 have found frivolous but we didn't have really a a procedure to find them frivolous sort of like it's

00:58:44.960 --> 00:58:52.480
 ethical to have integrity is sort of like what i'm drawing from that yeah like if you said it happened

00:58:52.480 --> 00:58:56.640
 and as far as present i mean i'm

00:58:56.640 --> 00:59:05.760
 if they present just the evidence we have the evidence i mean that i don't know if they

00:59:05.760 --> 00:59:08.640
 necessarily have to be prosecuted we haven't had that many hearings

00:59:08.640 --> 00:59:17.200
 yeah i think i i think they're allowed to cross examine i think because maybe but we're also

00:59:17.200 --> 00:59:23.360
 allowed to have that's true yeah so i think that's part of it is that currently in the code

00:59:23.360 --> 00:59:27.600
 the complainant must attend and then testify and you have questions essentially

00:59:29.920 --> 00:59:36.320
 otherwise the complaint is dismissed without they're not allowed the board

00:59:36.320 --> 00:59:40.720
 my understanding is from the current code is not allowed to continue with that if the complainant

00:59:40.720 --> 00:59:48.160
 does not attend even if they might believe that it is true and there is another essentially

00:59:48.160 --> 00:59:57.120
 yeah i would just in general suggest that we need more information on this topic other than

00:59:57.120 --> 01:00:04.080
 having the presenter or the complaint maybe we could contact some of these other cities

01:00:04.080 --> 01:00:11.840
 san marcos or others to find out without shoveling work you know work in your lab medicine i'd like

01:00:11.840 --> 01:00:18.720
 to know more about what seven people with three alternates can do to actually process a complaint

01:00:18.720 --> 01:00:23.840
 without getting us in deep water i don't think it's that difficult i know it's done elsewhere

01:00:25.440 --> 01:00:31.680
 so i'd like to know more about this other than having the entire burden on someone who's filed

01:00:31.680 --> 01:00:37.760
 that complaint and is required to prosecute it or have it dismissed that is not a good that's not

01:00:37.760 --> 01:00:43.920
 good so what i'm hearing from everybody to hear to steal from what hand is saying is like some of us

01:00:43.920 --> 01:00:50.320
 think the complaint definitely needs to be there others don't there's we're not sure where the

01:00:50.320 --> 01:00:56.880
 evidence should come from but do we tonight have anything actual we can work on because otherwise

01:00:56.880 --> 01:01:02.240
 we could just talk about this all night and i don't think that's very productive like what go ahead

01:01:02.240 --> 01:01:06.880
 okay sorry i was just gonna say i if if it's direction of the board i can bring back more

01:01:06.880 --> 01:01:13.040
 information specifically on this last column from some of the other cities basically next time or

01:01:13.040 --> 01:01:21.440
 whatever but and what i was going to say about as for tonight i think if we're able to make some

01:01:21.440 --> 01:01:28.880
 concessions complainant and commission must attend strike and present like that might be the

01:01:28.880 --> 01:01:34.000
 compromise we can come to between those of us that are here from what i'm hearing i don't know if

01:01:34.000 --> 01:01:39.280
 that's accurate but that's what i'm hearing no one is suggesting that the complaint can go on vacation

01:01:40.000 --> 01:01:45.280
 i mean if they file the complaint i'm expecting them to be in the room when their case is presented

01:01:45.280 --> 01:01:55.600
 to a board of ethics that they shouldn't have to be there i think i said that i'm sorry in some

01:01:55.600 --> 01:02:01.920
 the nuns up there i don't know what those nuns mean but in our particular case i have no problem

01:02:01.920 --> 01:02:08.160
 requiring a complainant to be in the room because there might be some questions that the board of

01:02:08.160 --> 01:02:13.200
 ethics would have that would require an answer right and it might not be part of their paperwork

01:02:13.200 --> 01:02:17.280
 and i would hate to be told well the complainant's not here i'm suggesting

01:02:17.280 --> 01:02:26.480
 yeah and that's where i'm at i mean i i can say i don't know but if if just like in the past if

01:02:26.480 --> 01:02:32.480
 we're getting the information prior to the hearing and we're going through the evidence i don't need

01:02:32.480 --> 01:02:38.320
 the complainant to present that evidence to me however i would like the opportunity to ask that

01:02:38.320 --> 01:02:43.520
 complainant questions about that i'm not suggesting that so if that's what we're if that's what we're

01:02:43.520 --> 01:02:51.040
 talking about we might need to look at the code and procedure as far as like that specific language

01:02:51.040 --> 01:02:56.080
 i don't remember exactly what it says like do i know they have to be there do they have to even

01:02:56.080 --> 01:03:01.200
 speak if they've already given their things but they're allowed to but do they have to speak if

01:03:01.200 --> 01:03:05.600
 they're there and they've given their information i don't remember if we're reading it i have to

01:03:05.600 --> 01:03:11.200
 pull it up so i mean it like is that what we want to focus on because this is just like too broad

01:03:11.200 --> 01:03:14.880
 and we're not i mean no no effect but i just don't feel like we're getting anything done

01:03:14.880 --> 01:03:23.040
 talking around the ground so go ahead i want to bring up one other thing the word retaliation the

01:03:23.040 --> 01:03:29.680
 term retaliation is in our glossary but i haven't seen i believe that it is i haven't seen anything

01:03:29.680 --> 01:03:39.040
 what if someone retaliates because i don't know if that follow falls under this agenda item

01:03:39.040 --> 01:03:45.520
 okay it's it is the same i think there is a section of retaliation but it is a different section

01:03:45.520 --> 01:03:53.040
 we're posted for this subsection four which reads burden of proof because the burden of showing that

01:03:53.040 --> 01:03:57.840
 a violation of this article occurred is placed on the complainant is the complainant that has

01:03:57.840 --> 01:04:03.440
 the obligation to put forth evidence including testimony supporting the complaint the complainant

01:04:03.440 --> 01:04:08.240
 is required to testify at the hearing unless it is held to determine if an accepted complaint is

01:04:08.240 --> 01:04:12.960
 frivolous a complainant's failure to testify at a hearing other than a hearing is determined

01:04:12.960 --> 01:04:21.360
 for quality shall be grounds for dismissal of the complaint that's the entire language of the

01:04:21.360 --> 01:04:31.200
 section so i guess i mean it would be so i guess the question is do they have to testify or do they

01:04:31.200 --> 01:04:37.360
 have to be there we're all in agreement they have to be there i guess yes and then as far as testify

01:04:37.360 --> 01:04:43.920
 i mean i guess what does that mean here really if we're requiring them to be there then we should

01:04:43.920 --> 01:04:52.960
 require them yeah sitting in a room search no purpose i kind of i agree with that um but i mean

01:04:52.960 --> 01:04:57.920
 as far as like prosecuting they would just be they would have to they would have to be there

01:04:57.920 --> 01:05:02.960
 and they would have to i mean it seems pretty broad as far as testimony and this isn't a court

01:05:02.960 --> 01:05:09.440
 of law so what would be testified like they have to say like i believe in this complaint i filed it

01:05:09.440 --> 01:05:14.160
 like it's not like you have to prosecute it we have if we have the evidence yeah i think we have

01:05:14.160 --> 01:05:20.000
 the evidence to testify but i guess but that's what i'm saying like it says testify but i kind

01:05:20.000 --> 01:05:28.480
 of feel like it just means you you have to just stand by your complaint yeah because i know you

01:05:28.480 --> 01:05:33.120
 have to i i think from what i'm hearing i don't have in front of me like you have to answer

01:05:33.120 --> 01:05:41.040
 questions and you have to just like put skin in the game that you filed this not that you necessarily

01:05:41.040 --> 01:05:48.720
 you don't have to what the premise is the complaint after it gets through is administratively complete

01:05:48.720 --> 01:05:54.240
 before it gets to the before it gets to the board now yes there might be questions that arise

01:05:54.240 --> 01:06:00.240
 you know during a panel hearing or whatever and and yes that complaint it should be in the room

01:06:00.240 --> 01:06:07.680
 and should be available to testify if necessary but the i just don't see how different that is

01:06:07.680 --> 01:06:14.560
 than what we have yeah and what we have what he just read i don't like the burden of proving so

01:06:14.560 --> 01:06:20.960
 clearly laid on the complaint i think this says you not only are you a complainant you are a

01:06:20.960 --> 01:06:26.160
 presenter you are a prosecutor otherwise the thing goes in the trash i did not hear prosecution i

01:06:26.160 --> 01:06:32.080
 didn't your prosecutor is i heard testify testify stand by what you've turned in as your evidence

01:06:32.080 --> 01:06:37.120
 for why this needs to go forward so i think that might be something that we need to reread

01:06:37.120 --> 01:06:43.120
 personally and be sure that we're all on the same page with what that's saying i mean i remember

01:06:43.120 --> 01:06:50.480
 in some hearings i've been in i like i feel like i'm the prosecutor when i'm asking the questions

01:06:50.480 --> 01:06:57.840
 from the board and i didn't really feel like the complaint was because i was asking the hard

01:06:57.840 --> 01:07:04.480
 questions they didn't really know what to ask and all they were required to do is testify i don't

01:07:04.480 --> 01:07:09.680
 know did you read it differently did anybody i think it's going to be up to y'all to interpret

01:07:09.680 --> 01:07:13.440
 the language the way you'll when y'all are having a hearing you know it's going to be on y'all to

01:07:13.440 --> 01:07:19.040
 decide and i think and it might have been my fault for posting it wrong this this section right here

01:07:19.040 --> 01:07:23.760
 is what we're posting for there are some things in the rules and procedure that might be more what

01:07:23.760 --> 01:07:28.400
 we're talking about and we can i can bring that with that specifically on the agenda next time so

01:07:28.400 --> 01:07:36.640
 maybe we should um like this this is broad like i said it had i guess some of these are interrelated

01:07:36.640 --> 01:07:43.200
 but like what what do we want to work on do we want to have a discussion just about complaining

01:07:43.200 --> 01:07:49.200
 and what testimony means it's like is that where we are because like i said so far i think it's been

01:07:49.200 --> 01:07:54.800
 about 38 minutes and we really haven't gotten much done on this and us not getting anything done

01:07:54.800 --> 01:08:05.440
 doesn't help the ethics code this discussion accomplishes a great deal in my opinion it's not

01:08:05.440 --> 01:08:10.880
 like we're not doing anything here this has been one of the biggest problems with this and i know

01:08:10.880 --> 01:08:15.600
 and you've stayed in position several times and we've heard it several times i think we all

01:08:15.600 --> 01:08:19.040
 understand where you are you do not think they should be the prosecutor you do not think they

01:08:19.040 --> 01:08:24.560
 should have testified they just need to be in the room like we all i think we all agree that and i

01:08:24.560 --> 01:08:28.880
 think at least four of us think they should be there they should have testified they don't have

01:08:28.880 --> 01:08:36.080
 so that's where we are like what would we do going forward from here then we would go back and we

01:08:36.080 --> 01:08:41.200
 would look at these other existing codes that were on that initial chart and look at other cities

01:08:41.200 --> 01:08:46.880
 that did not require the complainant to actually present the evidence this is not that complicated

01:08:46.880 --> 01:08:53.760
 and it's it's a process where i guess madison maybe you should we should have you go back and

01:08:53.760 --> 01:08:59.600
 look at the rules procedure and see if they say they have to present the evidence could we also

01:09:00.240 --> 01:09:06.960
 i specifically the one city that has attend and testify is fort worth so maybe that is what the

01:09:06.960 --> 01:09:12.240
 direction could be is like what is the difference between fort worth's code in terms of must attend

01:09:12.240 --> 01:09:19.040
 and testify versus denton must attend and present and just compare those two and the language in

01:09:19.040 --> 01:09:26.640
 those two i can provide further research on specifically this last column at a future meeting

01:09:26.640 --> 01:09:35.040
 if that's the direction important i agree with andrea let's narrow it down to yeah didn't end

01:09:35.040 --> 01:09:42.320
 forward as a i appreciate you looking at these other cities but that's just going to add to the

01:09:42.320 --> 01:09:49.440
 the amount of time we spend on this let's narrow it down to can we learn anything from them but our

01:09:49.440 --> 01:09:58.080
 charge as i understand it is to say what's the best for denton as opposed to trying to migrate

01:09:58.080 --> 01:10:03.520
 whether others are doing or not doing a lot of are not doing so this is narrowed down to fort worth

01:10:03.520 --> 01:10:09.760
 for our next meeting or whenever that can be an agenda and compare and then make our decisions from

01:10:09.760 --> 01:10:16.400
 there austin has must requires them to attend but not testify so it might be worth including that

01:10:16.400 --> 01:10:25.760
 one as well since we're just as a suggestion so maybe we we narrow it down to that and have you

01:10:25.760 --> 01:10:33.040
 look at austin fort worth and denton and have a discussion more about specifically what you were

01:10:33.040 --> 01:10:45.760
 saying all right and i did believe we would need multiple yeah because it's actually on your thing

01:10:45.760 --> 01:10:50.880
 to like come back but but like i said like it's been 40 minutes and like we don't have anything

01:10:50.880 --> 01:10:56.560
 actually we can do we're we're not in agreement so like let's let's maybe try again next month

01:10:56.560 --> 01:11:04.000
 with those and see if we can talk about it more that's home yeah okay all right so more work for

01:11:04.000 --> 01:11:15.440
 you madison uh or two um okay i'm gonna move along now to one e well this goes right into it what to

01:11:15.440 --> 01:11:24.160
 talk about future meeting topics um so okay it's now it's been you know over an hour was there

01:11:24.160 --> 01:11:29.360
 anything from the first presentation you gave is there anything we need to revisit there uh i think

01:11:30.720 --> 01:11:35.200
 yeah uh as far as future meeting topics the only thing is that the mayor did request that the board

01:11:35.200 --> 01:11:40.640
 consider how a respondent uh might object to a specific board member being assigned to a

01:11:40.640 --> 01:11:47.440
 preliminary panel um held for a complaint fired filed against them um that at the april 4th

01:11:47.440 --> 01:11:53.440
 presentation um so that's just so you know that he requested that be uh discussed as a potential

01:11:53.440 --> 01:12:00.720
 future meeting topic does not require you can decide well i'll tell everybody madison called me

01:12:00.720 --> 01:12:06.640
 and i'm usually like i don't know pick the three people that i have done at least but if there's

01:12:06.640 --> 01:12:10.080
 three people that haven't done it pick somebody that's done it before that's pretty much what i'm

01:12:10.080 --> 01:12:17.680
 saying i have i mean i guess like it could randomly be somebody that has some issue i guess i could see

01:12:17.680 --> 01:12:21.680
 how that might be an issue because i do just try to randomly do it because i don't want anybody like

01:12:21.680 --> 01:12:28.240
 coming after me that i'm like picking and uh and i know for a while there's a lot of turnovers i

01:12:28.240 --> 01:12:32.800
 was on all of them just because i was like the only person that had been on one and luckily i'm not

01:12:32.800 --> 01:12:38.160
 now so i pick other i do not pick myself uh but i could see how that being an issue even if it's

01:12:38.160 --> 01:12:43.840
 a random person it could be a random person that like i don't know the mayor has a lawsuit against

01:12:43.840 --> 01:12:51.600
 or i don't know that might be something legitimate to look at oh well no i'm just saying like

01:12:52.320 --> 01:12:57.360
 say i'm like um you know the three of you are going to be on the preliminary hearing but i don't

01:12:57.360 --> 01:13:03.840
 yeah i think we have a yeah yeah that's there's a so i will put that on the to-do list but that's the

01:13:03.840 --> 01:13:18.080
 direction um so i would say oh so i guess next next meeting we do need to talk about public comment

01:13:18.080 --> 01:13:23.600
 again maybe get an update any discussion that's needed um you already have a burden of proof

01:13:23.600 --> 01:13:30.720
 follow-up i would suggest we increase the time on that yeah i mean maybe we should just put

01:13:30.720 --> 01:13:33.600
 that in the future meeting because we're not going to get through pending matter

01:13:42.960 --> 01:13:49.360
 and i don't know that i mean as far as like the mayor's comment of uh the like objection

01:13:49.360 --> 01:13:55.120
 to plumber that i i kind of think we might agree on that quicker than these other issues on here

01:13:55.120 --> 01:14:03.920
 yeah i'm sure so i don't i mean we could potentially do this is our to-do list essentially um so i can

01:14:03.920 --> 01:14:08.880
 add it to there or we can add it to um i honestly i kind of think i don't know what everybody else

01:14:08.880 --> 01:14:12.560
 thinks that the mayor's thing that he brought up about complaining about who's on the preliminary

01:14:12.560 --> 01:14:17.920
 panel might be quicker than all those things but maybe not because it could be then like what they

01:14:17.920 --> 01:14:21.680
 people council members object to every preliminary panel and then like they're kind of telling you

01:14:21.680 --> 01:14:34.640
 what to do so never mind it's probably long to just put it at the bottom so uh so for june maybe

01:14:34.640 --> 01:14:41.920
 update on the comment public comment and i think that won't take very long because i don't think

01:14:41.920 --> 01:14:46.960
 there'll be a lot of actionable stuff that will just be like hey here's how it's going okay well

01:14:46.960 --> 01:14:54.240
 do and then as far as burden fruit proof talk about um like specifically the testimony and

01:14:54.240 --> 01:14:59.280
 the complaint showing up i don't know if we even want to start tackling another topic because i

01:14:59.280 --> 01:15:09.680
 don't think we would get through it too yeah um i don't know maybe something like definition of

01:15:09.680 --> 01:15:16.000
 alternatives maybe that would be but i mean like i feel like i'm like famous last words if i say

01:15:16.000 --> 01:15:24.640
 any of these different quick so i'm okay if we just put kind of those three things like what we

01:15:24.640 --> 01:15:32.640
 talked about burden proof update on public comment and future meeting topics and then like we won't

01:15:32.640 --> 01:15:42.160
 get burnt out anybody have any that's a good point okay so i think that's that's your direction

01:15:42.160 --> 01:15:49.120
 i believe that's it okay um i have add burden of public comment follow-up increase them and also

01:15:49.120 --> 01:15:54.720
 only just have burden of proof on the next agenda and push pending matter advising to the next one

01:15:54.720 --> 01:16:03.520
 yeah i think i think so and and we can do we can talk about august more i think that's the way to do

01:16:03.520 --> 01:16:10.640
 um yeah all right so is there anything else when would we compare fort worth and austin oh that

01:16:10.640 --> 01:16:22.160
 would be part of the okay we'll just pick right back up on that anything else all right okay we

01:16:22.160 --> 01:16:27.120
 you had mentioned wanting to revisit the previous proposals you want me to add that to the june

01:16:27.120 --> 01:16:33.520
 agenda or no oh as far as like what they said i mean i don't know what does it really think like

01:16:33.520 --> 01:16:43.200
 i kind of think just the ones that they don't i guess like bring to us like kind of what they

01:16:43.200 --> 01:16:50.160
 said about him no just oh like what if an ordinance is adopted before june uh which i don't think it

01:16:50.160 --> 01:16:54.480
 will be um i'll certainly let you know what the new ordinance is and that'll be on the agenda but

01:16:54.480 --> 01:16:59.520
 um yeah i guess if there's new ordinance put on the agenda and maybe we could just put on the

01:16:59.520 --> 01:17:03.600
 agenda the stuff that didn't get passed and maybe we can talk like hey do we want to try to do this

01:17:03.600 --> 01:17:12.240
 again i think that would probably fit in time okay clear is my message i think i understand

01:17:13.520 --> 01:17:22.560
 uh yeah i had a long day i hope i made sense all right any i'm gonna wait till mass is finished

01:17:22.560 --> 01:17:32.560
 writing anything else okay well it's 647 and we will adjourn okay all right thanks everybody