Alright. Okay, ready? It is 5 30 p.m. and on Thursday July 27, 2023 and this is a special call
meeting of the Board of Ethics for the City of Denton, Texas. We have one item for consideration
tonight and that is item BOE 23-031. I request for an advisory opinion for 23-003
from Councilmember Meltzer concerning potential pending matters, conflict of interests,
or improper use of influence, applicability, and refusal recommendation. So we have a couple
of questions that I think will help us determine the decision. So the first question would be,
would a discussion or vote made by the Deep Denton Economic Development Partnership Board
regarding the board's composition be a pending matter? So I ask the members what you think.
If I may ask, in our background, the 12 members, their titles listed here, not their names, but
these would be the titles of the membership that we will be using for this. And Councilman
Meltzer, I'm assuming, is one of the two Councilmembers? Yes, that's correct. Thank you
for that clarification. Okay. And if I may ask, who is the second City Councilmember? I couldn't
look it up. Well, I'm just curious why we're just dealing with one. He requested the advisory
opinion because he's a member of LULAC. He is concerned that there is no Latino representation
on this board and the Latino population is now 25% of the city. And I agree with that. I mean,
I saw that. That was fun. I'm just curious. Right. And then we're not really posted to discuss what
the composition of the board should be, just if he can recommend to the board being a member of
LULAC, that LULAC replace the Hispanic Chamber. But that does not release any responsibility
of the second Councilmember if they feel like there's conflict. I mean, if they had a different
conflict, they could. I don't know what that would be. That's my question. Right. Thank you.
Okay. Can I clarify what we're asked to determine, right? First of all, so at the moment, this is not
before the City Council, correct? Correct. Essentially, we're in the hypothetical situation,
we're asking if he would be allowed to do this per the rules of the other board. Right. And
have dual roles, one being a member of LULAC and secondly, being on the Economic Development
Partnership Board, correct? I think that his concern is, is there an issue with him recommending
LULAC, an organization he's a member of, replace the Hispanic Chamber on the board
by having a member? Because he believes the Hispanic Chamber is now a defunct organization.
So I, then I have, I've got the record facts correct. Okay, that was mine. So do you think,
do you guys think that is a pending matter? And maybe we need to look at the pending matter
definition. And while they're doing that, if I could ask, is, is this being, is the Council
member being, is he asking to, in a sense, fill two spots, one being the City Council member and the
other one filling the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce? I think he's just asking if, as a member of LULAC,
it would be a conflict of interest of him to recommend that LULAC be the one to... Right. I
don't think, my understanding is he's not asking to be both met, both appointed positions. He's just
saying, instead of the Hispanic Chamber, can I recommend LULAC replace them essentially? Thank you.
So it's not, that's what I was curious, I appreciate that. So this is the pending matter.
So you want to read that definition or just something you think?
To me, the pending matter definition is confusing.
Right, and I framed it this way because if there's not a pending matter,
there can't be a conflict of interest for the epics.
My understanding is that it's something that's about to happen and once, once you get past that
date, then, and that's the part that has always confused me about the pending matter definition.
Madam Chair, I think not knowing the full ramification of the Economic Development Partnership Board,
and looking at some of the explanation given to us, I would think if it does not conflict
with the portion that says, "arranging with the city for the provision of good services,
real property, or other things of value in case involving the city," if the operation or the
guidelines of the Economic Development Partnership Board, if that doesn't cross that threshold,
I personally do not see a conflict. I would agree.
But I use that as a caveat. If that, if we find that the board
is more than we think based on those criteria, then I may have a different vote.
But as of right now, I do not see a conflict.
I don't. I can't think. We're looking at pending matter,
and we're looking at the question number one, is there a pending matter? Now, when you look
at your definitions and you go back to your guidelines for definitions, it says these boards
will have these meetings, except where the context clearly indicates a different meeting.
So he's bringing up that this could be a pending matter. So it's up to the board to determine
whether that may fall within the context of pending matter.
I don't hear that there are goods or services or property
hanging on this. I hear it is more of a representation issue.
So I'm going to tease it apart this way. It's like, I believe just because it is about to happen,
in my opinion, it is a pending matter, right? Because his actions will, you know,
will depend on whether or not, right? So I would say, so therefore we can discuss it.
But at the same time, I also don't believe that being a member in an organization,
it's a non-profit organization, and there is no monetary benefit that Council Member Meltzer
would have from making the recommendation he's about to make.
So Rob, what do you think? I believe from my past experience
with Council Member Meltzer that if he sees, while he's on here, something that would be
considered a conflict, I would think that he would recognize that and then recuse himself.
And I appreciate this. It's a great exercise for us to see how this whole process works.
With that in mind, I would move forward with it not being, with the understanding that he knows
if there is one that does pop up because he's familiar with the pending matter.
That's a good way to put it, and this is why I don't like this pending matter working in an
organization. I've said that before. But I think that's a good way to look at it, is that we need
to rely on his ability to figure if there is something that could benefit him and that I
would expect that he would recuse himself at that point. Right, I think he's just asking for advice
on if he should. I would say because of the way we're looking at it, it's not a pending matter.
But I hear what you're saying. Madam Chair, do we need a vote for each one of these or just a
conversation? Okay, so would you make a motion? Is that how you would handle that? I would vote
for each one. Madam Chair, I move that item one of the discussion is I don't think that it is not
a pending matter concern or a violation of the ethics. Okay. I'll second that. Okay, all in favor
say aye. Aye. So it is not a pending matter. So question number two, would a discussion or vote
made by the City Council regarding economic development partnerships composition be a pending
matter? Discussion? Madam Chair, I would once again revert back to my original statement.
And everyone on that council is familiar with the pending matter on what we have discussed. So I
would think that... Same kind of the same logic. I think it would fall in the same safe harbor.
Yeah. And I would move Madam Chair, and I don't mean to speak to her, I move Madam Chair that
item two also be considered a non-violation of the Board of Ethics. Okay. So number two, you're just
considering whether it's a pending matter? For the City Council. For the City Council. That's correct.
In fact, I don't think it would be as long as they don't fall within those criteria.
Right. Is it your motion then that it's not a pending matter? That is correct. Yes ma'am.
Would you be willing to second that? I second that. So all in favor of it not being a pending matter
for the City Council? Aye. Third, if there is a pending matter, I guess we don't have to answer
that question because we've decided it's not. Well this may be, would that be the case or is this just
a standalone pending matter? Well you know this, I think we should vote on this too. So like what you
said Rob, if there is a pending matter then he would have a conflict of interest regarding his
membership in the black? I think that would be true. Okay. Could you say this again please?
If there is a pending matter, does Council Member Meltzer have a conflict of interest
per the definition of conflict of interest? So I would advise him to be cautious moving forward
and to refuse himself if he believes there is a pending matter in the future. With the understanding
of the outline that we have for what a conflict of interest is. Yeah. Which is? So the conflict of
interest definition is that you're an officer of the non-profit. So he's not. He's not. Okay, good
point. Well and if anything else of these that might come up, there may be some monetary issues
of such. And that's why I think it's good that we cover all of those even though they may not be
germane at this moment. But we don't know what the pending matter could become. I looked at Council
Members Meltzer's territory, if you will, and it goes from Fulton Street all the way over to I-35.
There is a large section of less expensive rent apartments that I think are probably,
I do think there's, I think there's a lot of Latino people in his district and he is
white. I'm glad that he's in the black and I'm glad that he's representing
that group because it's important for inclusion. And unless there is a monetary thing, I'm not
concerned that it is a conflict of interest. I think that would be a whole different matter.
For him to be a member. Yeah. I mean for one, we've established the fact that he's not a board
member. Yeah. Therefore, the conflict of interest does not, does not apply. And secondly, he's
already being very transparent. If we're talking about being, you know, if you scrolled up a little
bit, you know, he's already making, he's disclosing that he's a member. He's not hiding that fact. So
I think. Yeah. So I would say it's not. No. Is that a motion?
Do you want to make a motion, Andrea? I'm going to make the motion and it comes to a discussion
point number three that council member Meltzer doesn't, does not appear to have a conflict of
interest as a member of LULAC. I would second that with that term that you put it, does not.
As not being an officer. Well, could you reread that motion, please? My understanding is
the motion that council member Meltzer does not have a conflict of interest as a member of LULAC.
You had added something else though I thought, as we understand, I think you put in. Oh, I did not
put that in the motion, but that was part of my discussion. Oh, I thought that was part of the
motion. Yeah. Okay. He's just a member. Simple member, yeah. So, so you seconded. So all in favor.
And fourth point would council member Meltzer recommending that LULAC chapter,
chapter replace the Denton Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on the Economic Development Partnership
Board be considered improper use of influence per the ethics ordinance? Is there improper influence
in the glossary? No, but this is the section that discusses improper influence, but there's no
definition of anything. Secure special privileges. Greet any special consideration.
Assist the
prestige of the officials or employees in your position in order to advance private
Madam Chair. Yes. I may ask with the letter of explanation from council member Meltzer,
stating that the Denton Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, an organization
that for all intents and purposes no longer exists. So my question is,
is it our opinion that
we have the authority to have that taken off as a title and be replaced from LULAC? I'm wondering
if that should be done, let's say from council level, because if it is for all practical purposes.
That's, that makes, that's a good point. I mean, whether, whatever we think, I believe it's a
council, it's the city council's position or should be their position to make that change,
because we don't have the authority to move names back and forth and such. But we, that's not on the
agenda. You're not posted to discuss the composition of the EDPP, only if council member Meltzer can't
suggest that the composition be changed. But I can address it from the letter that he gave us,
can I not? No, you can't make like a recommendation. No, no, no, I'm not making a recommendation. I
apologize if that was the inference. Speaking just as an open mic situation, I would
I would be, I would not be in favor of passing that on.
I'm looking at the improper influence and if you look down to number five,
stating or implying to state that the city official is a representative of the city
in an organization or to recommend to the city council without having those, having been submitted
to the city council. That's the area I think we need to look at. So are you asking, like, is this
a process issue? Like, could the EDPP do this without going to council? Is that your question?
I don't think number five applies. Yeah. Because that is stated or applied to state or local
government agencies. That's not what he's, that would, this in making a recommendation kind of
in front of the city council would not, number five would not apply in my opinion. The other part that
I, I think that if you were elected to an office like, like city council, your job is to influence
the other members with your opinion because you're representing your constituents and I don't think
that's improper influence. So. I would agree with that. Yeah. In my opinion, the influence that he's
exerting as a representative of Hispanics is part of what he's, what his role is as a city council
member. Because this is sadly a marginalized group and they need all the, in my opinion, they need
all the representation they can get. Our fair representation would be better, you know. I have no,
I have no conflict with that. I just, the way this is worded, recommending LULAC to be,
to replace Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, I don't even think that that would be
that procedure, that mechanism. I'm not sure that's even in the Board of Ethics
anyway. That's why I bring that up that way. Now is that a proper process or thinking?
It's kind of like legislation. There's a mental health law that was on the books
since 1983 that didn't include my license and therefore I could not get reimbursed for Medicare
or Medicaid because only psychologists existed when the law was written. We finally got that
changed this year. So sometimes what's written in documents becomes outdated and then it becomes
problematic. I think that's something that we might want to encourage city council to fix,
but it's not our, and maybe that's a whole different matter. The composition of the EDP?
Yes, we are not discussing whether or not they should change it. You don't have any authority to
do that. I wanted to bring up a point. When they talk about city official and whether they have
conflicts, they talk about council members, department heads, member of the Board of Ethics,
Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, Landmark, or Public Utilities. It doesn't list
the Economic Development Board. That's a really good point. That's a hyper-technical point.
The ordinance needs to be amended. That's my point, and if we can't make that suggestion to
the council, to me that handcuffs us. In your motion you could say because the Economic Development
Board is not listed. Yes. It's not an improper influence. You can't be subject to the ordinance
as improper influence on number four. Because it doesn't exist. Because it doesn't follow the
ordinance, but you can go on to say a recommendation that you consider.
Well, I don't think we have that privilege, do we?
Well, I mean, I don't know, as only three members of the board, I don't think you could make,
give direction to tell council something, but you could bring it up at the next board meeting for
discussion by the whole board, essentially, if that makes sense, to make that recommendation.
I think it's better to just stick with that's not mentioned and it's not our thing.
I think it's proven that we phrase it that way and in our own backdoor way,
tell them they need to update. Do I hear a motion here?
I'm trying, but I just love the way she phrased it and I can't quite.
I would just say that the question is, because the Economic Development Board
is not listed. A city official on the Economic Development Board is not covered by the ethics
ordinance that number four, there's no improper influence. I move for that, please.
And that's a way of telling the council. I think without having to
even get the board, get the rest of the board involved, although I think it'll be prudent.
Well, I'll wait for the vote. If you looked at it the way,
I think the board was supposed to work. The board is part of the ethics ordinance.
He's on the board. He's a member of LULAC. Had he been a board member of LULAC, yes,
he should disclose and then not. None of those taxes.
So we have a motion. I will second that.
Oh wait, I believe the motion is that this would not be improper influence because
the Economic Development Board, the Economic Development Partnership Board
is not listed by the ethics ordinance. Yes.
Or a city official acting on the Economic Development Partnership Board
is not covered on the ethics ordinance. Yeah. Yes. And we have a second to that.
All in favor? Aye. All right. Madam Chair, if I may ask,
these findings from this special call to advisory panel, this will be brought before the ethics board?
If we choose to bring it up. I'm going to, on the agenda, have basically a report that just says these
advisory opinions were issued. So there'll be an item on the agenda during which you can discuss it.
Then we could bring it up if we want to. If we want to, right.
Because I'm wondering with number four, as it's now spelled out, we find the other three
without any conflict because this whole matter is about an item that we don't have
any, it's not at our ethics board. Is that correct? Well you found that it wasn't a pending matter.
Correct. Either the council or the ethics board. And then you found that if the way three is boarded,
you could have considered if it was a pending matter, we have a conflict interest. But you found
against it interpreted that way. I just thought maybe four could have taken the thought for how
we moved with four might have been able to take care of the other three. But it's fine. It's what we,
it's the proper way. And I think for a question too, that was regards to the city council, which
is covered by the order. Okay, thank you. So are there any more motions or points for discussion?
It is 5.55 p.m. and this meeting is adjourned.