1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,400 >> And everybody's here, please call in. 2 00:00:04,400 --> 00:00:06,060 >> Okay. It's 530. 3 00:00:06,060 --> 00:00:07,740 So we'll go ahead and get started and call 4 00:00:07,740 --> 00:00:12,140 to order this meeting of the regular meeting 5 00:00:12,140 --> 00:00:14,100 of the Board of Ethics. 6 00:00:14,100 --> 00:00:17,720 It's 530, August 7th, 2023. 7 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:23,720 Jumping into the agenda, item A, BOE 23-032. 8 00:00:23,720 --> 00:00:28,720 Consider approval of minutes for June 5th, June 22nd, 9 00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:32,520 and July 27th, 2023, and it was a regular meeting 10 00:00:32,520 --> 00:00:35,620 and then two advisory opinions. 11 00:00:35,620 --> 00:00:38,040 I wasn't there, but everything looked okay to me. 12 00:00:38,040 --> 00:00:39,460 Is there any -- 13 00:00:39,460 --> 00:00:41,300 >> I move approval. 14 00:00:41,300 --> 00:00:43,000 >> For all three? 15 00:00:43,000 --> 00:00:43,940 >> Now we have e-comments. 16 00:00:43,940 --> 00:00:46,240 We have to state that we didn't receive any e-comments. 17 00:00:46,240 --> 00:00:47,380 That's true. 18 00:00:47,380 --> 00:00:48,080 >> Oh, before we get started? 19 00:00:48,080 --> 00:00:48,840 Oh, okay. 20 00:00:48,840 --> 00:00:49,540 >> Yeah, sorry. 21 00:00:49,540 --> 00:00:51,120 >> I read the new procedure. 22 00:00:51,120 --> 00:00:55,040 >> Okay. So opening administrative business. 23 00:00:55,040 --> 00:00:56,280 State of the time. 24 00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:58,760 Quorum is present. 25 00:00:58,760 --> 00:01:00,220 Everybody who said they were going to come was here. 26 00:01:00,220 --> 00:01:00,960 We have seven people present. 27 00:01:00,960 --> 00:01:05,120 And we have no e-comments received. 28 00:01:05,120 --> 00:01:08,260 So now to approval of minutes, meeting minutes. 29 00:01:08,260 --> 00:01:09,860 Do I have a motion? 30 00:01:09,860 --> 00:01:11,440 >> I move to approve. 31 00:01:11,440 --> 00:01:13,040 >> Of all three? 32 00:01:13,040 --> 00:01:14,940 >> Of all three. 33 00:01:14,940 --> 00:01:16,300 If that's okay. 34 00:01:16,300 --> 00:01:17,740 >> I'll submit any objection to that. 35 00:01:17,740 --> 00:01:19,700 Okay. Any discussion? 36 00:01:19,700 --> 00:01:21,340 Or I need a second? 37 00:01:21,340 --> 00:01:22,080 >> I'll second. 38 00:01:22,080 --> 00:01:24,720 >> Second by Hannah, moved by Annette, second by Hannah. 39 00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:26,480 Any discussion? 40 00:01:26,480 --> 00:01:28,020 All in favor say aye. 41 00:01:28,020 --> 00:01:28,780 >> Aye. 42 00:01:28,780 --> 00:01:31,180 >> Aye. I think everyone, I think it's unanimous. 43 00:01:31,180 --> 00:01:37,060 So we approve the prior meeting minutes for those three meetings. 44 00:01:37,060 --> 00:01:43,960 Okay. So BOE 23-033, agenda item B. Receive report, hold discussion, 45 00:01:43,960 --> 00:01:47,240 take necessary action regarding the ethics complaint process detailed 46 00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:52,540 in quota ordinance number two, article 11, section 2-281. 47 00:01:52,540 --> 00:01:58,880 Meetings in section 2-282, disposition. 48 00:01:58,880 --> 00:02:03,220 So do you want me to just turn this over to you, Madison? 49 00:02:03,220 --> 00:02:05,460 Do you have a presentation on this? 50 00:02:05,460 --> 00:02:06,260 >> Not really. 51 00:02:06,260 --> 00:02:08,860 >> Oh. I didn't know I was to look it up there. 52 00:02:08,860 --> 00:02:13,660 >> Yeah. Last meeting, we discussed the burden of proof 53 00:02:13,660 --> 00:02:14,960 for two meetings prior to this. 54 00:02:14,960 --> 00:02:17,140 Last meeting there was majority consensus 55 00:02:17,140 --> 00:02:21,360 to remove section 2-281(c)(4) burden of proof 56 00:02:21,360 --> 00:02:23,000 from the ethics ordinance. 57 00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:26,100 At that time, staff was provided direction, or was directed 58 00:02:26,100 --> 00:02:30,440 to provide potential options on how we could gather additional evidence 59 00:02:30,440 --> 00:02:35,560 if needed for an ethics complaint if it was not directed by the complainant. 60 00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:40,960 So I developed, this shows kind of a summary of the current model as well 61 00:02:40,960 --> 00:02:43,700 as three options that I put together based 62 00:02:43,700 --> 00:02:47,000 on just ideas that you all had discussed. 63 00:02:47,000 --> 00:02:49,540 These aren't, we're not necessarily limited to those. 64 00:02:49,540 --> 00:02:53,800 That's just what I tried to do, what you all directed me to do, so. 65 00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:55,660 That's really all I've got. 66 00:02:55,660 --> 00:03:02,940 >> Okay. I was not here for the last meeting. 67 00:03:02,940 --> 00:03:05,580 I wanted to vote it to get rid of the burden of proof. 68 00:03:05,580 --> 00:03:09,180 So I don't really have a lot of comment about this. 69 00:03:09,180 --> 00:03:17,280 >> I think it's really important to consider getting rid 70 00:03:17,280 --> 00:03:24,940 of the burden of proof because on the citizen, because it doesn't appear 71 00:03:24,940 --> 00:03:30,360 that way in any other city that I have found, and it's not in the model code. 72 00:03:30,360 --> 00:03:38,800 It is clear that the burden of proof is between the city and the complainant. 73 00:03:38,800 --> 00:03:43,000 I think to put that pressure on a city will mean that no one's going 74 00:03:43,000 --> 00:03:52,280 to want to file a complaint even if they have what they consider valid reasons. 75 00:03:52,280 --> 00:03:58,320 And I think that the city needs to be the one to say no. 76 00:03:58,320 --> 00:04:00,380 This is between us and you. 77 00:04:00,380 --> 00:04:06,480 It's not even, I don't even think that should be put on us as a board. 78 00:04:06,480 --> 00:04:20,660 I think it's a city thing that if you're violating the code of ethics, then so. 79 00:04:20,660 --> 00:04:24,700 >> So I had to go back and review some of the discussion 80 00:04:24,700 --> 00:04:26,860 from the last meeting because it's been a while. 81 00:04:26,860 --> 00:04:32,040 And a lot of the discussion was about the burden replacing the complainant, 82 00:04:32,040 --> 00:04:39,280 how that would limit certain citizens from wanting to file a complaint for fear 83 00:04:39,280 --> 00:04:43,560 of retribution or fear of the process and having to go through and stand 84 00:04:43,560 --> 00:04:47,720 up in front of the board and present evidence and that sort of thing. 85 00:04:47,720 --> 00:04:52,760 And I think a lot of the discussion was how do we make it so that our process allows 86 00:04:52,760 --> 00:04:57,240 for someone to make a complaint and then not have the responsibility 87 00:04:57,240 --> 00:05:02,000 to be a prosecutor in the process. 88 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:10,380 And there was a lot of discussion about if we could have outside counsel present 89 00:05:10,380 --> 00:05:14,380 that evidence or do some sort of additional investigation 90 00:05:14,380 --> 00:05:20,260 on a complaint to gather evidence or if we could have an advocate or something 91 00:05:20,260 --> 00:05:26,600 like that being a board member or some other party that would guide the complainant 92 00:05:26,600 --> 00:05:33,040 or take their complaint and then ask additional questions prior to the board hearing 93 00:05:33,040 --> 00:05:37,240 and after the preliminary hearing panel. 94 00:05:37,240 --> 00:05:44,820 So I think that would be adding a step in between the preliminary review by the panel 95 00:05:44,820 --> 00:05:51,320 after the complaint is deemed to be complete and have evidence and potentially action. 96 00:05:51,320 --> 00:05:54,260 So that was where a lot of the discussion was like. 97 00:05:54,260 --> 00:06:02,560 How can we make it so that a, you know, typical resident of Denton, 98 00:06:02,560 --> 00:06:08,400 if they have a legitimate complaint, we make it so the process is, 99 00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:12,320 I don't want to say more inviting, but maybe less intimidating 100 00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:16,480 so that they feel comfortable making a complaint. 101 00:06:16,480 --> 00:06:20,160 And we had some discussion about, well, if I'm going to make a complaint, 102 00:06:20,160 --> 00:06:22,460 I'm going to hire an attorney to do that. 103 00:06:22,460 --> 00:06:28,960 And I don't think that is the typical, you know, something typical for a resident 104 00:06:28,960 --> 00:06:35,300 of the city of Denton to want to do, hire an attorney to submit a complaint 105 00:06:35,300 --> 00:06:37,980 for a violation of Denton's ordinance. 106 00:06:37,980 --> 00:06:44,280 So I think what we asked Madison to help with was give us some guidance 107 00:06:44,280 --> 00:06:49,380 on your different options of what we can do compared to where we are now to take some 108 00:06:49,380 --> 00:06:55,200 of that burden off of the complainant and what we could possibly do to make that, 109 00:06:55,200 --> 00:07:02,640 make the process work and not require a citizen to be the complainant to be party 110 00:07:02,640 --> 00:07:08,700 to the entire process after their complaint is deemed valid and not frivolous. 111 00:07:08,700 --> 00:07:18,040 Now, I think some of the discussion we ended on was do we want to be able to ask for, 112 00:07:18,040 --> 00:07:23,420 ask them questions, allow them to submit more evidence or allow board members 113 00:07:23,420 --> 00:07:27,020 to submit evidence or conduct some kind of investigation. 114 00:07:27,020 --> 00:07:31,900 And I think that's where we sort of got hung up last time. 115 00:07:31,900 --> 00:07:37,900 But it seemed like in the discussion everyone kind of was getting to the same point 116 00:07:37,900 --> 00:07:43,040 of the average citizen is not an attorney. 117 00:07:43,040 --> 00:07:49,140 They're not a board of ethics member and they're going to be less familiar with all this process. 118 00:07:49,140 --> 00:07:55,020 And the way it is set up now with the burden of proof lying solely on the complainant, 119 00:07:55,020 --> 00:08:04,220 that is something that is going to limit a citizen from wanting to or feeling 120 00:08:04,220 --> 00:08:10,220 like they could submit a complaint for fear of having to come in front of the board 121 00:08:10,220 --> 00:08:14,400 and speak or be questioned or something like that. 122 00:08:14,400 --> 00:08:18,100 So I don't know if that helps guide a discussion a little bit. 123 00:08:18,100 --> 00:08:23,980 I'm just trying to prevent us from having the same discussion we had last time. 124 00:08:23,980 --> 00:08:31,920 >> Well, as far as these options, I mean, like I said, 125 00:08:31,920 --> 00:08:34,920 I think that the complaint should have some skin in the game. 126 00:08:34,920 --> 00:08:36,160 So I wouldn't vote it for this. 127 00:08:36,160 --> 00:08:41,220 But does anybody have comments about these different options, Madison, before? 128 00:08:41,220 --> 00:08:43,600 >> I have several. 129 00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:44,960 >> Okay. 130 00:08:44,960 --> 00:08:53,200 >> First, I think the BOE advocate is a conflict of interest 131 00:08:53,200 --> 00:08:57,280 for anyone on the board to be the advocate. 132 00:08:57,280 --> 00:09:00,380 So I have a real problem with that option. 133 00:09:00,380 --> 00:09:07,620 It also gives the appearance of bias and also removes a person 134 00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,200 from the pool to even serve on the board rather than advocate. 135 00:09:11,200 --> 00:09:14,360 So I have a real problem with that. 136 00:09:14,360 --> 00:09:17,560 I do have a question about the city attorney. 137 00:09:17,560 --> 00:09:22,140 When I looked up the city attorney, because I remember an incident years ago 138 00:09:22,140 --> 00:09:27,640 when the city attorney helped me with a violation of the ordinance that a neighbor was doing. 139 00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:32,880 And according to the website, and I know we have the office representing here, 140 00:09:32,880 --> 00:09:35,480 the city attorney will assist citizens in preparation 141 00:09:35,480 --> 00:09:39,680 that probably will cause affidavit for class investing. 142 00:09:39,680 --> 00:09:41,720 It responds and files motions. 143 00:09:41,720 --> 00:09:46,020 But I wondered if the city attorney might be someone who could step in 144 00:09:46,020 --> 00:09:48,660 and help a citizen put together the packet. 145 00:09:48,660 --> 00:09:55,640 >> Well, I think there is a conflict of interest as we've already discussed going back to 2018, 146 00:09:55,640 --> 00:09:58,640 that the city attorney is employed by the city. 147 00:09:58,640 --> 00:10:01,380 So their like bosses are counsel. 148 00:10:01,380 --> 00:10:06,240 So they have a conflict of interest of any complaints against counsel. 149 00:10:06,240 --> 00:10:08,240 >> So that would not be an option? 150 00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:10,080 >> I mean, I don't think so. 151 00:10:10,080 --> 00:10:12,980 >> If they were helping them put together the paperwork. 152 00:10:12,980 --> 00:10:15,960 Not necessarily representing them. 153 00:10:15,960 --> 00:10:18,720 >> I think that probably would be considered representing them, 154 00:10:18,720 --> 00:10:20,200 but I don't think that would be the paperwork. 155 00:10:20,200 --> 00:10:21,400 >> Okay. 156 00:10:21,400 --> 00:10:23,100 >> I wouldn't want to put them in that position. 157 00:10:23,100 --> 00:10:27,400 I just threw that out there as one option. 158 00:10:27,400 --> 00:10:32,840 >> Yeah, and I think what you were reading is like there's certain classy complaints 159 00:10:32,840 --> 00:10:38,080 that citizens can make, like, you know, your, I don't know, 160 00:10:38,080 --> 00:10:40,580 neighbor's dog's barking or something like that. 161 00:10:40,580 --> 00:10:43,320 Like not a true crime that's just a final crime. 162 00:10:43,320 --> 00:10:47,080 I think that's what it's talking about, what you're reading. 163 00:10:47,080 --> 00:10:58,300 >> So my final comment is that in the code, it says that complaint has the right to be 164 00:10:58,300 --> 00:11:02,700 represented by legal counsel, which in itself is rather intimidating. 165 00:11:02,700 --> 00:11:06,480 But then in the procedure, it says legal counsel or another representative, 166 00:11:06,480 --> 00:11:08,880 which sounds a little bit more user-friendly, 167 00:11:08,880 --> 00:11:10,740 that you don't necessarily have legal counsel, 168 00:11:10,740 --> 00:11:15,680 but you could have someone be with you and advocate for you. 169 00:11:15,680 --> 00:11:21,760 >> Yeah, I think we've discussed this before when we changed that. 170 00:11:21,760 --> 00:11:26,800 I think we changed it to representative possibly way back several years ago, 171 00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:31,460 that like you can't have just anybody that's not an attorney come forward. 172 00:11:31,460 --> 00:11:34,160 I mean, I think you're probably right about the Board of Ethics. 173 00:11:34,160 --> 00:11:37,160 You have a good point about that, but I think you're all right. 174 00:11:37,160 --> 00:11:39,740 It could just be anyone that's not an attorney. 175 00:11:39,740 --> 00:11:42,380 >> So that should be in the code, and it's not. 176 00:11:42,380 --> 00:11:45,880 It's in the procedure, but it's not in the code. 177 00:11:45,880 --> 00:12:02,260 >> Madam Chair, is it your feeling as excellent points like that are being brought up, 178 00:12:02,260 --> 00:12:11,200 do you want us to make a point on that, direct and move on, 179 00:12:11,200 --> 00:12:18,040 or just at the end we catch and put them all into the basket and see what we've got to talk about? 180 00:12:18,040 --> 00:12:19,520 >> I mean, I guess that's it. 181 00:12:19,520 --> 00:12:23,380 I mean, I think that maybe it's a good thing to go through which ones don't work 182 00:12:23,380 --> 00:12:26,720 and maybe which ones could be looked into more. 183 00:12:26,720 --> 00:12:32,760 >> Well, because I'm wondering, Deborah's saying another one of the laborers that a motion made 184 00:12:32,760 --> 00:12:35,800 to have that put back in if it had been taken out. 185 00:12:35,800 --> 00:12:39,860 >> Well, I think we added it to procedure, but what she's saying, it's never been in the -- 186 00:12:39,860 --> 00:12:43,040 I don't think it's ever been in the code, because I don't think we took it out. 187 00:12:43,040 --> 00:12:44,600 Unless we did, I couldn't be remembering it. 188 00:12:44,600 --> 00:12:47,600 >> Well, that's what I'm asking, you want to have that included in the code, 189 00:12:47,600 --> 00:12:50,520 and is that something that will go before the council for their approval? 190 00:12:50,520 --> 00:12:56,820 >> But that would be true in a -- I guess in a court of law, you can have anybody represent you. 191 00:12:56,820 --> 00:13:00,860 It probably should be an attorney, but -- 192 00:13:00,860 --> 00:13:03,520 >> Yeah, I mean, in court of law, you can only have an attorney representing you. 193 00:13:03,520 --> 00:13:05,560 You can't have anybody else. 194 00:13:05,560 --> 00:13:09,500 Like, you either pro se yourself, you represent yourself for an attorney, 195 00:13:09,500 --> 00:13:11,640 but I wonder if you even need it in the code. 196 00:13:11,640 --> 00:13:13,040 That might be something to look into. 197 00:13:13,040 --> 00:13:15,640 Like, if it's in the procedure, you need it in the code, 198 00:13:15,640 --> 00:13:18,540 because the procedure is how we do the proceedings. 199 00:13:18,540 --> 00:13:20,680 >> Or like, interpretive guidance. 200 00:13:20,680 --> 00:13:22,640 >> Yeah, I mean, because that's what it is. 201 00:13:22,640 --> 00:13:25,080 It is interpretive guidance, the code. 202 00:13:25,080 --> 00:13:28,180 >> I think some of the concern about what's in the code is that it says 203 00:13:28,180 --> 00:13:35,360 that the complainant has the obligation to put forth evidence, including testimony, 204 00:13:35,360 --> 00:13:42,600 and the complainant is required to testify at the hearing, unless it's determined to be through with us. 205 00:13:42,600 --> 00:13:50,240 So, a lot of the discussion was, do we want to require the complainant to testify at the hearing? 206 00:13:50,240 --> 00:13:55,640 And that -- I think the people that are -- a lot of the discussion we've had is, 207 00:13:55,640 --> 00:14:00,580 is that fair to a citizen to require them to testify? 208 00:14:00,580 --> 00:14:07,560 If they have submitted all -- they've submitted the complaint correctly, they submitted their evidence, 209 00:14:07,560 --> 00:14:14,720 do we -- should we require the complainant to come to the hearing that is not a hearing 210 00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:18,060 about the complaint itself, but about the respondent? 211 00:14:18,060 --> 00:14:22,500 >> Well, I think you should also think about the accused and the rights they have, you know, 212 00:14:22,500 --> 00:14:29,080 whether whichever council member it is, should they have a right to confront who's accused them? 213 00:14:29,080 --> 00:14:34,480 And witnesses against them, but, you know, that's kind of -- my criminal background is like, you know -- 214 00:14:34,480 --> 00:14:38,620 >> Yeah, I think they should certainly have the right to know who's filing a complaint, 215 00:14:38,620 --> 00:14:44,560 but I think them putting all of the -- you've got to gather all of the data, 216 00:14:44,560 --> 00:14:46,420 which they might not have access to. 217 00:14:46,420 --> 00:14:50,000 >> But if everybody's in consensus that we're moving on from that, 218 00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:53,560 I guess I don't really think there's a point discussing it longer. 219 00:14:53,560 --> 00:14:56,800 We just have to figure out, so what do we do now? 220 00:14:56,800 --> 00:15:00,600 >> I think we've already taken that out, the requirement for the complainant. 221 00:15:00,600 --> 00:15:01,380 >> Well, I guess -- 222 00:15:01,380 --> 00:15:02,940 >> I think that's already -- 223 00:15:02,940 --> 00:15:05,100 >> A recommendation, right? 224 00:15:05,100 --> 00:15:07,320 >> Well, there's majority consensus. 225 00:15:07,320 --> 00:15:11,620 We haven't settled on language yet, exactly, because I don't know what to replace it with. 226 00:15:11,620 --> 00:15:14,220 So we haven't voted on a specific proposal yet. 227 00:15:14,220 --> 00:15:15,660 We're still kind of crafting it. 228 00:15:15,660 --> 00:15:18,220 >> Okay. Okay. 229 00:15:18,220 --> 00:15:28,800 And so there's an outside counsel, so up there, I wonder how can entire counsel be 230 00:15:28,800 --> 00:15:35,580 about being able to hire attorneys to investigate them. 231 00:15:35,580 --> 00:15:37,940 Just throwing that out there. 232 00:15:37,940 --> 00:15:41,280 Is that likely to, you know, be something that's -- 233 00:15:41,280 --> 00:15:44,880 >> So we're more concerned probably about what the counsel thinks 234 00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:47,020 than what's best for the citizen. 235 00:15:47,020 --> 00:15:52,420 >> Well, I mean, if we present it to them and they don't accept it, then nothing gets done. 236 00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:55,380 >> No, that doesn't happen. 237 00:15:55,380 --> 00:15:58,260 >> Yeah, that's -- I mean, I go back to, like, they don't -- 238 00:15:58,260 --> 00:16:03,160 they did not pass that they can't vote on things they take money about. 239 00:16:03,160 --> 00:16:09,400 So, you know, would they want to hire attorneys to investigate them? 240 00:16:09,400 --> 00:16:16,340 Might be something to think about as far as that one. 241 00:16:16,340 --> 00:16:23,220 >> I just think it's one of the many ways this code is like no other that I've read anywhere. 242 00:16:23,220 --> 00:16:28,980 And it's -- puts a very heavy burden on citizens. 243 00:16:28,980 --> 00:16:39,100 And I do think if we had a preliminary hearing, I think some of the complaints 244 00:16:39,100 --> 00:16:46,440 that have been filed would have gone away just in that. 245 00:16:46,440 --> 00:16:51,540 >> So at the preliminary hearing, it says city auditor responsible 246 00:16:51,540 --> 00:16:55,580 for acquiring additional evidence as directed to the extent possible. 247 00:16:55,580 --> 00:17:00,460 But then is that a conflict of the city auditor doing an investigation on city council 248 00:17:00,460 --> 00:17:04,220 and the city auditor is an employee of city council? 249 00:17:04,220 --> 00:17:08,060 >> I mean, it certainly could be. 250 00:17:08,060 --> 00:17:09,960 >> Yeah, I might have a concern. 251 00:17:09,960 --> 00:17:15,100 >> But I don't -- I mean, literally anybody who works with the city is 252 00:17:15,100 --> 00:17:18,040 in some way conflicted to the state council. 253 00:17:18,040 --> 00:17:21,980 >> Well, I mean, that's why I think when we have advisory opinions, 254 00:17:21,980 --> 00:17:27,820 when we have actual hearings, that's why we bring in the law firm. 255 00:17:27,820 --> 00:17:30,320 That's necessarily, you know, hypothetically thinking 256 00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:32,780 at these things I don't think is a conflict. 257 00:17:32,780 --> 00:17:38,120 But when you're actually talking about, you know, accusing someone in the city 258 00:17:38,120 --> 00:17:41,260 of doing something, then you start getting into the conflict. 259 00:17:41,260 --> 00:17:59,340 >> So we're agreed that it's okay to shift the burden away from the complainant, 260 00:17:59,340 --> 00:18:02,340 but we just don't know how to work that? 261 00:18:02,340 --> 00:18:05,480 Does that -- am I understanding that correctly? 262 00:18:05,480 --> 00:18:11,660 >> I think there was -- my understanding from last meeting was there was majority consensus 263 00:18:11,660 --> 00:18:16,000 to essentially strike the section of the code that says burden approved. 264 00:18:16,000 --> 00:18:22,000 That specifically puts that on the complainant, which based on the research, 265 00:18:22,000 --> 00:18:25,340 there's no other section like -- no other city has a specific section 266 00:18:25,340 --> 00:18:27,200 that specifically calls that out. 267 00:18:27,200 --> 00:18:28,140 >> Right. 268 00:18:28,140 --> 00:18:29,880 >> That's true. 269 00:18:29,880 --> 00:18:33,180 But then the question was, well, then if we do that, 270 00:18:33,180 --> 00:18:35,380 what other ways do we gather additional evidence? 271 00:18:35,380 --> 00:18:37,880 If we need it, who -- how do we run the hearing? 272 00:18:37,880 --> 00:18:39,760 And that kind of -- there were those questions. 273 00:18:39,760 --> 00:18:42,380 So there were several ideas tossed around. 274 00:18:42,380 --> 00:18:45,720 I tried to put them on paper so that we could discuss them. 275 00:18:45,720 --> 00:18:50,700 >> If I may -- go ahead. 276 00:18:50,700 --> 00:18:52,300 >> This says gather additional evidence. 277 00:18:52,300 --> 00:18:57,800 I guess my question or thought would be, like, just because you're gathering evidence, 278 00:18:57,800 --> 00:19:02,340 does that necessarily mean it has to be in favor of the complainant? 279 00:19:02,340 --> 00:19:10,440 Like, if you gathered additional evidence as, let's say, city auditor in this second row, 280 00:19:10,440 --> 00:19:13,560 you might find that different evidence that is, like, to the contrary. 281 00:19:13,560 --> 00:19:17,960 So you're doing your job, but you're not necessarily favoring a side. 282 00:19:17,960 --> 00:19:21,420 >> Well, I mean, I think you could probably call that investigation. 283 00:19:21,420 --> 00:19:22,420 >> Okay. 284 00:19:22,420 --> 00:19:26,560 >> You know, and I think the investigation of the complaint against, you know, okay, good. 285 00:19:26,560 --> 00:19:30,300 If they find something that says the person didn't do anything, that's good. 286 00:19:30,300 --> 00:19:35,640 But -- and, I mean, I trust Madison's ethics, but what if you have a city auditor 287 00:19:35,640 --> 00:19:39,340 that that's their bosses and they want their contract renewed? 288 00:19:39,340 --> 00:19:43,720 Then they might find evidence that, you know, is favorable toward the council member. 289 00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:47,660 And so that's where you have the conflict of things could go bad, and they might not want 290 00:19:47,660 --> 00:19:48,920 to find that bad evidence. 291 00:19:48,920 --> 00:19:54,600 So even if they find good stuff, they're still investigating the council person. 292 00:19:54,600 --> 00:19:57,080 And, you know, we'll see what comes out of it. 293 00:19:57,080 --> 00:19:58,400 But that's where the conflict is. 294 00:19:58,400 --> 00:20:00,480 >> Yeah. That's a conflict. 295 00:20:00,480 --> 00:20:03,000 Absolutely. 296 00:20:03,000 --> 00:20:12,580 >> So if no other city has a burden of proof, what's the process that they use to -- 297 00:20:12,580 --> 00:20:14,240 >> It's often similar to what we're doing. 298 00:20:14,240 --> 00:20:17,980 There's just not a section in the ordinance that specifically says burden 299 00:20:17,980 --> 00:20:22,220 of proof is the totally -- I mean, it doesn't exactly say the totally the complainant, 300 00:20:22,220 --> 00:20:24,420 but that's basically what it says. 301 00:20:24,420 --> 00:20:28,880 >> So what you're saying is the other cities, it's on the complainant? 302 00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:33,160 >> The complainant is typically required to at least testify at a preliminary hearing 303 00:20:33,160 --> 00:20:38,160 or hearing and present their -- what they submitted in the complaint as a narrative. 304 00:20:38,160 --> 00:20:41,400 >> I thought Fort Worth was the only city that required them to testify 305 00:20:41,400 --> 00:20:43,640 and the others didn't know that. 306 00:20:43,640 --> 00:20:47,800 >> No. There was -- most of them require them to testify. 307 00:20:47,800 --> 00:20:49,200 I could go back to our previous -- 308 00:20:49,200 --> 00:20:51,000 >> I feel like we had a chart about that at one point. 309 00:20:51,000 --> 00:20:58,520 >> Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. 310 00:20:58,520 --> 00:21:01,240 >> We did. 311 00:21:01,240 --> 00:21:05,200 It was in May. 312 00:21:05,200 --> 00:21:07,480 Thank you, Madison. 313 00:21:07,480 --> 00:21:07,880 >> Oh my gosh. 314 00:21:07,880 --> 00:21:10,000 How do you remember which meeting that was? 315 00:21:10,000 --> 00:21:12,360 >> I know. 316 00:21:12,360 --> 00:21:14,520 Madison's good. 317 00:21:14,520 --> 00:21:20,240 >> Incredible. 318 00:21:20,240 --> 00:21:22,200 >> Wow. 319 00:21:22,200 --> 00:21:23,760 >> Whoa. 320 00:21:23,760 --> 00:21:40,400 >> I feel like we looked at this chart and we talked about it and we didn't take it for now. 321 00:21:40,400 --> 00:21:41,480 Is that what happened at that meeting? 322 00:21:41,480 --> 00:21:42,760 >> This was in May. 323 00:21:42,760 --> 00:21:44,200 >> In June, you directed it. 324 00:21:44,200 --> 00:21:44,440 >> Okay. 325 00:21:44,440 --> 00:21:48,000 >> And then in June, yeah, in May, you directed me to present more detail 326 00:21:48,000 --> 00:21:49,600 about Fort Worth and Austin, I believe. 327 00:21:49,600 --> 00:21:55,880 And then in June, there was majority consensus to remove that. 328 00:21:55,880 --> 00:22:04,920 >> If I may, what is the difference between the testifying and the presuming? 329 00:22:04,920 --> 00:22:07,840 >> I think there's not a difference. 330 00:22:07,840 --> 00:22:08,360 I don't know. 331 00:22:08,360 --> 00:22:13,440 That's -- well, I guess if we just took the burden of evidence out -- 332 00:22:13,440 --> 00:22:15,080 >> Well, I don't think it occurred to you. 333 00:22:15,080 --> 00:22:18,040 That's what I -- I'm sorry, and then -- 334 00:22:18,040 --> 00:22:23,360 >> I guess if we just took the burden of proof out, that would be a step forward. 335 00:22:23,360 --> 00:22:31,160 And then I guess I think what we were struggling with that time was, 336 00:22:31,160 --> 00:22:34,840 should the complainant be compelled to testify? 337 00:22:34,840 --> 00:22:42,560 >> I think that there should be something to replace burden of proof if it's taken out. 338 00:22:42,560 --> 00:22:47,600 Otherwise, there's no direction in how evidence is collected. 339 00:22:47,600 --> 00:22:49,720 And somebody might just put a complaint up, 340 00:22:49,720 --> 00:22:52,120 and then nobody has the responsibility to look into it. 341 00:22:52,120 --> 00:22:55,160 And then we go to a hearing, and it's like default judgment 342 00:22:55,160 --> 00:22:57,360 because there's no evidence against it. 343 00:22:57,360 --> 00:22:59,520 >> That's happened. 344 00:22:59,520 --> 00:23:02,320 >> Well, then that means it's the complainant's burden still, 345 00:23:02,320 --> 00:23:03,920 because that's the only person. 346 00:23:03,920 --> 00:23:06,960 So you either have to -- you keep it as is. 347 00:23:06,960 --> 00:23:11,880 You make it ambiguous, and the complainant doesn't even know it's their responsibility. 348 00:23:11,880 --> 00:23:16,240 Or you figure out how to do it a new way. 349 00:23:16,240 --> 00:23:20,200 Which I think I brought it up at the May meeting, if that's the last time when I was 350 00:23:20,200 --> 00:23:22,640 at and we looked over this. 351 00:23:22,640 --> 00:23:27,320 You're going to have to ask city council to probably hire out somebody from the outside, 352 00:23:27,320 --> 00:23:32,120 or hire some sort of investigator to do this. 353 00:23:32,120 --> 00:23:35,640 And I think that probably is a challenge, and I know you brought it before. 354 00:23:35,640 --> 00:23:38,280 I wish we'd think about whether they would do it or not. 355 00:23:38,280 --> 00:23:41,280 But I mean, I think we should, because if they're not going to do it, 356 00:23:41,280 --> 00:23:46,120 we need to think of a good way to do it. 357 00:23:46,120 --> 00:23:56,360 >> Well, if we're making sure that the council member or the complainee has representation, 358 00:23:56,360 --> 00:24:01,240 why wouldn't we also provide that for a complainant? 359 00:24:01,240 --> 00:24:04,440 Why wouldn't we give them some support, even if it -- 360 00:24:04,440 --> 00:24:06,320 >> The person that complains against? 361 00:24:06,320 --> 00:24:09,000 We don't provide counsel for them. 362 00:24:09,000 --> 00:24:14,360 >> No, but why would -- I mean, if we're doing it for the accused, 363 00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,800 why would we not also do it? 364 00:24:16,800 --> 00:24:20,680 I mean, this is not like a court of law for -- 365 00:24:20,680 --> 00:24:23,520 >> We don't provide counsel for the accused. 366 00:24:23,520 --> 00:24:25,080 >> Or either side. 367 00:24:25,080 --> 00:24:26,600 >> They provide their own -- 368 00:24:26,600 --> 00:24:28,440 >> Or they do themselves. 369 00:24:28,440 --> 00:24:32,240 I think -- because I think, like, Paul had an attorney. 370 00:24:32,240 --> 00:24:32,920 >> Right. 371 00:24:32,920 --> 00:24:35,640 >> But I don't know if -- I don't remember her. 372 00:24:35,640 --> 00:24:36,400 I think I'm missing -- 373 00:24:36,400 --> 00:24:38,080 >> His attorney wasn't a city employee. 374 00:24:38,080 --> 00:24:40,120 >> Yeah. I feel like he -- that was -- I mean, I don't -- 375 00:24:40,120 --> 00:24:41,960 I actually don't think he hired him. 376 00:24:41,960 --> 00:24:44,720 I'm not totally sure, but, you know, he did -- 377 00:24:44,720 --> 00:24:46,360 the city didn't provide an attorney. 378 00:24:46,360 --> 00:24:48,640 >> Our office recuses itself entirely. 379 00:24:48,640 --> 00:24:51,720 >> Yeah. And then we get -- we get counsel as the board of ethics. 380 00:24:51,720 --> 00:24:54,080 They pay for outside counsel for us. 381 00:24:54,080 --> 00:24:56,920 So you're talking about the city would have to pay outside counsel 382 00:24:56,920 --> 00:25:00,560 for us and outside counsel as the investigator. 383 00:25:00,560 --> 00:25:03,720 So two different outside counsels. 384 00:25:03,720 --> 00:25:05,080 >> Makes it expensive. 385 00:25:05,080 --> 00:25:08,080 >> Yes. So something to consider. 386 00:25:08,080 --> 00:25:08,560 Yes? 387 00:25:08,560 --> 00:25:13,000 >> So if -- what I'm hearing, and correct me if I'm wrong, 388 00:25:13,000 --> 00:25:17,480 is that the point of contention is the phrase burden of proof. 389 00:25:17,480 --> 00:25:20,360 But the process remains the same. 390 00:25:20,360 --> 00:25:25,520 >> Well, based on if we just took out the wording burden of proof, 391 00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:29,200 then -- or just took out the section about burden of proof, 392 00:25:29,200 --> 00:25:33,420 then there's no section saying how evidence comes to us. 393 00:25:33,420 --> 00:25:36,440 And so really the -- it's ambiguous. 394 00:25:36,440 --> 00:25:38,080 So the complaint wanted no. 395 00:25:38,080 --> 00:25:39,400 And the only way you're really going 396 00:25:39,400 --> 00:25:42,480 to get evidence to us is the complaint would bring it. 397 00:25:42,480 --> 00:25:45,120 >> So is there another phrase that would take care of that issue 398 00:25:45,120 --> 00:25:48,600 without it sounding like burden of proof? 399 00:25:48,600 --> 00:25:50,800 >> I mean, but -- well, then you're just -- I mean -- 400 00:25:50,800 --> 00:25:52,080 >> I know it's synaptic. 401 00:25:52,080 --> 00:25:53,000 >> Yeah, exactly. 402 00:25:53,000 --> 00:25:56,160 The things that you all are worried about are still there. 403 00:25:56,160 --> 00:25:59,640 >> But that is the thing that I have objected to the most about -- 404 00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:02,640 one of the things about this code is 405 00:26:02,640 --> 00:26:05,840 that it clearly says this rests on a citizen. 406 00:26:05,840 --> 00:26:11,160 And I -- maybe it makes it more ambiguous, but at least let's stay 407 00:26:11,160 --> 00:26:17,200 with taking it out and then figure out what we need to clean 408 00:26:17,200 --> 00:26:19,720 up, you know, for the rest of the procedures. 409 00:26:19,720 --> 00:26:23,640 It's pretty obvious someone is making a complaint. 410 00:26:23,640 --> 00:26:26,480 It's kind of part of the democratic process 411 00:26:26,480 --> 00:26:29,600 that you know your accuser. 412 00:26:29,600 --> 00:26:33,440 You know, I personally would expect all those things. 413 00:26:33,440 --> 00:26:37,960 I just really object to the very strong statement 414 00:26:37,960 --> 00:26:40,720 that this is on the citizen. 415 00:26:40,720 --> 00:26:45,920 I just don't think that's a good way to couch it. 416 00:26:45,920 --> 00:26:49,040 >> So you're saying you want to just like put it to council, 417 00:26:49,040 --> 00:26:51,400 let's just take this section out. 418 00:26:51,400 --> 00:26:54,560 And what if council's like, okay, whoever's presenting this, 419 00:26:54,560 --> 00:26:57,120 how are we -- how would the Board of Ethics get evidence then? 420 00:26:57,120 --> 00:27:00,080 >> I don't think anything would change. 421 00:27:00,080 --> 00:27:04,080 I mean I don't think anything is changing except 422 00:27:04,080 --> 00:27:08,520 for the last sentence there. 423 00:27:08,520 --> 00:27:10,920 I mean if they -- if we take this -- 424 00:27:10,920 --> 00:27:13,960 if we completely strike that from the ordinance, 425 00:27:13,960 --> 00:27:17,320 then a complaints failure to testify 426 00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:22,680 to hearing is not grounds for dismissal of the complaint. 427 00:27:22,680 --> 00:27:25,920 Like that -- as far as like in practice what's actually going 428 00:27:25,920 --> 00:27:28,320 to happen, that's the only thing that's really going 429 00:27:28,320 --> 00:27:29,560 to change here. 430 00:27:29,560 --> 00:27:32,600 Right now they still have to submit their evidence 431 00:27:32,600 --> 00:27:37,080 like that farther up in the -- in the ordinance. 432 00:27:37,080 --> 00:27:41,600 Part of the complaint package includes their, you know, 433 00:27:41,600 --> 00:27:44,840 the name of the complainant, their information, 434 00:27:44,840 --> 00:27:47,840 what section they're violating and then some other things, 435 00:27:47,840 --> 00:27:51,280 the statement of facts and other documents and materials. 436 00:27:51,280 --> 00:27:52,880 We're not changing any of that. 437 00:27:52,880 --> 00:27:56,680 The reality is we could strike out that burden 438 00:27:56,680 --> 00:27:59,040 of proof paragraph completely. 439 00:27:59,040 --> 00:28:01,560 Everything would be exactly the same as it is now. 440 00:28:01,560 --> 00:28:05,160 It might feel better because it doesn't say burden of proof, 441 00:28:05,160 --> 00:28:09,360 but they still have to do everything except for testify. 442 00:28:09,360 --> 00:28:12,200 And right now the way it's written is if they don't show 443 00:28:12,200 --> 00:28:15,440 up to the hearing, not the preliminary panel hearing, 444 00:28:15,440 --> 00:28:20,360 but the actual hearing after a complaint deemed actionable 445 00:28:20,360 --> 00:28:23,400 and complete, if they don't show up to that hearing, 446 00:28:23,400 --> 00:28:26,760 then we throw out the complaint. 447 00:28:26,760 --> 00:28:28,960 So in practice, the only thing that we're doing 448 00:28:28,960 --> 00:28:32,640 by striking this whole paragraph would be maybe making us feel 449 00:28:32,640 --> 00:28:36,160 better about not using the word burden of proof 450 00:28:36,160 --> 00:28:39,040 and not requiring the complainant to testify. 451 00:28:39,040 --> 00:28:42,880 And I don't know if those are good things or bad. 452 00:28:42,880 --> 00:28:46,560 I mean, I think there is some concern 453 00:28:46,560 --> 00:28:50,800 over not requiring the complainant to show up at the hearing 454 00:28:50,800 --> 00:28:53,960 because they -- the respondent is being accused of something 455 00:28:53,960 --> 00:28:58,320 and they have the right to respond however they respond. 456 00:28:58,320 --> 00:29:00,800 But are they responding to the person or are they responding 457 00:29:00,800 --> 00:29:04,040 to the complaint, the evidence that was submitted? 458 00:29:04,040 --> 00:29:07,000 >> So I guess, I mean, so does everyone want 459 00:29:07,000 --> 00:29:11,880 to just take this out and just not have a backup? 460 00:29:11,880 --> 00:29:12,600 Is that what you're saying? 461 00:29:12,600 --> 00:29:16,520 Is that -- I would -- I think -- 462 00:29:16,520 --> 00:29:20,280 oh, I don't think Rob's talking on the subject. 463 00:29:20,280 --> 00:29:23,920 >> If we don't have a title, if we don't call it something, 464 00:29:23,920 --> 00:29:27,280 we're all gone. 465 00:29:27,280 --> 00:29:28,160 We're gone. 466 00:29:28,160 --> 00:29:30,280 Next month, let's say, we have a new group come in. 467 00:29:30,280 --> 00:29:32,040 How do they find this? 468 00:29:32,040 --> 00:29:35,960 >> How do they find this? 469 00:29:35,960 --> 00:29:36,880 >> There's no title. 470 00:29:36,880 --> 00:29:39,400 There's nothing -- there's nothing here to -- 471 00:29:39,400 --> 00:29:41,240 if we wanted to see the procedure here 472 00:29:41,240 --> 00:29:43,720 and we don't have a title for it, how -- 473 00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:46,000 where are you going to look it up to look for it? 474 00:29:46,000 --> 00:29:46,680 Procedure? 475 00:29:46,680 --> 00:29:47,800 Yeah. 476 00:29:47,800 --> 00:29:50,520 >> If that's not in there and doesn't have a title, 477 00:29:50,520 --> 00:29:52,400 if that paragraph is gone, 478 00:29:52,400 --> 00:29:55,840 nothing changes except that we cannot throw out a complaint 479 00:29:55,840 --> 00:29:59,120 if the complaint doesn't show up. 480 00:29:59,120 --> 00:30:03,800 Right now, we're not discussing who can conduct an investigation 481 00:30:03,800 --> 00:30:05,600 or present more evidence. 482 00:30:05,600 --> 00:30:08,880 Right now, the way it's written, that is solely on the complaint 483 00:30:08,880 --> 00:30:11,280 and that's not because of this paragraph. 484 00:30:11,280 --> 00:30:13,880 That's because that's the way it's written up above whenever 485 00:30:13,880 --> 00:30:15,320 they have to submit their complaint. 486 00:30:15,320 --> 00:30:16,400 >> And I'm fine with that. 487 00:30:16,400 --> 00:30:18,120 It's this burden-improved thing. 488 00:30:18,120 --> 00:30:19,240 It's something they'll turn. 489 00:30:19,240 --> 00:30:23,680 >> And it's another way this document is a legal document. 490 00:30:23,680 --> 00:30:26,360 >> Well, I mean, it is a legal document and it is a hearing. 491 00:30:26,360 --> 00:30:31,080 >> It's an ethical code and ethics are not the same as law. 492 00:30:31,080 --> 00:30:33,480 >> But you were accusing someone of doing something 493 00:30:33,480 --> 00:30:37,440 that could affect them, like, you know, I don't know. 494 00:30:37,440 --> 00:30:38,160 >> Understood. 495 00:30:38,160 --> 00:30:43,960 >> About not giving, you know, all the legal, you know, 496 00:30:43,960 --> 00:30:47,200 procedural due process to the counselor. 497 00:30:47,200 --> 00:30:52,360 >> The law is a set of rules and ethics are something different 498 00:30:52,360 --> 00:30:54,000 and it is something -- 499 00:30:54,000 --> 00:30:57,000 >> But in order to go through a complaint, you have to have a set 500 00:30:57,000 --> 00:30:59,800 of rules and it's an ordinance and it is a law. 501 00:30:59,800 --> 00:31:03,640 >> I was about to say, may I finish? 502 00:31:03,640 --> 00:31:06,000 >> Yeah, sure. 503 00:31:06,000 --> 00:31:07,480 >> It's something that I think a lot 504 00:31:07,480 --> 00:31:09,520 of lawyers don't understand. 505 00:31:09,520 --> 00:31:13,240 >> Okay, we're not going to talk badly 506 00:31:13,240 --> 00:31:15,960 about people of certain professions, Hannah. 507 00:31:15,960 --> 00:31:21,520 >> It's gone. 508 00:31:21,520 --> 00:31:23,720 It's back with Rob, so I'll let it go. 509 00:31:23,720 --> 00:31:27,000 >> All right, so we've spent the allotted time on this. 510 00:31:27,000 --> 00:31:30,040 Is it that we just want to, there was consensus last time 511 00:31:30,040 --> 00:31:33,240 to leave out burden of proof and so we're saying we don't want 512 00:31:33,240 --> 00:31:36,040 to do any of the options Madison says and just go forward 513 00:31:36,040 --> 00:31:38,000 with just getting that out. 514 00:31:38,000 --> 00:31:40,720 I mean, if anybody has a motion for that, they can do that, 515 00:31:40,720 --> 00:31:43,720 or if we need to give more guidance to Madison 516 00:31:43,720 --> 00:31:48,840 to further the conversation, we can do that. 517 00:31:48,840 --> 00:31:52,520 >> I would propose modification. 518 00:31:52,520 --> 00:31:57,120 I like the file complaint is the complaint. 519 00:31:57,120 --> 00:32:00,040 Well, same law, the column one. 520 00:32:00,040 --> 00:32:03,920 Column two, I like that the Board of Ethics have, 521 00:32:03,920 --> 00:32:06,680 we have a responsibility of saying here's what evidence we 522 00:32:06,680 --> 00:32:10,640 would need to agree with you or disagree. 523 00:32:10,640 --> 00:32:14,800 Then who's responsible for gathering the initial evidence? 524 00:32:14,800 --> 00:32:17,920 I believe it's the complainant, not a city auditor 525 00:32:17,920 --> 00:32:20,640 or the other options that are listed there. 526 00:32:20,640 --> 00:32:26,360 And then the Board of Ethics listens to the evidence 527 00:32:26,360 --> 00:32:27,760 and makes a decision. 528 00:32:27,760 --> 00:32:32,520 So it's a modification of the second line there. 529 00:32:32,520 --> 00:32:34,520 >> Who would make the present, I apologize, 530 00:32:34,520 --> 00:32:38,160 who would make the present evidence, or present the evidence, 531 00:32:38,160 --> 00:32:44,720 are you saying the Board of Ethics would then present the evidence? 532 00:32:44,720 --> 00:32:45,400 Who would present it? 533 00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:48,480 >> We're saying, I would say the Board of Ethics says, 534 00:32:48,480 --> 00:32:51,200 here's what we need to make a judgment. 535 00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:52,680 >> I got that. 536 00:32:52,680 --> 00:32:56,120 >> And then the complainant is responsible for gathering 537 00:32:56,120 --> 00:32:59,720 that evidence that we've listed, here's what's required. 538 00:32:59,720 --> 00:33:02,440 And then in the normal course of events, 539 00:33:02,440 --> 00:33:05,600 the Board of Ethics makes a decision as to, yes, 540 00:33:05,600 --> 00:33:09,480 this is a valid complaint, or no, this is frivolous. 541 00:33:09,480 --> 00:33:10,160 >> So the fourth form -- 542 00:33:10,160 --> 00:33:12,600 >> Just saying at the hearing, we just look at the evidence 543 00:33:12,600 --> 00:33:13,840 that has been gathered. 544 00:33:13,840 --> 00:33:14,360 >> Yeah. 545 00:33:14,360 --> 00:33:15,960 >> Okay. 546 00:33:15,960 --> 00:33:19,360 >> So no formal presentation, per se, by the complainant? 547 00:33:19,360 --> 00:33:22,880 >> Well, they present the evidence that we asked for. 548 00:33:22,880 --> 00:33:25,600 >> Okay, but so, okay, I was trying to get, 549 00:33:25,600 --> 00:33:30,600 who's under the number four category then? 550 00:33:30,600 --> 00:33:32,560 >> That's the responsibility of the complainant. 551 00:33:32,560 --> 00:33:33,280 >> Thank you. 552 00:33:33,280 --> 00:33:35,680 >> So providing, here's the evidence that I have. 553 00:33:35,680 --> 00:33:40,880 If you like me saying, I saw Dustin speeding on the way 554 00:33:40,880 --> 00:33:45,000 to this meeting, that's my complaint. 555 00:33:45,000 --> 00:33:49,720 Then this board would say, okay, Tom, how are you going to -- 556 00:33:49,720 --> 00:33:52,160 we need some evidence that really happened. 557 00:33:52,160 --> 00:33:53,760 Well, believe me, it did. 558 00:33:53,760 --> 00:33:56,000 Well, no, that's not going to be that valid. 559 00:33:56,000 --> 00:33:59,900 So I'd have to provide other evidence for you to make -- 560 00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:02,120 to go forward, you probably would say, no, 561 00:34:02,120 --> 00:34:04,360 that's frivolous, Tom, out with you. 562 00:34:04,360 --> 00:34:08,120 Or if I came in and said, here's a picture of my speedometer 563 00:34:08,120 --> 00:34:11,280 and there's his car in front of me. 564 00:34:11,280 --> 00:34:15,380 But, so it's my responsibility as a complainant 565 00:34:15,380 --> 00:34:17,200 to say here's the evidence that I have. 566 00:34:17,200 --> 00:34:19,400 >> But you don't necessarily have to testify. 567 00:34:19,400 --> 00:34:22,800 >> No, I can just, it could be written, answers to the, 568 00:34:22,800 --> 00:34:26,320 what the Board of Ethics says they need. 569 00:34:26,320 --> 00:34:29,000 >> And if I may, if we wanted to add an "or" there, 570 00:34:29,000 --> 00:34:30,520 like the complainant or the Board of Ethics, 571 00:34:30,520 --> 00:34:33,720 let's say somebody gets stage fright, don't show up, 572 00:34:33,720 --> 00:34:35,800 but we have all the evidence we need. 573 00:34:35,800 --> 00:34:38,280 That would be kind of a weird situation, right, 574 00:34:38,280 --> 00:34:40,360 to just throw it out because all the evidence 575 00:34:40,360 --> 00:34:41,640 that somebody doesn't want to speak 576 00:34:41,640 --> 00:34:43,280 in front of people so they don't show up. 577 00:34:43,280 --> 00:34:43,880 >> So you're -- 578 00:34:43,880 --> 00:34:44,440 >> Not optimal. 579 00:34:44,440 --> 00:34:46,460 >> I think that's kind of the same thing Tom's saying, 580 00:34:46,460 --> 00:34:49,120 that the complainant could represent it or not. 581 00:34:49,120 --> 00:34:51,240 >> But if we want, if we want to add an "or," 582 00:34:51,240 --> 00:34:53,520 complainant or Board of Ethics can present evidence, 583 00:34:53,520 --> 00:34:54,840 that might -- 584 00:34:54,840 --> 00:34:55,960 >> Why not a middle point? 585 00:34:55,960 --> 00:34:58,120 >> I want to say we're presenting the evidence, 586 00:34:58,120 --> 00:35:00,640 but maybe just something 587 00:35:00,640 --> 00:35:04,360 about like reviewing the evidence that's been gathered. 588 00:35:04,360 --> 00:35:06,320 It's like we want to really be presenting it 589 00:35:06,320 --> 00:35:09,640 because we're the, we're the judges right now. 590 00:35:09,640 --> 00:35:10,920 >> Thank you. 591 00:35:10,920 --> 00:35:14,440 >> So -- 592 00:35:14,440 --> 00:35:19,880 >> If we went that route, no. 593 00:35:19,880 --> 00:35:20,680 >> That's quite right. 594 00:35:20,680 --> 00:35:21,320 Thank you. 595 00:35:21,320 --> 00:35:22,360 That's not there. 596 00:35:22,360 --> 00:35:24,040 I forgot. 597 00:35:24,040 --> 00:35:24,680 >> Any questions? 598 00:35:24,680 --> 00:35:25,560 Okay. 599 00:35:25,560 --> 00:35:27,680 >> So I mean, so currently if the, 600 00:35:27,680 --> 00:35:31,000 there's a procedure where if the complainant or respond, 601 00:35:31,000 --> 00:35:35,000 and respondent are a -- or a -- I'm sorry. 602 00:35:35,000 --> 00:35:38,320 Send the evidence, additional evidence basically, 603 00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:39,720 if they would like it presented at the hearing. 604 00:35:39,720 --> 00:35:41,920 It's required to go in the packet in order for the board 605 00:35:41,920 --> 00:35:44,320 to discuss it through the Texas Open Meetings Act, 606 00:35:44,320 --> 00:35:46,120 the Texas Open Meetings Act. 607 00:35:46,120 --> 00:35:50,520 So any evidence that they would like to present has to go 608 00:35:50,520 --> 00:35:53,080 to me anyway so that it can be given to you prior 609 00:35:53,080 --> 00:35:55,120 to the meeting, my understanding of how it works 610 00:35:55,120 --> 00:35:57,720 and how we've done in the past. 611 00:35:57,720 --> 00:36:01,720 I can't tell if Scott's like, that's not right. 612 00:36:01,720 --> 00:36:03,840 So in that way I guess they wouldn't have 613 00:36:03,840 --> 00:36:06,000 to necessarily present it. 614 00:36:06,000 --> 00:36:09,640 It's already there for you to consider. 615 00:36:09,640 --> 00:36:11,480 Just there's no necessary, there's no requirement 616 00:36:11,480 --> 00:36:15,560 for them to verbally say, I brought you XYZ. 617 00:36:15,560 --> 00:36:17,760 >> And if I might, if they don't present, 618 00:36:17,760 --> 00:36:20,280 they're probably lessening their odds 619 00:36:20,280 --> 00:36:24,040 of having their complaint agreed upon. 620 00:36:24,040 --> 00:36:26,280 But that's their choice. 621 00:36:26,280 --> 00:36:29,600 We're taking that burden from them. 622 00:36:29,600 --> 00:36:32,080 >> If we kept the complaint but then added 623 00:36:32,080 --> 00:36:35,240 or a representative, it doesn't have to be an attorney. 624 00:36:35,240 --> 00:36:39,800 It might be somebody that's more eloquent in their train 625 00:36:39,800 --> 00:36:43,040 of thought is something that -- and then maybe nurses can't be. 626 00:36:43,040 --> 00:36:47,160 Could we then just make that complaint and/or representative? 627 00:36:47,160 --> 00:36:51,000 >> Yeah, and I think that's already how the procedure rules 628 00:36:51,000 --> 00:36:52,160 are ready. 629 00:36:52,160 --> 00:36:55,880 So I'm going to, and you know, I don't want us to like go way 630 00:36:55,880 --> 00:37:00,600 over time because now we have kind of a new idea. 631 00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:05,160 Do we want to continue the discussion with this new idea 632 00:37:05,160 --> 00:37:07,520 and see what we can, maybe at the next meeting 633 00:37:07,520 --> 00:37:11,160 or does everybody want to accept that? 634 00:37:11,160 --> 00:37:14,040 Or is everybody like, no, we don't want that? 635 00:37:14,040 --> 00:37:15,120 What do you all think? 636 00:37:15,120 --> 00:37:15,960 Just to -- 637 00:37:15,960 --> 00:37:17,080 >> I guess if I could keep things -- 638 00:37:17,080 --> 00:37:19,360 so what I've heard is there's general consensus 639 00:37:19,360 --> 00:37:25,080 to not require the complainant to testify at the hearing 640 00:37:25,080 --> 00:37:26,360 but to give them direction. 641 00:37:26,360 --> 00:37:28,920 We would like you to provide answers, additional evidence 642 00:37:28,920 --> 00:37:30,840 for XYZ at some point. 643 00:37:30,840 --> 00:37:33,200 So I could bring back language that does those things 644 00:37:33,200 --> 00:37:35,400 or we could say let's wait on that 645 00:37:35,400 --> 00:37:37,080 and have a continued discussion next time. 646 00:37:37,080 --> 00:37:38,680 >> Well, I don't know. 647 00:37:38,680 --> 00:37:40,760 I'll let everybody say something that they want. 648 00:37:40,760 --> 00:37:43,280 But maybe you come up with language about that 649 00:37:43,280 --> 00:37:46,800 and maybe language with this new line that I think is kind 650 00:37:46,800 --> 00:37:51,440 of hits maybe more of what everybody's thinking. 651 00:37:51,440 --> 00:37:53,840 And then we kind of have a new discussion based 652 00:37:53,840 --> 00:37:54,760 on the new language you bring. 653 00:37:54,760 --> 00:37:56,880 And maybe it'll be like this and we'll come up with something new 654 00:37:56,880 --> 00:38:00,400 but maybe we can all like, come up, like, decide on something. 655 00:38:00,400 --> 00:38:05,440 >> I just have, what if the complainant is asked to come 656 00:38:05,440 --> 00:38:08,800 up with something that requires an open records request? 657 00:38:08,800 --> 00:38:12,920 I guess those can take what, two days? 658 00:38:12,920 --> 00:38:13,920 >> I think -- 659 00:38:13,920 --> 00:38:17,560 >> I believe there is a response required in 10 days 660 00:38:17,560 --> 00:38:18,880 but I've deferred it out on that. 661 00:38:18,880 --> 00:38:21,000 >> I mean, they can be quick if it's an easy yes. 662 00:38:21,000 --> 00:38:22,960 But yeah, I mean, they can take longer than 10 days 663 00:38:22,960 --> 00:38:24,280 if there's information -- 664 00:38:24,280 --> 00:38:25,640 >> You get an attorney general looking at it and it'll -- 665 00:38:25,640 --> 00:38:27,680 it could be much longer. 666 00:38:27,680 --> 00:38:29,920 But how about we knock it in the weeds on that tonight? 667 00:38:29,920 --> 00:38:33,200 >> I think we could write something in that said, 668 00:38:33,200 --> 00:38:36,000 I could facilitate that process in some way. 669 00:38:36,000 --> 00:38:37,520 >> Okay. So -- 670 00:38:37,520 --> 00:38:40,200 >> At least help get them submit the request and things like that. 671 00:38:40,200 --> 00:38:43,720 >> Okay. So how about you write a language 672 00:38:43,720 --> 00:38:46,600 that, you know, I guess we want to take this out. 673 00:38:46,600 --> 00:38:48,000 We don't want them to testify. 674 00:38:48,000 --> 00:38:51,920 Write a language with kind of what Tom has said 675 00:38:51,920 --> 00:38:53,920 and what we kind of all talked about. 676 00:38:53,920 --> 00:38:56,400 And then we'll just continue this discussion next week 677 00:38:56,400 --> 00:38:58,600 and I think we'll have maybe a better starting point 678 00:38:58,600 --> 00:39:00,840 to maybe we can all come to an agreement. 679 00:39:00,840 --> 00:39:02,400 How does that sound? 680 00:39:02,400 --> 00:39:04,240 All right. 681 00:39:04,240 --> 00:39:06,240 All right. 682 00:39:06,240 --> 00:39:09,280 [ Inaudible ] 683 00:39:09,280 --> 00:39:12,520 Okay. So Madison's taking notes. 684 00:39:12,520 --> 00:39:14,680 Is there anything else you need as far 685 00:39:14,680 --> 00:39:17,760 as guidance on that agenda item? 686 00:39:17,760 --> 00:39:20,360 >> I don't think so at this time. 687 00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:27,360 >> Okay. Item C, BOE 23-034, Receive a report, 688 00:39:27,360 --> 00:39:29,520 hold the discussion, and take necessary action regarding the 689 00:39:29,520 --> 00:39:35,480 definition and role of alternate members of the Board of Ethics. 690 00:39:35,480 --> 00:39:45,440 So going to the agenda sheet -- I don't have a presentation. 691 00:39:45,440 --> 00:39:50,040 Okay. So I guess what -- I don't know 692 00:39:50,040 --> 00:39:51,640 if I was here during this discussion. 693 00:39:51,640 --> 00:39:56,840 I mean, right now, it's just like can the regular members come 694 00:39:56,840 --> 00:40:00,760 and if not, I mean, I don't even tell Madison. 695 00:40:00,760 --> 00:40:03,000 I think we just randomly kind of picked the next person 696 00:40:03,000 --> 00:40:06,360 up for alternate to attend. 697 00:40:06,360 --> 00:40:09,680 I think we talked about this before and we decided, like, 698 00:40:09,680 --> 00:40:11,280 you know, you have the seven people 699 00:40:11,280 --> 00:40:13,440 and if there's more alternates, they can come, but they're not, 700 00:40:13,440 --> 00:40:18,400 like, participating in the discussion just to, you know, 701 00:40:18,400 --> 00:40:19,600 not have the ten person -- you know, 702 00:40:19,600 --> 00:40:21,920 just to keep it at the seven person. 703 00:40:21,920 --> 00:40:26,720 >> With our own edification to keep up with the view of the Board, 704 00:40:26,720 --> 00:40:28,920 I think the extra alternate -- 705 00:40:28,920 --> 00:40:30,760 if they're coming and they're sitting on the side, 706 00:40:30,760 --> 00:40:32,000 that's what you're saying. 707 00:40:32,000 --> 00:40:33,360 >> Yeah, but they don't -- yeah, 708 00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:35,240 they don't participate in the actual discussion. 709 00:40:35,240 --> 00:40:36,960 >> I thought somebody had a car accident. 710 00:40:36,960 --> 00:40:38,400 >> Mops in. 711 00:40:38,400 --> 00:40:39,600 >> It's a page hitter. 712 00:40:39,600 --> 00:40:42,120 >> Yeah, I guess so. 713 00:40:42,120 --> 00:40:45,920 So I don't know, what was the -- 714 00:40:45,920 --> 00:40:50,280 >> I was given direction to bring this to the Board. 715 00:40:50,280 --> 00:40:57,520 >> I think that we should let alternates come to the meetings 716 00:40:57,520 --> 00:41:02,360 and at least have voice, and I know that there's a provision 717 00:41:02,360 --> 00:41:06,480 of Robert's Rules of Order for voice, but no vote, 718 00:41:06,480 --> 00:41:08,880 but the way things work when we have 719 00:41:08,880 --> 00:41:12,600 to sub in new alternates every time, I think it slows 720 00:41:12,600 --> 00:41:17,400 down our discussion because then we have to kind of bring them, 721 00:41:17,400 --> 00:41:20,080 people who haven't been there before, up to speed, 722 00:41:20,080 --> 00:41:22,480 to understand what we're talking about. 723 00:41:22,480 --> 00:41:24,720 >> Well, I mean, isn't that the same issue just -- 724 00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:27,040 whatever Board member is not there, who's not there, 725 00:41:27,040 --> 00:41:30,040 and will have a different idea the next time? 726 00:41:30,040 --> 00:41:35,480 I think the -- I mean, my idea is like the Board is kind 727 00:41:35,480 --> 00:41:38,160 of the seven people that if they could all show up every meeting, 728 00:41:38,160 --> 00:41:41,560 the alternates wouldn't have any say. 729 00:41:41,560 --> 00:41:47,920 So I guess -- I don't see a reason to really change it. 730 00:41:47,920 --> 00:41:48,760 Go ahead. 731 00:41:48,760 --> 00:41:49,840 >> I'm confused. 732 00:41:49,840 --> 00:41:53,440 Is the question whether or not they're allowed to attend? 733 00:41:53,440 --> 00:41:54,840 >> No, I don't -- I mean, I don't think so. 734 00:41:54,840 --> 00:41:56,160 I mean, because it's a public meeting. 735 00:41:56,160 --> 00:41:57,280 >> Okay. All right. 736 00:41:57,280 --> 00:41:58,760 I think I just got a little -- 737 00:41:58,760 --> 00:42:01,120 >> They're not allowed to have a voice or a vote. 738 00:42:01,120 --> 00:42:02,440 >> Okay. Okay. 739 00:42:02,440 --> 00:42:05,200 >> Unless they're asked to sub in for someone. 740 00:42:05,200 --> 00:42:06,560 >> Thank you. 741 00:42:06,560 --> 00:42:09,480 >> And no other cities, once again, 742 00:42:09,480 --> 00:42:12,160 no other cities do this. 743 00:42:12,160 --> 00:42:14,440 So we're, once again, unique. 744 00:42:14,440 --> 00:42:15,640 >> Good. 745 00:42:15,640 --> 00:42:17,920 >> No other cities do what? 746 00:42:17,920 --> 00:42:19,720 >> Have alternates. 747 00:42:19,720 --> 00:42:20,920 >> Board members. 748 00:42:20,920 --> 00:42:22,720 >> So they just -- they don't have alternates at all. 749 00:42:22,720 --> 00:42:24,160 They just have the board. 750 00:42:24,160 --> 00:42:26,040 >> Right. 751 00:42:26,040 --> 00:42:27,360 >> That might be a problem. 752 00:42:27,360 --> 00:42:29,040 >> They have no quorum. 753 00:42:29,040 --> 00:42:30,560 >> Yeah. That's what I was thinking. 754 00:42:30,560 --> 00:42:34,360 Because if you just have -- if you have the -- 755 00:42:34,360 --> 00:42:37,840 I mean, isn't it a lesser quorum if you have a lesser actual board? 756 00:42:37,840 --> 00:42:40,600 And then if you -- the quorum is four because the board is seven. 757 00:42:40,600 --> 00:42:44,280 So it doesn't matter that we have the extra alternate members. 758 00:42:44,280 --> 00:42:47,800 I mean, to make quorum if we're missing members, it helps 759 00:42:47,800 --> 00:42:49,680 because then we can call them in. 760 00:42:49,680 --> 00:42:52,120 We don't always know that ahead of time. 761 00:42:52,120 --> 00:42:53,760 >> Yeah. And if we did have -- 762 00:42:53,760 --> 00:42:57,400 if we were barely meeting quorum and we have an alternate sitting here, 763 00:42:57,400 --> 00:43:00,120 we wouldn't not be meeting quorum. 764 00:43:00,120 --> 00:43:08,280 And it's just a unique thing about how Denton does their boards and commissions. 765 00:43:08,280 --> 00:43:11,760 >> I'm having trouble seeing that there's a problem with it. 766 00:43:11,760 --> 00:43:15,040 >> Well, I'll tell you where there is a problem. 767 00:43:15,040 --> 00:43:22,280 I have had to seek permission to get a change made to my historic structure. 768 00:43:22,280 --> 00:43:27,720 I had to wait an extra two months because the HLC could not get quorum. 769 00:43:27,720 --> 00:43:30,560 And they didn't have enough alternates to sub in. 770 00:43:30,560 --> 00:43:32,000 >> Well, I mean, that's a different board. 771 00:43:32,000 --> 00:43:33,200 >> Well, I know, but -- 772 00:43:33,200 --> 00:43:35,080 >> We haven't had that problem here. 773 00:43:35,080 --> 00:43:41,400 >> I really think that the more people we have having opinions is a good thing. 774 00:43:41,400 --> 00:43:47,200 And if they're willing to come, that would be a good thing. 775 00:43:47,200 --> 00:43:47,800 Go ahead. 776 00:43:47,800 --> 00:43:53,360 >> Are we trying to decide if the alternate members can speak at the meetings? 777 00:43:53,360 --> 00:43:55,360 Is that what the question is? 778 00:43:55,360 --> 00:43:57,240 >> They're not even allowed to come. 779 00:43:57,240 --> 00:43:58,240 Yeah, they can't speak. 780 00:43:58,240 --> 00:43:59,840 >> Well, they can attend. 781 00:43:59,840 --> 00:44:04,080 >> Yeah, we have an alternate sitting here. 782 00:44:04,080 --> 00:44:09,240 >> Right. I guess I'm just trying to understand what we're trying to get to here 783 00:44:09,240 --> 00:44:13,640 because it's not -- I don't think it's the Board of Ethics 784 00:44:13,640 --> 00:44:17,760 that defines the alternate member role, right? 785 00:44:17,760 --> 00:44:24,440 I mean, maybe we have the option to allow for an alternate member and it's to speak. 786 00:44:24,440 --> 00:44:29,800 I don't really think they would be allowed to vote no matter what we would like them to do, right? 787 00:44:29,800 --> 00:44:32,600 >> And now we have public comment, so they could -- 788 00:44:32,600 --> 00:44:36,960 >> Public comment would be allowable from an alternate member, correct? 789 00:44:36,960 --> 00:44:37,200 >> Yes. 790 00:44:37,200 --> 00:44:38,040 >> Yeah, I don't see why not. 791 00:44:38,040 --> 00:44:43,200 >> And that could be done for any agenda item, right? 792 00:44:43,200 --> 00:44:43,520 >> Correct. 793 00:44:43,520 --> 00:44:45,400 It's my understanding. 794 00:44:45,400 --> 00:44:46,040 >> Cool. 795 00:44:46,040 --> 00:44:53,120 >> Okay, so if I could -- I don't know who has a prompt or whatever, go for it. 796 00:44:53,120 --> 00:44:56,000 >> All I was going to say is it seems like we just solved that problem. 797 00:44:56,000 --> 00:44:57,000 >> Oh, with the public comment? 798 00:44:57,000 --> 00:44:59,280 >> That's all I was going to say. 799 00:44:59,280 --> 00:45:02,120 >> I just -- a little -- and I think you're right. 800 00:45:02,120 --> 00:45:08,480 A little history, though, when this board first started, alternates did sit in 801 00:45:08,480 --> 00:45:10,880 and were allowed to participate. 802 00:45:10,880 --> 00:45:17,520 But I think there was something from the city attorney's office that had a concern about that and so -- 803 00:45:17,520 --> 00:45:18,560 >> They muted us. 804 00:45:18,560 --> 00:45:19,920 >> Yeah, yeah. 805 00:45:19,920 --> 00:45:26,920 >> I think there's some ambiguity about -- with the Open Meetings Act, about whether an alternate, 806 00:45:26,920 --> 00:45:33,760 if they're participating in a meeting -- I mean, we have our code that says shall attend only upon request. 807 00:45:33,760 --> 00:45:41,400 And if we're reading that to have any meaning at all, then that may mean by accepting the role 808 00:45:41,400 --> 00:45:46,200 of alternate, you are accepting a position that limits your ability to speak of -- 809 00:45:46,200 --> 00:45:54,840 just like if you accept a position on a board, you can't speak at the public comment section 810 00:45:54,840 --> 00:45:57,000 for that board or city council. 811 00:45:57,000 --> 00:46:02,720 So we've read that to mean that all board members, including alternates, 812 00:46:02,720 --> 00:46:07,480 are limited in their ability to participate in public comment. 813 00:46:07,480 --> 00:46:10,360 >> So that sounds familiar, you know, if you brought it up. 814 00:46:10,360 --> 00:46:18,360 >> So alternates cannot participate in public comment if they're not seated at the table? 815 00:46:18,360 --> 00:46:19,720 >> Yeah. 816 00:46:19,720 --> 00:46:24,080 >> That's been our direction based on our interpretation of the code in the Open Meetings Act. 817 00:46:24,080 --> 00:46:29,920 >> So that's not an option, then, to have -- 818 00:46:29,920 --> 00:46:34,680 >> So if you're an alternate, you can't be a public comment if you're not at the board. 819 00:46:34,680 --> 00:46:39,520 >> You could propose a change to the ethics ordinance that might suggest otherwise. 820 00:46:39,520 --> 00:46:44,880 But as our office has read it, no, unless you've been invited to attend the meeting 821 00:46:44,880 --> 00:46:49,520 by the city office, then you can't participate. 822 00:46:49,520 --> 00:46:52,880 >> Is that all boards like that one? 823 00:46:52,880 --> 00:46:55,840 >> As far as I know, it's the only one that has an alternate. 824 00:46:55,840 --> 00:47:02,520 [ Multiple Speakers ] 825 00:47:02,520 --> 00:47:10,160 >> So the problem is really just that it doesn't have alternates on their board of ethics 826 00:47:10,160 --> 00:47:13,160 where nobody else does that. 827 00:47:13,160 --> 00:47:14,520 So that makes us -- 828 00:47:14,520 --> 00:47:20,760 >> I think that there were not alternates. 829 00:47:20,760 --> 00:47:24,720 I know there have been times in the past where it was all alternates 830 00:47:24,720 --> 00:47:28,720 and one board member just to make quorum. 831 00:47:28,720 --> 00:47:35,320 So it's much more beneficial to have the option of having alternates to make quorums 832 00:47:35,320 --> 00:47:38,200 so that people don't have to come back for another meeting 833 00:47:38,200 --> 00:47:43,200 because you couldn't make a decision, couldn't vote on a decision because you didn't make a quorum. 834 00:47:43,200 --> 00:47:45,000 >> And I think that's even more important when you're talking 835 00:47:45,000 --> 00:47:46,320 about preliminary hearings -- 836 00:47:46,320 --> 00:47:46,760 >> Yes. 837 00:47:46,760 --> 00:47:51,800 >> -- than hearings, which you want to get the process going so that everyone has due process. 838 00:47:51,800 --> 00:47:52,800 >> I think that's good. 839 00:47:52,800 --> 00:47:57,840 I guess the sticking point is do alternates have a voice if they're not at the table? 840 00:47:57,840 --> 00:48:00,400 And it sounds like no. 841 00:48:00,400 --> 00:48:02,400 >> Well, I mean, being an alternate is your choice. 842 00:48:02,400 --> 00:48:07,520 You could resign or not take the position and make a public comment 843 00:48:07,520 --> 00:48:10,280 at every single meeting about every single agenda item. 844 00:48:10,280 --> 00:48:18,680 >> Well, I think the alternate understood or understands their role at the very beginning anyway. 845 00:48:18,680 --> 00:48:23,800 So because there are many times I'm over there by the dock and I'm right -- I'd love to ask, but I can't. 846 00:48:23,800 --> 00:48:28,840 So I pass on notes to members and they said I couldn't do that. 847 00:48:28,840 --> 00:48:29,840 But I mean, I tried. 848 00:48:29,840 --> 00:48:31,960 >> I remember that. 849 00:48:31,960 --> 00:48:35,560 >> But then I thought back, well, you know, they're right. 850 00:48:35,560 --> 00:48:41,480 So except the horseshoe road, so I was -- I lived with that. 851 00:48:41,480 --> 00:48:41,800 >> All right. 852 00:48:41,800 --> 00:48:49,600 So is there any motions or anything we want to do as far as agenda item C? 853 00:48:49,600 --> 00:48:52,880 >> I would like to keep it the same. 854 00:48:52,880 --> 00:48:53,280 >> All right. 855 00:48:53,280 --> 00:48:56,560 So if we keep it the same, I don't think we need any motions and we can move on. 856 00:48:56,560 --> 00:49:00,200 I kind of -- from looking at everybody, I think there's a -- 857 00:49:00,200 --> 00:49:04,720 maybe not unanimous, but there's consensus that we'll just move on. 858 00:49:04,720 --> 00:49:15,600 All right. So agenda item D, BOE 23-035, management reports, and so these are -- I guess this is -- 859 00:49:15,600 --> 00:49:17,320 >> Yeah. It's really just informational. 860 00:49:17,320 --> 00:49:23,440 We issued two advisory opinions since the last meeting, and the ethics ordinance amendments 861 00:49:23,440 --> 00:49:26,560 that we had previously discussed was officially passed on July 18th. 862 00:49:26,560 --> 00:49:29,320 So we are technically under a new code now. 863 00:49:29,320 --> 00:49:31,960 The management report has kind of summarized what actually changed. 864 00:49:31,960 --> 00:49:35,000 I know the rules of procedure amendment passed that same day as well, 865 00:49:35,000 --> 00:49:40,600 and so we now officially have public comment with the reasonable rules that you give direction for. 866 00:49:40,600 --> 00:49:43,960 So that's really just to make sure you're aware of all those changes 867 00:49:43,960 --> 00:49:46,120 and the advisory opinions that were issued. 868 00:49:46,120 --> 00:49:50,680 I can answer any questions that you may have about that, but it's really just kind of an FYI. 869 00:49:50,680 --> 00:50:01,920 >> Okay. Does anybody have any questions, any comments about any of these three items? 870 00:50:01,920 --> 00:50:04,960 Is it part of our packet? 871 00:50:04,960 --> 00:50:14,120 Okay. I don't think there is, so -- all right. 872 00:50:14,120 --> 00:50:16,280 I think we've gone through all the agenda items. 873 00:50:16,280 --> 00:50:19,000 Is there anything we're missing? 874 00:50:19,000 --> 00:50:22,240 Everything's been covered? 875 00:50:22,240 --> 00:50:22,720 All right. 876 00:50:22,720 --> 00:50:23,280 So I guess -- 877 00:50:23,280 --> 00:50:24,840 >> Oh, we have the future meeting. 878 00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:28,000 >> Oh, it's the future meeting. 879 00:50:28,000 --> 00:50:37,320 So I just have to tell D here, is part of D future meeting what we're going to discuss? 880 00:50:37,320 --> 00:50:37,680 >> All right. 881 00:50:37,680 --> 00:50:39,280 It should be on the agenda. 882 00:50:39,280 --> 00:50:44,040 >> There are no closing items or how many agenda items? 883 00:50:44,040 --> 00:50:45,240 >> It's E. 884 00:50:45,240 --> 00:50:46,440 >> Oh, okay. 885 00:50:46,440 --> 00:50:46,960 I might -- 886 00:50:46,960 --> 00:50:47,960 >> You were at the wrong meeting? 887 00:50:47,960 --> 00:50:48,400 >> Yes. 888 00:50:48,400 --> 00:50:49,640 >> Yes. 889 00:50:49,640 --> 00:50:50,680 >> I missed E. 890 00:50:50,680 --> 00:50:53,040 >> Yeah. I was on the wrong agenda. 891 00:50:53,040 --> 00:50:53,720 >> I think -- 892 00:50:53,720 --> 00:50:55,520 >> It's not on there, so we can't talk about it. 893 00:50:55,520 --> 00:50:55,960 >> Yeah. 894 00:50:55,960 --> 00:51:03,520 Sorry. I think we have already talked about at least one thing we want to talk about next meeting. 895 00:51:03,520 --> 00:51:07,920 So that was part of -- was on the agenda, the -- 896 00:51:07,920 --> 00:51:09,120 >> Touchable. 897 00:51:09,120 --> 00:51:13,560 >> Yeah. The burden-approved stuff, so we know that. 898 00:51:13,560 --> 00:51:18,280 >> We'll figure out how to change everything that was scheduled for us. 899 00:51:18,280 --> 00:51:18,880 >> All right. 900 00:51:18,880 --> 00:51:25,200 We'll -- without an E, we'll call the meeting adjourned at 621. 901 00:51:25,200 --> 00:51:26,820 Am I missing anything? 902 00:51:26,820 --> 00:51:27,860 Okay, all right. 903 00:51:27,860 --> 00:51:28,860 Thank you, everybody.