Oct 02, 2023 Board of Ethics on 2023-10-02 5:30 PM

vice-chair until you're not. This is Monday October 2nd 2023 at 5 30 p.m. I'm calling the Board of Ethics to order and our first item is item A BOE 23-37 receive nominations and hold an election of a chair and vice-chair. I mean I'm fine if we want to postpone it. Madam Chair if I could ask we have three members that are actual members we have two alternates. I personally would concur with your thoughts in holding off until the next meeting and really push to have the members here. The alternates get to vote of course but I think no offense to anyone but I would like to see us have another one and do you need a motion Madam Chair or Madison for that? I won't do that yet because if some may not think that way so someone else wants to make a motion I'm about to second it or I'll make it but I don't want to push anything. I would agree and I would second that motion if you were to make it. Madam Chair that I move that uh do we call it by its BOE number? Just a motion to postpone. Okay then I move that we postpone the nominations and hold the election for the chair and vice-chair until next scheduled meeting. And that would be November 6th. Thank you. I second that. Okay so um the motion is on the floor to postpone the um the nominations and election of the chair and vice-chair until the next meeting which would be November 6th. Okay so all in favor. Aye. That was unanimous. Okay um the second item the BOE 23-038 consider approval on minutes for August 7th 2023. Do I hear a motion? I motion to accept it. Second. Okay so all in favor of approving the minutes from August 7th. Aye. Okay now we're on to training. I wonder if we should can we postpone that too? Uh we can. I believe I think so yes. I have a question. Is the training available online or is that part of it? Not yet. I'm working on that. Yeah I mean it once it is held it will be available to go back and watch so. So we have two full members who couldn't be here tonight or three. Is Justin's team? Yes three. So three. I I would entertain that motion. I move to postpone the training until more members. Okay Patricia Brinke has moved to postpone the training until the next meeting. Is there a second motion? Seconded. Okay question. Yes. How is the training presentation is that different from the video that we published? Yes so um that because of the changes that remain to the ordinance that training is no longer completely original training is no longer completely accurate so I've created a new training that's updated it's shorter um and we reviewed it uh in June I believe with the board before it kind of went into effect it's been given to the city council and it's going to be given to the other city officials this month as well so. Then I think that's a great idea. So we're ready for our vote to postpone the training um BoE 23-39 to next month. All in favor? Aye. Let's unanimous. Okay. All right. I was fast. So we're moving on to item D BoE 23-040. Receive a report hold a discussion and take necessary action regarding the ethics complaint process detailed in the code of ordinances. So um so I don't have a presentation exactly but it took the direction I believe I was given last time and tried to make changes to the ethics ordinance as well as the rules of procedure to reflect the removal of the burden of proof section as well as um allow for the board to request the complainant and or respondent gather additional evidence prior to an evidentiary hearing being held. Um this uh chart is supposed to try to visualize the difference in the the new process based on those changes and then this table is supposed to compare the current procedure to the proposed procedure um as best as possible. So I can pull up the red lines um and then this is really just for your consideration what you would like to do further based on y'all's previous discussion. Okay I see that first chart. And I think the big difference is it kind of necessitates the board to have a preliminary hearing if they would like to have additional evidence at this point. What are your reactions? I like it. Yeah I think it looks good. It's the same it's the spirit of what we talked about. Yes yeah yeah. Could we see the other screen please I'm sorry. That's nice. I like it. Is anybody is there any more discussion that we need to have about it? Does this go before the council now? Oh when we when we have several recommendations to make we'll go before the council. Right it's one that still has to. Right yeah so historically we've taken a packet so several potential amendments to the city council we would likely could take them one at a time. That's a lot of work. I mean it's it's kind of either way it's going to be different kind of massive work. I wouldn't recommend against that honestly. So yeah it's really what y'all would prefer but yes it does have to go before the city council in order to be adopted into the ordinance. So is anybody ready to put a motion on the floor about... Could we just have a quick look at the red lines? Sure. Here this is all that has really changed in the ethics ordinance is just removing this and then you guys had discussed wanting to make sure this was clear that another it didn't have to be legal counsel on the ethics ordinance so I just added that. Okay. And then in the rules of procedure is more where it's been. Yes. So here it's trying to clarify that you can the board of ethics during the summary hearing can request that additional evidence and put out a timeline for that. So after that hearing I would be responsible for sending those additional requests to the complainant and respondent and then also I'll be available to facilitate any open records request submissions and then the rest of these are really to try to make more clear that the complainant is not required to attend anymore. You can't just dismiss a complaint because the complainant hasn't attended the hearing. This is a little clean up because I don't used to be accused but now it's responded and then removing this section it was kind of confusing honestly and then just trying to clarify opening state really wasn't that table so I could yeah. And then also removing the burden of proof section from this the rules of procedure as well. So I can go to a specific part if you'd like to look at it I know it's kind of a long. And the rest is just remembering right yeah yeah. I like the in the opening statement has changed the shower to may. Any other questions or applications or comments? It's good don't you think? I like it do you want to. I'll make a motion that we accept the changes. Was there a speaker for this item? Yeah I think so. Oh okay. Is this the? Yes. Yeah I'll have that couple things to say. Okay. So I guess if you will come forward and state your name and your four minutes. That's four minutes right? Your four minutes will be. I know that I did I ran out of paper that's part of why I was why I was running late so I don't have enough for everybody but I do have enough for a couple. This sounds like it's a complaint. Yeah that is. I don't think that this is the time. Well are you speaking on the? Yeah I know I'm here about this item but that was I wanted to distribute that while I was here. So we have two items from you? Sure why not. Well so they asked if there were any speakers on this item that's why I'm here and so while I came up I was just distributing this other. And that's fine we'll just hold on to this but we can't speak on this item because we're not posted for this we're only posted for this item. So we can only have discussion. I'm going to talk about about the. Sure. Sure yeah and that's fine. So no names no complaints about anybody in particular. No is that is that is that a normal thing that. Yeah we don't the complaints go through the auditor. Okay so so we can't talk to the public about complaints that we have relative to you know public welfare in general. That there's a procedure for that and it starts with the auditor. Okay I mean I just yeah seeking clarity is all. I just want to be consistent and fair. No absolutely and I certainly want to be fair too I you know we'll leave it at that. And I did forward this email to you guys so all of y'all or I forwarded it to the secretary so all y'all should have it at least by tomorrow. Okay there's just a couple of things in here relative to changes that are being made. Why are we changing from abstain abstain or abstainment to abstention. A couple of this this really I was actually more prepared to speak on this. Generally I oppose any changes to our especially our code of ethics right now because I think there's some surreptitious agendas that are acting under the surface. And so without any offense being intended toward you all. Okay we've got some big issues relative to the life for the average person in the city. Okay that complaint that I I'm making now after 10 months is relative to a testimony that I gave January of this year. Okay and so I've waited for that individual for months and months to do what is what I consider the right thing and they didn't do it. And so for that reason I'm going to ask you guys to oppose any changes being adopted because I don't believe that y'all are aware of the true affect that that's going to have for our community. Okay and then that's all I'll say on this. Okay thank you guys. Thank you. I I may. Sure here you can actually have this my copy. I don't need it thank you. I'm talking about I just want to talk about what you said on the podium. So what you see up there you're opposed to. From from looking at from looking through this is I printed out y'all's agenda. Yeah I'm opposed to any changes any substantive changes to the procedure for the Board of Ethics right now. Absolutely. And you're opposed to it because of some but there is activity going on that we're not aware of. If you are aware of it now and. I'm not aware of any. Okay well I mean you just touched the document you're aware of. So well so I mean it's the same as being served. I mean that we're dealing with technicalities that are being hidden by attorneys and it's stuff that it goes it does affect every individual living in the city. And so the stuff that I'm seeing substantively why what's the definition for the word abstention. What's the definition for the word abstainment. Why is that change necessary to make in a public in our records. Why is that necessary at the city level. Okay and so the these if it's just a you know common usage and we'd be talking about something different but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about intense and we're talking about people changing the form of testimony. What you know the there's a procedure in here that is essentially blotted out that the complainant says something first and then the or respondent or defendant whatever you guys want to call it. Says something next and that needs to be in there. You know we need to have that articulated. Not that it may happen but it shall. Okay and these are that answered my question. Thank you. Yeah. Okay thank you guys. We would have to go into a closed session to discuss legal issues. I think it would depend on what they are. It would as long as it's an item. I don't know that we have anything posted that we would allow for an enclosed session at this point. So I have a question for the rest of what he wanted to talk about. Would that be considered an ethics complaint and that would be filed that way or what what was the procedure he would want to do to talk about the rest of what he had to present? What is the procedure for him? So in order to file an ethics complaint there's a specific form that you have. I mean is that what that is? Is the rest of it was an ethics complaint? It's intended my understanding is it's intended to be an ethics complaint. It's not currently on the correct form so I will work with him. So you work with him to get him. Yeah. It's supposed to be authorized as well. I think that's some property we need to follow the procedures that we have. So can I make a comment on one of the comments that Mr. Dillenberg made? I believe so. If it's on the posted item. Yes it is. So my understanding and I'm an alternate on this board but I watch all of the meetings but these changes are not necessarily generated by the city council members. They are generated through the discussion of the board with the goal to make it as easy as possible on the complaint to come forward with a complaint to be heard to have the evidence that they need and to support their complaint so that we have the information to make an determination. My understanding in terms of how the city council can propose their own changes without the board of ethics but the board of ethics in order to propose a change that comes from us. And this this process there's been a number of meetings and a number of discussions about this their issue with the goal of making it easier to complain and not it's not harder. I don't know if I should say anything. If you have a response. Should I go back up there? Yes. Okay. I appreciate that very much. I think that's something that I'm thankful that you guys have that in mind and I've always seen that when I watch y'all's meetings but there's a lot of stuff going on and this complaint that I made is just kind of one of a number of things. That's a different issue. Anyway I agree and so my point in saying that I don't agree with it is and where I don't necessarily argue that that you guys aren't doing that maybe by intention I think that it needs to be a like certain responsibilities need to remain with the complaintant like being present for the meeting you know you guys struck that part said if he's not if they're not here then the complaint is dismissed. I don't have any problem that as a general member of the public with only you know the interests of myself and my fellow man obviously as an American and as a text I think we care about each other generally and and so in saying that you should be here to present your complaint if you're going to be complaining against someone on allegations that are relatively serious in most cases. So again any substantive changes I'm just not having any favor of right now especially until some of this other stuff comes to light. It's Gandhi's birthday today so happy birthday Gandhi. Here's to a better world and hopefully you guys will at least wait on this for now until you guys have a chance to review the rest of this stuff and and see what I'm talking about okay. All right and I apologize for no notice. I waited until the last minute for this person's behalf. It was for no other reason than that that I wanted to give them every chance that I could to do something about it before I came and yes. All right thanks so much. How many questions? All right call the question. Okay so is there a motion on the board because I did not think there was. I thought there was a motion. I actually started the motion but then okay we moved. Okay so let's lay the motion on the floor and then we'll we'll vote on it. I move to accept the changes to the code as we discussed in previous meetings and presented by Madison. Is there a second? I second. Okay so Andrea has made the motion to approve the proposal for BOE 041 and Deborah seconded. So all in favor. Do we have any discussion or anything? Any discussion? Do you want this? I just want to make sure in case you wanted to say if you wanted to postpone this vote too. I think we're ready to vote. I think we heard enough of you heard evidence. We spent a lot of time talking about this at the last meeting and several other meetings actually. Yeah and I'm going to abstain just because I haven't been okay. This is my first meeting in several months. So all in favor. Andrea, Deborah, me, Rob. Rob is four and Patricia is abstaining. Okay this last item BOE 23-041. Discuss future meeting topics. Once again I think we might want to postpone it until we have everybody here. I would appreciate some direction on what you would like to see at the next meeting. Okay yes because we know there's going to be the election. One thing that I would really like to consider adding would be consider looking at the code of ethics that the city employees have because it's quite different from the one that we have for city officials and my concern with it is the one for city officials is actually a pretty good code. In my opinion this one is not. It's very weak. There's a lot of holes in it which we're trying to knit together but I'm not asking. I want to make it clear I would not want to. The city manager would have decisions over city employees but I think there could be a real problem if a city let's say a city council member asks an employee to do something that is a violation of their code of ethics which is actually a bit more strict. Then what do they do? Do they go with what the council member is asking and violate their own code of ethics or do they say no and possibly face some kind of get fired lose their job. I do think that there would be great benefit for both groups having the same thing and it's been a while since I've read that code but I thought it was pretty good when I did read it. So I would like to put that on the list and I would like to maybe reorder these things. Here's all of the items that are currently on the list before this meeting. I guess I'm not quite sure what you would like me to bring back as far as the city ethics policy. I think probably we need to just have a very big discussion next time about what the order is and you know some of this stuff is a couple of years old and I don't know if it's as important so we're getting new board members in I think that we should weigh in on and plus add new things and then so I would just say go back to the drawing board at the next meeting about you know what the order is. So I have an objection to that because I know a lot of discussion has gone into these topics already and some resolution I think some of them will be good. I think to start all over again is to throw out the valuable work that prior members have done. Okay. So for next month Madison you have something on financial thresholds, definition of pending matter, that is a big one. That's a big one. Yeah. So I actually wanted, I'm sorry. Oh go ahead. I was actually considering the same question is going back to those changes that we had submitted before and kind of like because we had discussed that there was a potential that we can resubmit, like revisit them, go over them and then resubmit them to the City Council which especially since we're just adopting something else I think at this time if we were to go and revisit those items that were not considered by the City Council and look at those topics and build a package over the next couple of months that could be submitted to the City Council maybe in January. I mean I don't want to make a tight one but like because that was something that I was missing the last couple of meetings is that we never went back to once the City Council came back to us with no direction on those on those changes. Yeah these are the ones that got put on the list after that basically they're revisiting those topics that we discussed. So looking at the calendar I was looking I was thinking that if we we're obviously having to move the election down to November and we're moving the ethics training down to November so maybe we can keep like the definition of pending matter. I think that's going to be a big long topic and then the rest I think should be put in a list and then we decide what the order is because there's a new there's new members and I want to have everybody involved. So I would be really good with that because I think the pending matter is going to be could be a lengthy discussion. And if it pushes to have members here in November I think that's a good time to give into that. Yeah so the direction I'm hearing is next meeting we'll have the minutes obviously the election of chair and vice chair the ethics annual ethics ordinance training a definition of the beginning of the definition of pending matter discussion and then perhaps like 10 minutes dedicated to future meeting topics instead of our usual five. One other thing that I wanted to consider would it be possible kind of out of difference to staff to have our meetings during the day or? It is possible. Because I know that I know that you and Tammy have to stay late and Scott knows too. I can add a discussion of the meeting schedule the next year. I think we need to do that anyway. Okay so I can add that to the agenda for next month. So it sounds like that concludes the item 041 and so is that correct has everybody had the chance to speak about that? Okay so this meeting is adjourned at 5.59 p.m.