WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.640 vice-chair until you're not. This is Monday October 2nd 2023 at 5 30 p.m. I'm calling the 00:00:08.640 --> 00:00:20.560 Board of Ethics to order and our first item is item A BOE 23-37 receive nominations and hold 00:00:20.560 --> 00:00:31.600 an election of a chair and vice-chair. I mean I'm fine if we want to postpone it. Madam Chair if I 00:00:31.600 --> 00:00:41.600 could ask we have three members that are actual members we have two alternates. I personally would 00:00:41.600 --> 00:00:48.080 concur with your thoughts in holding off until the next meeting and really push to have 00:00:50.880 --> 00:00:56.560 the members here. The alternates get to vote of course but I think no offense to anyone but I 00:00:56.560 --> 00:01:03.120 would like to see us have another one and do you need a motion Madam Chair or Madison for that? 00:01:03.120 --> 00:01:09.280 I won't do that yet because if some may not think that way so 00:01:09.280 --> 00:01:14.400 someone else wants to make a motion I'm about to second it or I'll make it but I don't want to 00:01:15.600 --> 00:01:21.600 push anything. I would agree and I would second that motion if you were to make it. Madam Chair 00:01:21.600 --> 00:01:30.480 that I move that uh do we call it by its BOE number? Just a motion to postpone. Okay then 00:01:30.480 --> 00:01:36.560 I move that we postpone the nominations and hold the election for the chair and vice-chair until next 00:01:37.840 --> 00:01:45.760 scheduled meeting. And that would be November 6th. Thank you. 00:01:45.760 --> 00:01:56.400 I second that. Okay so um the motion is on the floor to postpone the um the nominations and 00:01:56.400 --> 00:02:04.160 election of the chair and vice-chair until the next meeting which would be November 6th. Okay 00:02:04.960 --> 00:02:22.240 so all in favor. Aye. That was unanimous. Okay um the second item the BOE 23-038 consider approval 00:02:22.240 --> 00:02:32.960 on minutes for August 7th 2023. Do I hear a motion? I motion to accept it. Second. Okay 00:02:33.680 --> 00:02:44.480 so all in favor of approving the minutes from August 7th. Aye. Okay now we're on to training. 00:02:44.480 --> 00:02:52.640 I wonder if we should can we postpone that too? Uh we can. I believe I think so yes. 00:02:52.640 --> 00:03:01.360 I have a question. Is the training available online or is that part of it? 00:03:01.360 --> 00:03:09.760 Not yet. I'm working on that. Yeah I mean it once it is held it will be available to go back and 00:03:09.760 --> 00:03:18.080 watch so. So we have two full members who couldn't be here tonight or three. Is Justin's team? Yes 00:03:18.080 --> 00:03:27.600 three. So three. I I would entertain that motion. I move to postpone the training until more members. 00:03:27.600 --> 00:03:33.440 Okay Patricia Brinke has moved to postpone the training until the next meeting. 00:03:33.440 --> 00:03:46.800 Is there a second motion? Seconded. Okay question. Yes. How is the training presentation is that 00:03:46.800 --> 00:03:55.120 different from the video that we published? Yes so um that because of the changes that remain to the 00:03:55.120 --> 00:03:59.600 ordinance that training is no longer completely original training is no longer completely accurate 00:03:59.600 --> 00:04:06.400 so I've created a new training that's updated it's shorter um and we reviewed it uh in June I 00:04:06.400 --> 00:04:10.880 believe with the board before it kind of went into effect it's been given to the city council 00:04:10.880 --> 00:04:16.720 and it's going to be given to the other city officials this month as well so. Then I think 00:04:16.720 --> 00:04:27.280 that's a great idea. So we're ready for our vote to postpone the training um BoE 23-39 to next month. 00:04:27.280 --> 00:04:32.720 All in favor? Aye. Let's unanimous. 00:04:32.720 --> 00:04:35.680 Okay. 00:04:40.880 --> 00:04:55.200 All right. I was fast. So we're moving on to item D BoE 23-040. Receive a report hold a discussion 00:04:55.200 --> 00:05:01.280 and take necessary action regarding the ethics complaint process detailed in the code of ordinances. 00:05:01.280 --> 00:05:10.000 So um so I don't have a presentation exactly but it took the direction I believe I was given 00:05:10.000 --> 00:05:14.480 last time and tried to make changes to the ethics ordinance as well as the rules of procedure 00:05:14.480 --> 00:05:22.000 to reflect the removal of the burden of proof section as well as um allow for the board to 00:05:22.000 --> 00:05:28.240 request the complainant and or respondent gather additional evidence prior to an 00:05:28.240 --> 00:05:36.320 evidentiary hearing being held. Um this uh chart is supposed to try to visualize the difference in 00:05:36.320 --> 00:05:42.720 the the new process based on those changes and then this table is supposed to compare the current 00:05:42.720 --> 00:05:51.680 procedure to the proposed procedure um as best as possible. So I can pull up the red lines um and then 00:05:51.680 --> 00:05:55.200 this is really just for your consideration what you would like to do further based on 00:05:55.200 --> 00:06:08.560 y'all's previous discussion. Okay I see that first chart. And I think the big difference is 00:06:08.560 --> 00:06:13.440 it kind of necessitates the board to have a preliminary hearing if they would like to 00:06:13.440 --> 00:06:23.120 have additional evidence at this point. What are your reactions? 00:06:24.240 --> 00:06:26.320 I like it. Yeah I think it looks good. 00:06:26.320 --> 00:06:31.520 It's the same it's the spirit of what we talked about. Yes yeah yeah. 00:06:31.520 --> 00:06:33.280 Could we see the other screen please I'm sorry. 00:06:33.280 --> 00:06:51.680 That's nice. I like it. Is anybody is there any more discussion that we need to have about it? 00:06:51.680 --> 00:07:01.360 Does this go before the council now? Oh when we when we have several recommendations to make 00:07:01.360 --> 00:07:05.760 we'll go before the council. Right it's one that still has to. Right yeah so historically we've 00:07:05.760 --> 00:07:11.200 taken a packet so several potential amendments to the city council we would likely could take them 00:07:11.200 --> 00:07:18.080 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 00:07:18.080 --> 00:07:23.840 kind of massive work. I wouldn't recommend against that honestly. So yeah it's really what y'all would 00:07:23.840 --> 00:07:28.720 prefer but yes it does have to go before the city council in order to be adopted into the ordinance. 00:07:28.720 --> 00:07:37.200 So is anybody ready to put a motion on the floor about... Could we just have a quick look at the 00:07:37.200 --> 00:07:45.680 red lines? Sure. Here this is all that has really changed in the ethics ordinance is just removing 00:07:45.680 --> 00:07:51.680 this and then you guys had discussed wanting to make sure this was clear that another it didn't 00:07:51.680 --> 00:07:57.120 have to be legal counsel on the ethics ordinance so I just added that. Okay. And then in the rules 00:07:57.120 --> 00:08:01.440 of procedure is more where it's been. Yes. 00:08:01.440 --> 00:08:15.200 So here it's trying to clarify that you can the board of ethics during the summary hearing 00:08:15.200 --> 00:08:21.360 can request that additional evidence and put out a timeline for that. So after that hearing 00:08:21.360 --> 00:08:26.880 I would be responsible for sending those additional requests to the complainant and respondent 00:08:26.880 --> 00:08:33.600 and then also I'll be available to facilitate any open records request submissions and then 00:08:33.600 --> 00:08:41.760 the rest of these are really to try to make more clear that the complainant is not required to 00:08:41.760 --> 00:08:46.880 attend anymore. You can't just dismiss a complaint because the complainant hasn't attended the hearing. 00:08:46.880 --> 00:08:54.000 This is a little clean up because I don't used to be accused but now it's responded 00:08:54.000 --> 00:09:02.880 and then removing this section it was kind of confusing honestly and then just trying to clarify 00:09:02.880 --> 00:09:08.320 opening state really wasn't that table so I could yeah. 00:09:12.720 --> 00:09:18.400 And then also removing the burden of proof section from this the rules of procedure as well. 00:09:18.400 --> 00:09:24.880 So I can go to a specific part if you'd like to look at it I know it's kind of a long. 00:09:24.880 --> 00:09:33.600 And the rest is just remembering right yeah yeah. 00:09:36.560 --> 00:09:42.160 I like the in the opening statement has changed the shower to may. 00:09:42.160 --> 00:09:56.160 Any other questions or applications or comments? 00:10:03.920 --> 00:10:07.520 It's good don't you think? I like it do you want to. 00:10:07.520 --> 00:10:15.600 I'll make a motion that we accept the changes. Was there a speaker for this item? 00:10:15.600 --> 00:10:24.560 Yeah I think so. Oh okay. Is this the? Yes. Yeah I'll have that couple things to say. Okay. 00:10:24.560 --> 00:10:32.880 So I guess if you will come forward and state your name and 00:10:34.000 --> 00:10:39.440 your four minutes. That's four minutes right? Your four minutes will be. 00:10:39.440 --> 00:10:44.880 I know that I did I ran out of paper that's part of why I was why I was running late so 00:10:44.880 --> 00:10:49.680 I don't have enough for everybody but I do have enough for a couple. 00:10:49.680 --> 00:10:56.160 This sounds like it's a complaint. Yeah that is. I don't think that this is the time. 00:10:56.160 --> 00:11:01.920 Well are you speaking on the? Yeah I know I'm here about this item but that was 00:11:01.920 --> 00:11:08.480 I wanted to distribute that while I was here. So we have two items from you? Sure why not. 00:11:08.480 --> 00:11:15.920 Well so they asked if there were any speakers on this item that's why I'm here and so while 00:11:15.920 --> 00:11:21.120 I came up I was just distributing this other. And that's fine we'll just hold on to this but 00:11:21.120 --> 00:11:25.120 we can't speak on this item because we're not posted for this we're only posted for this item. 00:11:25.120 --> 00:11:33.680 So we can only have discussion. I'm going to talk about about the. Sure. Sure yeah and that's fine. 00:11:33.680 --> 00:11:42.880 So no names no complaints about anybody in particular. No is that is that is that a normal 00:11:42.880 --> 00:11:49.600 thing that. Yeah we don't the complaints go through the auditor. Okay so so we can't talk to the public 00:11:49.600 --> 00:11:54.400 about complaints that we have relative to you know public welfare in general. That there's a procedure 00:11:54.400 --> 00:12:00.320 for that and it starts with the auditor. Okay I mean I just yeah seeking clarity is all. I just 00:12:00.320 --> 00:12:05.520 want to be consistent and fair. No absolutely and I certainly want to be fair too I you know 00:12:05.520 --> 00:12:12.720 we'll leave it at that. And I did forward this email to you guys so all of y'all or I forwarded 00:12:12.720 --> 00:12:18.240 it to the secretary so all y'all should have it at least by tomorrow. Okay there's just a couple of 00:12:18.240 --> 00:12:24.960 things in here relative to changes that are being made. Why are we changing from abstain abstain 00:12:24.960 --> 00:12:34.240 or abstainment to abstention. A couple of this this really I was actually more prepared to speak 00:12:34.240 --> 00:12:42.160 on this. Generally I oppose any changes to our especially our code of ethics right now 00:12:43.120 --> 00:12:49.280 because I think there's some surreptitious agendas that are acting under the surface. And so without 00:12:49.280 --> 00:12:56.880 any offense being intended toward you all. Okay we've got some big issues relative to the life 00:12:56.880 --> 00:13:05.040 for the average person in the city. Okay that complaint that I I'm making now after 10 months 00:13:05.040 --> 00:13:10.560 is relative to a testimony that I gave January of this year. Okay and so I've waited for that 00:13:10.560 --> 00:13:17.120 individual for months and months to do what is what I consider the right thing and they didn't 00:13:17.120 --> 00:13:23.200 do it. And so for that reason I'm going to ask you guys to oppose any changes being adopted because 00:13:23.200 --> 00:13:27.840 I don't believe that y'all are aware of the true affect that that's going to have for our community. 00:13:27.840 --> 00:13:32.800 Okay and then that's all I'll say on this. Okay thank you guys. Thank you. 00:13:40.000 --> 00:13:48.000 I I may. Sure here you can actually have this my copy. I don't need it thank you. 00:13:48.000 --> 00:13:58.000 I'm talking about I just want to talk about what you said on the podium. So what you see up there 00:13:58.000 --> 00:14:06.400 you're opposed to. From from looking at from looking through this is I printed out y'all's 00:14:06.400 --> 00:14:12.480 agenda. Yeah I'm opposed to any changes any substantive changes to the procedure for the 00:14:12.480 --> 00:14:18.000 Board of Ethics right now. Absolutely. And you're opposed to it because of some but there is 00:14:18.000 --> 00:14:25.120 activity going on that we're not aware of. If you are aware of it now and. I'm not aware of any. 00:14:25.120 --> 00:14:30.560 Okay well I mean you just touched the document you're aware of. So well so I mean it's the same 00:14:30.560 --> 00:14:36.640 as being served. I mean that we're dealing with technicalities that are being hidden by attorneys 00:14:36.640 --> 00:14:42.080 and it's stuff that it goes it does affect every individual living in the city. And so the stuff 00:14:42.080 --> 00:14:46.240 that I'm seeing substantively why what's the definition for the word abstention. What's the 00:14:46.240 --> 00:14:53.200 definition for the word abstainment. Why is that change necessary to make in a public in our records. 00:14:53.200 --> 00:15:00.400 Why is that necessary at the city level. Okay and so the these if it's just a you know common usage 00:15:01.280 --> 00:15:05.920 and we'd be talking about something different but that's not what we're talking about. We're 00:15:05.920 --> 00:15:13.760 talking about intense and we're talking about people changing the form of testimony. What you 00:15:13.760 --> 00:15:20.160 know the there's a procedure in here that is essentially blotted out that the complainant 00:15:20.160 --> 00:15:26.480 says something first and then the or respondent or defendant whatever you guys want to call it. 00:15:27.040 --> 00:15:32.560 Says something next and that needs to be in there. You know we need to have that articulated. Not 00:15:32.560 --> 00:15:37.920 that it may happen but it shall. Okay and these are that answered my question. Thank you. Yeah. 00:15:37.920 --> 00:15:50.320 Okay thank you guys. 00:15:53.600 --> 00:15:57.040 We would have to go into a closed session to discuss legal issues. 00:15:57.040 --> 00:16:00.240 I think it would depend on what they are. 00:16:00.240 --> 00:16:09.760 It would as long as it's an item. I don't know that we have anything posted that we 00:16:09.760 --> 00:16:12.880 would allow for an enclosed session at this point. 00:16:15.840 --> 00:16:26.000 So I have a question for the rest of what he wanted to talk about. Would that be considered 00:16:26.000 --> 00:16:30.400 an ethics complaint and that would be filed that way or what what was the procedure he would want 00:16:30.400 --> 00:16:36.240 to do to talk about the rest of what he had to present? What is the procedure for him? So in 00:16:36.240 --> 00:16:39.760 order to file an ethics complaint there's a specific form that you have. I mean is that what 00:16:39.760 --> 00:16:45.280 that is? Is the rest of it was an ethics complaint? It's intended my understanding is it's intended to 00:16:45.280 --> 00:16:50.400 be an ethics complaint. It's not currently on the correct form so I will work with him. So you work 00:16:50.400 --> 00:16:58.560 with him to get him. Yeah. It's supposed to be authorized as well. I think that's some property 00:16:58.560 --> 00:17:07.120 we need to follow the procedures that we have. So can I make a comment on one of the comments that 00:17:08.400 --> 00:17:18.960 Mr. Dillenberg made? I believe so. If it's on the posted item. Yes it is. So my understanding 00:17:18.960 --> 00:17:27.040 and I'm an alternate on this board but I watch all of the meetings but these changes are not 00:17:27.040 --> 00:17:33.040 necessarily generated by the city council members. They are generated through the discussion of the 00:17:33.040 --> 00:17:42.320 board with the goal to make it as easy as possible on the complaint to come forward with a complaint 00:17:42.320 --> 00:17:49.840 to be heard to have the evidence that they need and to support their complaint so that we have 00:17:49.840 --> 00:17:56.720 the information to make an determination. My understanding in terms of how the city council 00:17:56.720 --> 00:18:05.520 can propose their own changes without the board of ethics but the board of ethics in order to propose 00:18:05.520 --> 00:18:16.320 a change that comes from us. And this this process there's been a number of meetings and a 00:18:16.320 --> 00:18:22.160 number of discussions about this their issue with the goal of making it easier to complain and not 00:18:22.160 --> 00:18:35.760 it's not harder. I don't know if I should say anything. If you have a response. Should I go 00:18:35.760 --> 00:18:48.320 back up there? Yes. Okay. I appreciate that very much. I think that's something that I'm thankful 00:18:48.880 --> 00:18:54.000 that you guys have that in mind and I've always seen that when I watch y'all's meetings but there's 00:18:54.000 --> 00:18:59.920 a lot of stuff going on and this complaint that I made is just kind of one of a number of things. 00:18:59.920 --> 00:19:09.520 That's a different issue. Anyway I agree and so my point in saying that I don't agree with it is 00:19:12.400 --> 00:19:21.600 and where I don't necessarily argue that that you guys aren't doing that maybe by intention I think 00:19:21.600 --> 00:19:30.880 that it needs to be a like certain responsibilities need to remain with the complaintant like being 00:19:30.880 --> 00:19:37.120 present for the meeting you know you guys struck that part said if he's not if they're not here 00:19:37.120 --> 00:19:43.520 then the complaint is dismissed. I don't have any problem that as a general member of the public 00:19:43.520 --> 00:19:50.880 with only you know the interests of myself and my fellow man obviously as an American and as a text 00:19:50.880 --> 00:19:57.760 I think we care about each other generally and and so in saying that you should be here to present 00:19:57.760 --> 00:20:02.080 your complaint if you're going to be complaining against someone on allegations that are relatively 00:20:02.080 --> 00:20:09.680 serious in most cases. So again any substantive changes I'm just not having any favor of right 00:20:09.680 --> 00:20:14.160 now especially until some of this other stuff comes to light. It's Gandhi's birthday today so 00:20:14.160 --> 00:20:19.840 happy birthday Gandhi. Here's to a better world and hopefully you guys will at least wait on this for 00:20:19.840 --> 00:20:24.640 now until you guys have a chance to review the rest of this stuff and and see what I'm talking 00:20:24.640 --> 00:20:30.640 about okay. All right and I apologize for no notice. I waited until the last minute for this 00:20:30.640 --> 00:20:37.120 person's behalf. It was for no other reason than that that I wanted to give them every chance that 00:20:37.120 --> 00:20:41.840 I could to do something about it before I came and yes. All right thanks so much. 00:20:41.840 --> 00:20:53.680 How many questions? All right call the question. Okay so is there a motion on the board because I 00:20:53.680 --> 00:20:59.120 did not think there was. I thought there was a motion. I actually started the motion but then 00:20:59.120 --> 00:21:06.720 okay we moved. Okay so let's lay the motion on the floor and then we'll we'll vote on it. I move 00:21:06.720 --> 00:21:12.960 to accept the changes to the code as we discussed in previous meetings and presented by Madison. 00:21:12.960 --> 00:21:22.240 Is there a second? I second. Okay so Andrea has made the motion to approve the proposal for BOE 00:21:22.240 --> 00:21:32.960 041 and Deborah seconded. So all in favor. Do we have any discussion or anything? Any discussion? 00:21:32.960 --> 00:21:41.040 Do you want this? I just want to make sure in case you wanted to say if you wanted to 00:21:41.040 --> 00:21:52.480 postpone this vote too. I think we're ready to vote. I think we heard enough of you heard evidence. 00:21:52.480 --> 00:21:59.920 We spent a lot of time talking about this at the last meeting and several other meetings actually. 00:21:59.920 --> 00:22:06.480 Yeah and I'm going to abstain just because I haven't been okay. This is my first meeting in 00:22:06.480 --> 00:22:20.000 several months. So all in favor. Andrea, Deborah, me, Rob. Rob is four and Patricia is abstaining. 00:22:20.000 --> 00:22:34.400 Okay this last item BOE 23-041. Discuss future meeting topics. Once again I think we might want 00:22:34.400 --> 00:22:42.960 to postpone it until we have everybody here. I would appreciate some direction on what you 00:22:42.960 --> 00:22:48.480 would like to see at the next meeting. Okay yes because we know there's going to be the election. 00:22:48.480 --> 00:23:01.440 One thing that I would really like to consider adding would be consider looking at the code of 00:23:01.440 --> 00:23:09.760 ethics that the city employees have because it's quite different from the one that we have for city 00:23:09.760 --> 00:23:17.840 officials and my concern with it is the one for city officials is actually a pretty good code. 00:23:17.840 --> 00:23:22.800 In my opinion this one is not. It's very weak. There's a lot of 00:23:24.880 --> 00:23:32.640 holes in it which we're trying to knit together but I'm not asking. I want to make it clear I 00:23:32.640 --> 00:23:40.240 would not want to. The city manager would have decisions over city employees but I think there 00:23:40.240 --> 00:23:48.160 could be a real problem if a city let's say a city council member asks an employee to do something 00:23:48.160 --> 00:23:53.600 that is a violation of their code of ethics which is actually a bit more strict. 00:23:55.040 --> 00:23:59.680 Then what do they do? Do they go with what the council member is asking 00:23:59.680 --> 00:24:06.480 and violate their own code of ethics or do they say no and possibly face some kind of 00:24:06.480 --> 00:24:16.000 get fired lose their job. I do think that there would be great benefit for both groups having 00:24:16.000 --> 00:24:21.920 the same thing and it's been a while since I've read that code but I thought it was pretty good 00:24:21.920 --> 00:24:28.480 when I did read it. So I would like to put that on the list and I would like to maybe 00:24:28.480 --> 00:24:36.000 reorder these things. Here's all of the items that are currently on the list before this meeting. 00:24:36.000 --> 00:24:43.040 I guess I'm not quite sure what you would like me to bring back as far as the city 00:24:43.040 --> 00:24:49.120 ethics policy. I think probably we need to just have a very big discussion next time about what 00:24:49.120 --> 00:24:55.760 the order is and you know some of this stuff is a couple of years old and I don't know if it's 00:24:55.760 --> 00:25:05.120 as important so we're getting new board members in I think that we should weigh in on and plus add 00:25:05.120 --> 00:25:13.680 new things and then so I would just say go back to the drawing board at the next meeting about 00:25:13.680 --> 00:25:22.080 you know what the order is. So I have an objection to that because I know a lot of discussion has 00:25:22.080 --> 00:25:32.960 gone into these topics already and some resolution I think some of them will be good. I think to 00:25:32.960 --> 00:25:38.880 start all over again is to throw out the valuable work that prior members have done. Okay. So 00:25:40.560 --> 00:25:46.080 for next month Madison you have something on financial thresholds, 00:25:46.080 --> 00:25:51.200 definition of pending matter, that is a big one. That's a big one. Yeah. 00:25:51.200 --> 00:25:59.440 So I actually wanted, I'm sorry. Oh go ahead. I was actually considering the same question is 00:25:59.440 --> 00:26:05.040 going back to those changes that we had submitted before and kind of like because we had discussed 00:26:05.040 --> 00:26:12.080 that there was a potential that we can resubmit, like revisit them, go over them and then 00:26:12.080 --> 00:26:17.680 resubmit them to the City Council which especially since we're just adopting something else I think 00:26:17.680 --> 00:26:24.800 at this time if we were to go and revisit those items that were not considered by the City Council 00:26:24.800 --> 00:26:33.280 and look at those topics and build a package over the next couple of months that could be submitted 00:26:33.280 --> 00:26:38.480 to the City Council maybe in January. I mean I don't want to make a tight one but like 00:26:38.480 --> 00:26:43.840 because that was something that I was missing the last couple of meetings is that we never 00:26:43.840 --> 00:26:52.000 went back to once the City Council came back to us with no direction on those on those changes. 00:26:52.000 --> 00:26:59.760 Yeah these are the ones that got put on the list after that basically they're revisiting those 00:26:59.760 --> 00:27:06.560 topics that we discussed. So looking at the calendar I was looking I was thinking that if we 00:27:06.560 --> 00:27:13.360 we're obviously having to move the election down to November and we're moving the ethics training 00:27:13.360 --> 00:27:19.040 down to November so maybe we can keep like the definition of pending matter. I think that's going 00:27:19.040 --> 00:27:26.160 to be a big long topic and then the rest I think should be put in a list and then we decide what 00:27:26.160 --> 00:27:32.880 the order is because there's a new there's new members and I want to have everybody involved. 00:27:32.880 --> 00:27:38.480 So I would be really good with that because I think the pending matter is going to be 00:27:38.480 --> 00:27:45.200 could be a lengthy discussion. And if it pushes to have members here in November 00:27:45.200 --> 00:27:54.560 I think that's a good time to give into that. Yeah so the direction I'm hearing is next meeting 00:27:54.560 --> 00:27:59.680 we'll have the minutes obviously the election of chair and vice chair the ethics annual ethics 00:27:59.680 --> 00:28:04.960 ordinance training a definition of the beginning of the definition of pending matter discussion 00:28:04.960 --> 00:28:09.120 and then perhaps like 10 minutes dedicated to future meeting topics instead of our usual five. 00:28:09.120 --> 00:28:17.600 One other thing that I wanted to consider would it be possible kind of out of difference to staff 00:28:17.600 --> 00:28:25.200 to have our meetings during the day or? It is possible. Because I know that I know that you 00:28:25.200 --> 00:28:34.080 and Tammy have to stay late and Scott knows too. I can add a discussion of the meeting schedule 00:28:34.080 --> 00:28:47.920 the next year. I think we need to do that anyway. Okay so I can add that to the agenda for next month. 00:28:47.920 --> 00:28:57.360 So it sounds like that concludes the item 041 and so is that correct has everybody had the 00:28:57.360 --> 00:29:06.160 chance to speak about that? Okay so this meeting is adjourned at 5.59 p.m.