It's 5.30 p.m. and it is Monday, March 4th, 2024.
And this is the City of Denton Board of Ethics.
And I don't -- do we have any B comments
or presentations from the public?
>> Not that I saw.
>> Okay. So we will move on to two items for consideration.
So BOE24-011, consider approval of minutes
for February 5th and February 8th, 2024.
So do I hear a motion?
>> I have a motion to accept the minutes as presented.
>> So Andrea Eberhardt has made a motion to accept the minutes.
>> I'll second.
>> And Dustin Howlett's second.
>> So all in favor of accepting the minutes as --
>> All right.
>> So we will move on to --
do we need to look at the draft advisory opinion or?
>> No, the advisory opinion?
>> Right.
>> That's been republished.
It's just in there as an FYI and that's a later item.
I think we're on the proposed -- the draft red lines.
>> Okay. So BOE24-012, receive a report, hold a discussion
and give staff direction regarding draft red lines
of the potential proposed amendments from the Board
of Ethics to one, repeal and replace ethics ordinance section
2-273A, conflicts of interest, and two,
eliminate section 2-281C for evidentiary hearing procedures
to reflect the elimination of the requirement
of the complainant to testify in evidentiary hearing.
So I guess we'll look at -- I guess just the red line ordinance.
>> Right. So we discussed all of this last time.
I made the changes that you all directed me to
and then I also updated this disclosure section
which I missed last time.
Basically I just removed it because it really --
I think it's generally covered by the updated language
and then it has this reference to pending matter
which is not really applicable anymore
under the draft red lines.
And then the only other thing I wanted to point
out is there's this section on city officials with contracts.
That's not currently in the ordinance and it's just language
from the model code that we haven't really discussed.
So I wanted to make sure we did
that before we forwarded it to the city council.
Those are kind of the major differences from last time.
>> I did want to say I would really not like to introduce --
other than what we're talking about right now --
don't want to introduce new things because I would
like to be able to say we have approved this
and there you go city council.
When are you going to -- when are you going to look at it?
So I don't mean to cut anybody's voice off.
There are certainly things I could tweak.
But I want to say we're done.
There you go.
And I think if we keep tweaking it, then we're going
to give reasons to wait longer.
So that said, I'll shut everybody down.
I hope not.
I love you not saying this and not saying anything.
>> I'm not going to say anything that's terrific.
>> More than this last time.
I'm 100% happy with where we're at and I'm looking forward
to the council unanimously approving this.
>> Me too.
Me too.
>> So any -- no concerns about the changes to this cycle
up here that basically got eliminated?
>> Andrew?
>> Nope. Because like you said, that's covered by the language
that we adopted last time.
>> Okay. And then we did update substantial --
add substantial here as we discussed,
as there was direction to do last time.
And then any discussion about this contract section?
It seems like it might be sort of covered by all the rest
of the withdrawal pieces.
So I don't know that it needs to be in there.
>> I don't think that was our intent.
Sorry.
>> You mean to omit that?
>> To omit it.
>> Yeah. I'm good with it as written.
>> So do we need a motion here?
>> I don't think so because there's not really any direction
you're giving me to adjust this language.
You're telling me there is direction
to remove this contract section,
but you never really gave me direction to add it,
so I don't think so.
>> I appreciate your transparency, but --
>> And then -- and then I think the only motion we really need is
to forward the proposed amendments to council,
which is really the next item, so.
>> Okay. So we move on to --
>> Do we need to talk about the rule and procedure part?
>> You -- so y'all discussed
that originally in October last year.
I know a while ago at this point.
But you're certainly welcome to discuss that again
if you would like to.
>> I don't have anything to add.
I just know that it was on the --
it was in that item in the agenda, so.
>> It was exhibit 30.
>> Yeah. And it's really updated to kind of reflect the change
to removing the burden of proof requirements,
and so allowing the complainant to choose whether
or not they would like to testify.
>> I don't have any comments on that.
I think it is exactly what we have.
>> Were we planning to include that in the packet
with these other two items, because --
>> So that is the second item.
It's -- yeah.
>> I was -- okay, so.
>> You can certainly give direction to only do one
of them if you would like to.
I think originally that was the plan.
>> So is everybody okay with the rules and procedure?
Yeah, that was -- I've slept many times since we approved that.
So, okay, so.
>> No, I feel the same way.
We've discussed it.
>> Forward march.
So do -- we've already moved on everything.
We didn't change anything tonight.
So, okay.
>> Yeah, so then the next item would be
to actually forward these proposals
to the city council, eventually.
>> Yes.
>> I moved them before the red line.
>> I think we have to read that item first before --
>> Oh, I'm sorry.
>> Oh, okay.
>> Sorry. They're separate, to make it clear.
>> Exhibit three, rule --
>> These are the items.
>> Yeah, item C, DOE 24-013, receive a report,
hold a discussion, and take necessary action regarding
forwarding proposals to amend city of Denton code
of ordinances chapter two, article 11, ethics,
and the board of ethics rules of procedure to the city council.
Exhibit one would be the agenda information sheet,
and then the exhibit two is a letter of proposed amendments.
>> Yeah, so the draft letter, I can pull it up in a second.
The options are really to forward it to council
as it's presented, forward it as amended,
based on your discussion, or just to put it
on next meeting's agenda, as well,
based on direction that you do.
>> Do I hear a motion?
>> I'll make a motion that we forward to council for approval
as written today, the written lines.
>> I'll second that.
>> Okay. Andrea seconded, Dustin made the motion.
Any discussion?
Okay. All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> It's unanimous.
Okay. So item D, BOE 24-014, receiver report,
holds a discussion and gives staff direction regarding the
definition of complainant as it relates to the city
of Denton code of ordinances,
chapter two, article 11, ethics.
So I have nothing prepared for this.
This was, I believe I was given direction to put this
on the agenda, and this was specifically something I know
members, core members over there wanted to discuss.
He was unable to be here tonight, so.
>> So.
>> Should we table it so we can attend?
>> I would suggest we table that to our next meeting.
>> It's a very entertaining definition
because it calls the complainant human, but I looked
at the legal definition that doesn't mention the humans.
>> I think his concern was whether or not it had
to be an individual or this could be a group
or something like that, but I don't want to speak for him,
and I think it would make sense to table it.
>> To our next meeting.
[ Inaudible ]
>> I don't have a problem to table it,
but I think there is a rule about, because I tried
to table something like that, and the lawyer was saying.
>> I don't know what the rule is.
>> I have a rule about it of not being able
to bring it back up if we table it.
Some, there was something.
>> Okay, so we had, there is some parliamentary language.
>> Yeah, there's a parliamentary language
that makes it when we say table it.
>> Okay.
>> I'm glad you, I know there's some kind
of weird language for that.
>> Yeah, so it's just the way Robert's rule is written.
So when you say you lay it on the table, you're adding it
to be debated, but you're moving to postpone the item.
>> Yes, exactly.
>> So we have to move to postpone.
>> Yeah, okay.
>> I'll move that we postpone this agenda item
to a future meeting.
>> And I'll second that.
>> Andrea seconded that, okay.
>> I think we have time for one.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> So, so now we are at item E, new investment reports.
So I guess.
Yeah, so you requested last time that I provide information
about council candidate filing, or sorry,
financial campaign information.
That letter is provided, the city secretary's office provided
that to me, so I included that just for your reference.
And then the, in February we issued advisory opinion 24-001.
It's already been issued, it's just as an FYI basically.
And then in case you want to give direction based
on what was decided or anything.
For our prior to the item, sorry.
I can pull up the letter or the advisory opinion if you would like.
>> What do you, what's your pleasure?
>> It's really if you have anything you would
like to discuss, we don't have to do anything.
Just for informational purposes.
>> I read over it in the final minute, but I need to hear.
I guess, I guess it needs to be a motion for this.
>> It doesn't have to be a motion.
>> Oh, okay.
Anybody have any, any problems with just moving on or.
>> Did you want to talk more about the finance stuff?
>> It wouldn't be, we wouldn't be able
to change the advisory opinion, right?
Because that panel was, that panel had the,
had the facts in front of them, and they made the decision.
And so, is this the one that you and I did?
Is that, okay.
>> Do you agree with your decision?
>> I do agree with my decision.
>> Then we're good.
>> Sometimes things come up that we're like, oh,
we may need to look at the code in this section.
So that's why, you know, make sure you all are aware
when advisory opinions are issued, what they say, you know.
>> This is a confusing question.
>> That's, that was the only thing is like I was just curious
about the question just because, but I don't think
that there needs to be any conversation about it because.
>> No, it's a confusing question.
And I think you guys did a good job.
>> Thank you.
>> We move on.
Well, we are clipping right through.
We are now to our last agenda item.
>> So it's meeting we've had in a while.
[ Laughter ]
>> DOE 24-016, receive a report, hold a discussion,
and give staff direction regarding future meeting topics.
>> So if you look at the post, I guess you can pull that up.
>> I like this sheet better, but this one has all the options
that we discussed discussing at some point.
And then I guess you postponed this to the definition
of complainant will come back next meeting.
And then we currently don't have anything else on the agenda
that you've given direction to discuss.
>> I would like to suggest that we maybe not meet next April
because I don't know, I mean this April or the next meeting
or maybe not in May because I want to hear a response
from city council first and I don't know why we're going
to keep trying to turn on all these things that we're interested
in changing without hearing.
>> You think?
>> Yeah.
>> Another decision.
>> The one thing that I'm concerned about if we're not
meeting, if we're not meeting in April or May,
that that may throw us off in terms of our meetings
for the summer because I think it will be a whole lot more
difficult for people with traveling in June and July.
So that would be my concern,
especially since we have the definition of complainant.
We have 30 minutes on there.
So I would say when is the next city council meeting?
When will this be presented?
>> This will be presented June 4th.
So there will actually be three meetings
of the board before that is discussed.
>> Right.
>> Or that I said a little bit.
>> I guess my feeling is just that the last time we brought
up some very minor changes, it just got mowed down.
And so now we're talking about something kind of big and --
>> I show you a concern.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. But I would --
I think that since it is only the three of us today
or four of us, maybe we should keep the April meeting
and move that definition of complainant
and then see if we need to meet in May.
>> What do you guys think?
>> And is that the one that Zoltman wanted to talk about?
Okay. And so if he comes next time,
he'll get his chance to talk about that.
>> So we just -- and I think if we're still feeling this way,
next month and we still haven't gotten any kind of response
under the apparent delay, then maybe we cancel May.
>> So we're not going to get a response before June 4th
because that's when it's scheduled
on the work session agenda.
That's not really a decision council made.
That's a decision based on the time available at work sessions.
>> I just think this is really important
and I don't know why they couldn't add it
to something sooner than that.
>> So I guess the question is do we want to have at least one
of the April or May meetings
so we can do the definition of complainant?
>> April would be better to have them in skip May rather
than vice versa, right?
>> True.
>> I mean if we meet in --
if we have our normally scheduled meeting in June,
that would be after the --
>> No, it will be the day before.
>> It will be the day before.
>> So the next meeting will be July if we wait until --
>> And typically we have not met in July.
>> Correct.
>> Because that is usually right around July 4th
so we typically have not met in July.
>> Well, the city council is going
to unanimously approve our changes
so there probably won't be any need to meet, right?
>> That's a really good point.
>> We'll use the June meeting for a pep rally before this.
[ Laughter ]
>> It's like when the kids take STAAR tests
and have a pep rally on the day before.
>> I would like to propose that we have an April meeting
and do the definition of complainant.
>> Okay. And then we can revisit this issue --
>> Because I would like to feel like we're doing something --
>> Yeah.
>> Instead of kind of having three months where we're --
>> Yes.
>> Waiting around on the scheduling challenges.
>> So the April meeting is on April, is it?
>> I believe it's on April 1st.
That's the first Monday of April, so.
>> Okay. And then the May meeting is?
>> The 13th.
>> Because I will be out of town on the first Monday,
which is the 6th.
>> Oh, I have a problem with the 13th.
>> May 13th?
>> Yeah.
>> Well, we might skip that one, right?
>> That would help me, but --
>> Well, we can decide to skip the May meeting in April.
>> Yes.
>> If we're meeting, we can decide it.
>> Okay. Did you say that the May meeting would be on the --
>> The 13th, correct.
>> So we're moving that one?
>> Yes. I will be out of town on the 6th.
>> Okay. I already -- you --
>> Unfortunately, no one else is able to do this.
>> No, you told us -- you told us about this
because I already changed my schedule.
>> I remember that too.
>> Thank you.
>> So the direction is to meet in April
as scheduled with the definition of the planet being the only
thing on the agenda at this time,
besides the normal things.
>> Yeah.
>> All right.
>> Anything else for this agenda item?
Any other topics you want to put into April?
Not at this time.
>> I don't have anything.
>> Okay. Well, then, it is now 5:50 p.m.
and this meeting is adjourned.