Jun 03, 2024 Board of Ethics on 2024-06-03 5:30 PM

Okay. It is Monday, June 3rd, 2024 at 5.30 p.m. and I'm going to call this Board of Ethics meeting to order. And do we have any presentations from the public? Not that I have seen anything, sir. Okay. So we will move on to items for consideration. So item 2A, BOE 24-21, consider approval of minutes from March 4th, 2024. So do we hear a motion in that order? Move. David Zeltner has moved to approve them. I'll sign. Andrea has seconded. So all in favor? Aye. So the minutes are approved. Item B, BOE 24-022, receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding future meeting topics. So I'll give it to Madison. I have prepared the agenda item I always prepare. Our next meeting is in August. We have a break in July for our schedule because we usually need the beginning and because of the fourth holiday. And then we have a break in September for a similar holiday reason, I believe. And so then our meeting after that is in October. So right now, apart from doing our annual ethics training in October, there's nothing on the agenda. So I'd like to get direction on what to do next meeting. Some of the potential agenda topics that y'all discussed previously are on the slide. I did want to say tomorrow we finally get to go to the city council to take the two things that we have spent many hours deliberating. So hopefully, I'm the one who did not think that we should meet last month. So if you're unhappy about that, please blame me. I just didn't feel that until we got to go to council that we really had anything to talk about. So I want to talk, can we talk about what do we do if they say no to these things that we've thought about? And what do we do if they say yes? As long as we're talking about future agenda topics, I think we're good. Right, yeah. That's important. So if they pass these things, then I really think that we should get busy and start looking at some of the other little things that work, or maybe not little. If they don't, then I'd like to hear what you think is next. What should we do next meeting topics? Can we put an item on the agenda to review their recommendations? Yes, good. I think that is exactly what I was going to say. So if we have an agenda item, then we can discuss whatever. If they project some or all of it, we can at least have it on the agenda so we can discuss it in a meeting and then make a plan for if we need to modify our recommendations and then resubmit or I don't know what we would do. But if it's not on the agenda, then we as a group are not going to have an opportunity to discuss that and address any concerns. Good point. And I think whatever we get back, I mean at times there's also been guidance, correct? It's like guidance in terms of like maybe tightening up language or definitions and things like that. So I think we would be much better off using the meeting next month to discuss what comes out of the city council meeting and then plan our year starting October with those topics and those considerations in mind. If they do take both of our recommendations, maybe we could talk about and we have this little grid of potential topics so maybe we could require more of that. Yeah, I wouldn't want to use -- if they accept our recommendations, I don't think it would make sense to have a whole meeting where we're just, you know, celebrating. Yeah, and then I have just a couple of things, minor issues with what will actually I guess be presented tomorrow. You said the next meeting, you mean August, not July, right? Yeah, August. Two very minor things, language-wise. Are we talking about to discuss in August or? Yes. Okay. What is being presented tomorrow, I cannot change at this point. Because it's our meeting. And I want to say, Madison, you did a really wonderful job of pinpointing the topics because they're kind of complicated and I think you -- I so appreciate the very good work you do. So that letter I signed, I didn't write it. I did read it before I signed it. I completely agree with that and I've already sent Madison a message saying that these are two very minor points just with the language itself, not changing anything. Under the definition of relative that you're going to be discussing or presenting tomorrow, it says with regard to the latest individual state income. I think we're off-posting because we're supposed to be talking about it. So maybe a topic would be tweaking anything that just passed. Just clarifying what's going to be discussed tomorrow, that's all. That's not what the posting is on the agenda. I think for our meeting today is what he's saying. We don't have that on our agenda for today. Well, just last-minute clarification there. I mean, we're not changing anything. There's two wording, some wording in here that I just wanted to mention. If it changes anything, I don't know at this point. But I was just concerned about that word plus the fact that -- let me just throw this in for whatever it's worth. Under the -- you have done a fine job here with this burden of proof issue. The only thing that I was curious about was under Section 282, there is -- it is still possible for a respondent -- hang on here for just two seconds. This is just clarifying what's going to be discussed tomorrow. That's all. I would like to hear this because I might ask a question. Well, this isn't what we're posting. Oh, okay. Well, then we can't talk about it. If you want to talk to Madison after the meeting about it, you can talk about it, but we're not posting for that in this meeting right now. Well, that's fine then if you don't want to. Okay. I'm just clarifying -- I just don't want you to violate the open meeting fact. In case there are questions coming from counsel tomorrow, that's all I'm doing is just trying to address any confusion that might come up. Well, it wouldn't be a telma violation if he talked to you and I listened. Would that be -- As long as it's not a quorum. Right. Okay. You can -- Okay. I suggest that you all just individually talk to Madison about whatever concerns you have about what's going to come up tomorrow, just on your own, but not in this meeting where we have quorum and we need to be following our posting. Okay. No, I'm 100% in favor. There were just two things. In case it came up tomorrow, I just wanted to clarify that -- And you can do that with Madison after the meeting. In this position. Well, I'm guessing that if they have a question, then I'll hear it. Okay. Here it is. Okay. Last one. I promise. Under 282 -- Can I ask that we move forward with the agenda? Let's move forward with the agenda. Well, it's only in case there's a question -- Maybe I'll talk with you in Madison afterwards, as long as nobody else is present. 282A4, the complainant failed to testify at a hearing. That's it. That's just maybe something that would come up in discussion. That possibly should have been included with the -- so that's it. Okay. We can talk about it. Offline. Yeah, I mean, it was not redlined as it probably should have been, just to match what's over here on the -- that's it. We're not changing anything, just clarifying in case you're asked tomorrow or in case something comes up. Yes, that goes along with -- Okay. We're moving on. All right. All right. Thank you. So I would suggest that -- I know we were going to talk about definition of complainant. Yeah, that was -- we had talked about talking about that next, basically. Yeah. That, to me, that's an easy one to put up. I'm looking at the agenda information sheet. So do you guys -- okay, I can pull it up, but that would be weird. All right. There's a tentative reading topics. This one? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Or I guess the one before, I'm actually looking at the agenda information sheet. All right, that's the second one. Okay, yeah. So perhaps put definition of complainant on for the first thing in August. And then what other -- Is the management report that you normally list on there with the discussion of the city council direction or comments, would that fall under that or is that a separate topic? I think it depends a little on what they do. If they give direction, I'll probably bring that as a separate item. If they just adopt everything, I'll probably just give a management report that says, you did it. And then also probably include something about how the annual training will be changed to reflect the changes. I have a topic that's not on this list. I would like to look at what the citizens voted on in -- was it 2015? And I would like to look at whether or not our code fulfills those four things they said we should do. So just so I understand, like the specific ballot language that was included? Right. We can get that. I think that would be very important. Would you like that to be an item or would you like me to just provide that information? I would like it to be an item. Okay. What do you guys think about that? So that's one that was first voted in? Yeah, there were four things that were voted on and I would like to look at all four of them. And I would like to start considering how we can make sure the code covers those four things. Okay, that makes sense. To me, that's very important. Yeah, I guess -- is there a direction to put that on August? Yes, please. Are you guys okay with that? Because I feel like that would inform the future. I would like to second that also because of those four, the first one referred to having a conflict of interest code, which we've done. But the issues are the appearance of impropriety. That was to be in the introduction to this code. And for some reason during its authorship, whatever, that word "appearance" got struck. And so when the voters went to the polls in November of 2015, that was one of the four things that they expected to see. The fourth was the disposition of an ethics complaint, sanctions only. Or when the Charter Committee met in 2015, they discussed not only sanctions, but the possibility of fines being applied. And so all of that got dropped when the City Council went to work actually constructing this code. So there are four -- I've got it copied. Are those just the reasons why I want to put this on each other? Well, yeah. Just to clarify. I understand. Well, for the others and for the record. So that's all. So yeah, so we'll look at what the language the voters voted on that led to the ordinance that we have that was created in 2018. So I think that should cover August very well. And then I would think that would inform the future. Yeah, so we'll have an update on what occurs tomorrow. We'll have a look at what the origins of the ethics ordinance, I guess, I'll call it that. And then you also want to include definition of complaint, or no? I guess wait, because I feel like that other thing that I put up is going to be a big item. Yeah, and we can discuss if everyone is okay with that. If we have time for that, or not, depending on what happens tomorrow, if that's fine with the rest of the board. Yes. For definition. Leave it on, are you saying? We'll say tentatively, and then if you think we'll have time in August, we'll just decide that offline. Because we can always put it for the next meeting. Yeah, we can always postpone it. Right. So you're going to force me with us tomorrow? It's going to go pretty well. Thank you, Dustin. Dustin says it's going to be great. I like that. Let's do this. Okay. Thank you for the direction. The next meeting is scheduled for August 5th at 5.30 p.m., like, are you equal time? So, I guess that's the end of our meeting. So, seeing no more comments, this meeting is adjourned at 5.47. It is the shortest meeting we have ever had. Great job.