WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:10.600 Okay. Good evening. It is Monday, April 14, 2025. It's 5.30 p.m. and this is the board of ethics meeting. 00:00:10.600 --> 00:00:19.160 We do not have any presentations from members of the public, so we will move on to item two on our agenda. 00:00:19.160 --> 00:00:28.560 Item A, BOE 25-017. Consider approval of meeting minutes for March 10, 2025. 00:00:28.560 --> 00:00:36.400 Are there any changes? Is there a discussion now? Or are you going to? Can I discuss now? 00:00:36.400 --> 00:00:45.360 I don't want to get out of order, so don't get me in trouble. I listened to the presentation twice, on video. 00:00:45.360 --> 00:00:53.260 And I was very moved about your comments. It was obvious to me that you had a lot of pain in you. 00:00:53.260 --> 00:01:01.560 But I'm going to say some things, and please don't take it personal. And that's the first thing. 00:01:01.560 --> 00:01:11.160 You can't take it personal. Because the committee is protecting themselves, and they're always, they're people. 00:01:11.160 --> 00:01:21.360 And they're always going to protect themselves. So, you know, we say A, they say B, but the point being is they have an agenda, and we have an agenda. 00:01:21.360 --> 00:01:24.660 Okay. So that's the first thing I want to tell you. 00:01:24.660 --> 00:01:27.860 Do you have any recommendations for the minutes? 00:01:27.860 --> 00:01:30.660 Do you have any recommendations for changes to the minutes? 00:01:30.660 --> 00:01:40.860 Yeah, I do. So let me get through my list. I have a list. I just want to tell you what I think first, and then I have, I do have an agenda. 00:01:40.860 --> 00:01:48.160 They want us to be the watchdog, but they don't want the dog to be too big. Okay. 00:01:48.160 --> 00:01:55.960 And for years following you, even though I wasn't on the committee, and I tried to get on the committee, and then I was asked to get on the committee, 00:01:55.960 --> 00:02:04.560 and I was on too many committees, and I said no. I always felt like you guys were trying so hard to keep them under wraps so much. 00:02:04.560 --> 00:02:10.260 Okay. So this is my personal opinion, from my experience. 00:02:10.260 --> 00:02:18.860 I do think, I could give you a story, but I won't about somebody holding on to somebody too tight, and I think that that's where they are with us. 00:02:18.860 --> 00:02:24.560 They think that we're trying to hold on to their success too tight, and they want it the way they want it. 00:02:24.560 --> 00:02:38.160 But I will say to you all, to follow your conscience, if we know something to be right, then by then, we put the number out there, and we live by it. 00:02:38.160 --> 00:02:45.360 And if they want to battle us, or they don't want us as members, they have a choice. But we've got to stick to our guns. 00:02:45.360 --> 00:02:57.160 Now, it doesn't matter if the number is 500, 5,000, or 50,000, it doesn't, it doesn't matter. 00:02:57.160 --> 00:02:57.660 Huh? 00:02:57.660 --> 00:02:58.960 Yeah, we're off topic. 00:02:58.960 --> 00:03:06.160 Oh, well, yeah, I asked you if I could do, talk to the, to the meeting, to the minutes, that's what I'm talking to you. 00:03:06.160 --> 00:03:10.160 Just trying to approve the minutes from last time. 00:03:10.160 --> 00:03:15.460 I, I, that's what I'm talking to you until we can then vote on it. Am I out of the way? 00:03:15.460 --> 00:03:22.160 Um, yeah, I think you are. We just need to. 00:03:22.160 --> 00:03:25.560 Okay, well go ahead and go for the minutes, and then we'll have discussion. 00:03:25.560 --> 00:03:26.860 At the very end. 00:03:26.860 --> 00:03:28.860 At the end of this whole thing? 00:03:28.860 --> 00:03:29.860 Right. 00:03:29.860 --> 00:03:31.860 Of the whole meeting? 00:03:31.860 --> 00:03:41.160 When we have that, when we talk about topics for future, we, that's when we can be a little bit more, we can talk about future agenda items at that time. 00:03:41.160 --> 00:03:41.660 Yeah. 00:03:41.660 --> 00:03:47.860 Well, unless she's leading up to some recommendation to amend the minutes. 00:03:47.860 --> 00:03:53.160 That's right. So I am leading up to that, okay. 00:03:53.160 --> 00:03:57.660 I don't think it's going to help this conversation to leave it at the end. 00:03:57.660 --> 00:04:03.460 If I'm out of the line, then just let me know. But I, I just really am passionate about what I'm getting ready to say. 00:04:03.460 --> 00:04:06.960 And it does lead up to the council, okay. 00:04:06.960 --> 00:04:13.660 That's not the, sorry, that's not this item. This item is, the item is, and there hasn't been a motion. 00:04:13.660 --> 00:04:17.060 There hasn't been a motion yet, so there's really not anything to discuss. 00:04:17.060 --> 00:04:19.360 Well, that's why I asked that we need a motion. 00:04:19.360 --> 00:04:19.860 So the motion. 00:04:19.860 --> 00:04:22.760 The minutes. And she said go ahead. 00:04:22.760 --> 00:04:27.760 So would you move to accept the minutes as, as they have been given to us? 00:04:27.760 --> 00:04:28.460 No. 00:04:28.460 --> 00:04:30.160 Okay. What do you want to? 00:04:30.160 --> 00:04:32.260 What would you change? 00:04:32.260 --> 00:04:36.360 A lot of things. I'm talking about it right now. 00:04:36.360 --> 00:04:40.960 The minutes are what already happened in the last meeting. 00:04:40.960 --> 00:04:44.660 Well, I'm challenging the fact, I mean, I listen to the whole conversation. 00:04:44.660 --> 00:04:47.560 And you were talking about things that weren't really on the minutes either. 00:04:47.560 --> 00:04:52.960 You were talking about trust, and people, and council, and you're frustrated with them. 00:04:52.960 --> 00:04:56.360 I didn't think that was part of the minutes either. 00:04:56.360 --> 00:05:07.660 That was when we were talking about the agenda item of the, of what we had taken to the council. 00:05:07.660 --> 00:05:09.760 Maybe it was on the top. 00:05:09.760 --> 00:05:14.260 Well, that doesn't matter. The point is, are you, this, I mean. 00:05:14.260 --> 00:05:21.260 So, so unless you have some specific motion to change something on the minutes, 00:05:21.260 --> 00:05:25.960 either a motion to approve as written, or. 00:05:25.960 --> 00:05:29.560 Okay, then I'm going to motion. 00:05:29.560 --> 00:05:34.260 We were, in the minutes, we were discussing meeting with the council. 00:05:34.260 --> 00:05:36.360 Can I address that? 00:05:36.360 --> 00:05:40.360 Yeah, you, so you want to address what you want to add to the minutes that wasn't in there. 00:05:40.360 --> 00:05:42.060 Yes. 00:05:42.060 --> 00:05:47.660 I want to make a motion that we ask the council what their ask is. 00:05:47.660 --> 00:05:54.260 What do they want? 00:05:54.260 --> 00:05:55.760 Is that legal for me to do? 00:05:55.760 --> 00:05:57.560 That's a question for legal. 00:05:57.560 --> 00:05:58.560 Legal? 00:05:58.560 --> 00:06:00.460 You can make that motion. 00:06:00.460 --> 00:06:07.060 I mean, the question ultimately will be, is that reflective of what happened at the meeting? 00:06:07.060 --> 00:06:14.060 Did this board do that? Did they make the ask at the meeting before? 00:06:14.060 --> 00:06:18.360 That's what this item is. This item is, there were, there was a meeting that happened before. 00:06:18.360 --> 00:06:19.960 Things were discussed. 00:06:19.960 --> 00:06:24.560 Minutes were drafted by staff to reflect what happened in that meeting. 00:06:24.560 --> 00:06:32.860 Do we, do y'all want to, do y'all accept those minutes as being accurate of what happened in that meeting? 00:06:32.860 --> 00:06:37.860 Or is there some mistake in those minutes that you need to correct? 00:06:37.860 --> 00:06:46.860 Well, I'm trying to correct the idea that, that we were talking about meeting with council, communicating together. 00:06:46.860 --> 00:06:52.260 And I was trying to address the fact that have we ever asked them what they want? 00:06:52.260 --> 00:06:56.160 What is their ask? What is their business ask? What do they want from us? 00:06:56.160 --> 00:07:05.060 I think I understand what you're, so you're wanting to make a motion that we ask them what's going on. 00:07:05.060 --> 00:07:06.960 So that will come up in new business. 00:07:06.960 --> 00:07:09.860 So once we reach new business, then you'll make your motion. 00:07:09.860 --> 00:07:10.160 Okay. 00:07:10.160 --> 00:07:15.060 Then we can debate it and that's when we can vote yes or no to, I think that's right. 00:07:15.060 --> 00:07:17.360 I'll just shut down until I get there. 00:07:17.360 --> 00:07:17.660 No, I don't- 00:07:17.660 --> 00:07:18.960 Just tell me when I'm there. 00:07:18.960 --> 00:07:21.360 No, I don't want you to shut down. I'm trying to- 00:07:21.360 --> 00:07:26.060 I want to hear what you have to say. It just, it has to be at the end or we're off topic. 00:07:26.060 --> 00:07:34.560 So the city a few years ago decided not to have narrative minutes and just to have more of an overview. 00:07:34.560 --> 00:07:39.060 And so the time that we can talk about this until we get there again. 00:07:39.060 --> 00:07:45.060 I apologize, I just am a little bit tad frustrated with some things. 00:07:45.060 --> 00:07:47.060 And I want to express my opinion. 00:07:47.060 --> 00:07:50.160 So whenever I can do that, you let me do that. 00:07:50.160 --> 00:07:52.060 Diane, we want to hear what you have to say. 00:07:52.060 --> 00:07:56.060 Well, I- no, we're key players. It has nothing to do with you. 00:07:56.060 --> 00:08:02.060 It has my frustration with what's some of the stuff that's going on. 00:08:02.060 --> 00:08:05.060 We'll talk about that at the end underneath business. 00:08:05.060 --> 00:08:05.760 Bam? 00:08:05.760 --> 00:08:06.760 We'll talk about that. 00:08:06.760 --> 00:08:08.360 Yeah, let me know when I can. 00:08:08.360 --> 00:08:09.760 New items and- 00:08:09.760 --> 00:08:10.960 Yeah, whatever. 00:08:10.960 --> 00:08:15.160 I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion to accept the minutes as you will present it. 00:08:15.160 --> 00:08:16.060 Okay, do I hear a second? 00:08:16.060 --> 00:08:17.460 Second. 00:08:17.460 --> 00:08:23.660 Okay, Andrea made the motion, Zeltner seconded. 00:08:23.660 --> 00:08:26.060 Okay, all in favor? 00:08:26.060 --> 00:08:28.560 Aye. 00:08:28.560 --> 00:08:31.060 So it's- are you extending, Diane? 00:08:31.060 --> 00:08:33.060 I'm extending because I want to hear. 00:08:33.060 --> 00:08:38.960 That's fine, I'll- that's fair. 00:08:38.960 --> 00:08:41.160 Okay, it passes. 00:08:41.160 --> 00:08:44.560 So the minutes stand as written. 00:08:44.560 --> 00:08:48.560 So item B is DOE 25-016. 00:08:48.560 --> 00:08:56.760 Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding ex parte communication as it relates to the city of Denton. 00:08:56.760 --> 00:09:03.660 Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article 11, Ethics. 00:09:03.660 --> 00:09:13.360 All right, so this discussion was approved as part of a previous feature agenda items item. 00:09:13.360 --> 00:09:21.460 And so the information from the current ethics ordinance is presented on the screen regarding ex parte communications. 00:09:21.460 --> 00:09:29.260 Just very briefly, that is about essentially one party communicating with either the board of ethics, 00:09:29.260 --> 00:09:34.560 or the board of ethics communicating to somebody outside of the board about a pending complaint. 00:09:34.560 --> 00:09:40.360 So that's the definition of the current ex parte communications. 00:09:40.360 --> 00:09:47.360 There's more detail, of course, on the screen, but I'll let y'all discuss anything that you would like to as far as this. 00:09:47.360 --> 00:09:52.560 As long as it's within the scope of the item. 00:09:52.560 --> 00:10:01.660 My first thing, I would like to change the word "pendency" or "during the pendency," 00:10:01.660 --> 00:10:05.860 which of course means ongoing or not concluded. 00:10:05.860 --> 00:10:16.260 I would say after a complaint has been filed and these are heard by the board or acted on by the board, whatever language, 00:10:16.260 --> 00:10:26.160 I just want to make it super clear because "pendency" is a legal term and people are going to have to follow this code are not lawyers. 00:10:26.160 --> 00:10:31.360 So what do you guys think? 00:10:31.360 --> 00:10:44.860 Then I would like to ask the lawyers in the room if there's a specific meaning attached to "pendency" in the realm of the law. 00:10:44.860 --> 00:10:50.060 I looked it up today and it means ongoing or not concluded. 00:10:50.060 --> 00:10:56.260 And I do understand the dictionary definition, but sometimes when we're talking specific terms, right, 00:10:56.260 --> 00:11:05.460 they have, there's a specific connotation that goes along with that term depending on what field of expertise we're talking about. 00:11:05.460 --> 00:11:07.160 So that's the only reason. 00:11:07.160 --> 00:11:12.460 And what about, instead of saying "during the pendency," just say "pending." 00:11:12.460 --> 00:11:17.160 Just the word "pending," would that be more clear? 00:11:17.160 --> 00:11:20.960 Yeah, that would be clear. 00:11:20.960 --> 00:11:23.360 Everybody understands that. 00:11:23.360 --> 00:11:27.260 You hear that "pending" word more often than "pendency." 00:11:27.260 --> 00:11:33.260 So after a complaint has been filed and is pending before the Board of Ethics. 00:11:33.260 --> 00:11:42.960 Yeah, I think that would be a lot more clear. 00:11:42.960 --> 00:11:55.760 I'm concerned that if your concern is that "pendency" is not clear when the official date that it's no longer pending or in the pendency, 00:11:55.760 --> 00:11:59.760 that just changing it to say "enduring" and "while it's pending" does not necessarily clear it. 00:11:59.760 --> 00:12:04.160 Once it's been heard and acted on, how do you want to say that? 00:12:04.160 --> 00:12:12.360 After a complaint has been filed and until the complaint has been resolved by the Board of Ethics or something like that, 00:12:12.360 --> 00:12:16.460 because then you skip the "pendency." 00:12:16.460 --> 00:12:17.360 I would agree. 00:12:17.360 --> 00:12:24.660 If we're changing it, then let's change it to something that is definitely more descriptive. 00:12:24.660 --> 00:12:38.260 And what actually produces the conclusion of that matter. 00:12:38.260 --> 00:12:45.660 So any discussion on this? 00:12:45.660 --> 00:12:53.660 I guess we don't need to vote on this because it'll come back next month and we'll look at it at that point. 00:12:53.660 --> 00:13:00.160 Yeah, so I guess you can give direction for me to simply create a proposal, ultimately. 00:13:00.160 --> 00:13:06.460 So including red lines to change it to say something along the lines of what you propose. 00:13:06.460 --> 00:13:09.260 It seems like there's consensus for that. 00:13:09.260 --> 00:13:17.160 The other thing that I would suggest, item two, why is it just the Board of Ethics? 00:13:17.160 --> 00:13:24.760 Why isn't it also PNZ and whatever other groups are so much of it? 00:13:24.760 --> 00:13:28.960 Because the Board of Ethics is acting in place of the judge or the jury, essentially. 00:13:28.960 --> 00:13:38.860 And so the intention is that the Board should not be communicating on only one side about a pending ethics complaint. 00:13:38.860 --> 00:13:51.460 Could we add a third area because those other groups also make decisions that have pretty serious ramifications? 00:13:51.460 --> 00:14:01.160 I don't know that, because this is talking about specifically it's a violation to have ex parte communications when an ethics complaint is occurring. 00:14:01.160 --> 00:14:10.660 And those other boards do not have any authority over ethics complaints. 00:14:10.660 --> 00:14:19.060 Their decision-making bodies in other respects, some of them. 00:14:19.060 --> 00:14:22.860 And they may have a similar rule in those capacities. 00:14:22.860 --> 00:14:27.660 We would have to make a decision. 00:14:27.660 --> 00:14:38.060 And in theory, if your concern is improper influence, the ethics ordinance covers that in the complex of interest section. 00:14:38.060 --> 00:14:52.560 So this is just really speaking to during an ethics complaint, trying to cover the Board of Ethics as the body acting in a judicial judge/jury capacity. 00:14:52.560 --> 00:15:00.460 And then the complainant and the respondent who are also involved in that complaint and their representation. 00:15:08.060 --> 00:15:22.860 Any other suggestions? 00:15:22.860 --> 00:15:27.860 I know that you wanted to discuss this, so I just want to make sure we got any concerns. 00:15:27.860 --> 00:15:35.860 Well, I was concerned that we would think back about the three of us being on that complaint. 00:15:35.860 --> 00:15:46.660 I really felt strongly that we should have been in closed doors for us discussing everything and going through things before we took our laundry and put it out here. 00:15:46.660 --> 00:15:50.260 We didn't even know if we'd agreed to the complaint or not agree to the complaint. 00:15:50.260 --> 00:15:55.860 And yet, you know, we have them back behind us, you know, not that I personally cared. 00:15:55.860 --> 00:16:03.360 But the point is, I just think there's some times that we have to, we have to have closed sessions and we have to talk amongst ourselves. 00:16:03.360 --> 00:16:11.060 And the other thing I didn't understand during that time is we had three people on the committee, but our whole board was here. 00:16:11.060 --> 00:16:16.060 And I wondered what was the significance of the three committee when the whole board was here. 00:16:16.060 --> 00:16:20.760 Why weren't we all involved? You know, because it was open door. 00:16:20.760 --> 00:16:29.760 And I really felt strongly that most people always have closed door communication before they get to the main, main deal. 00:16:29.760 --> 00:16:37.560 So our research about if a preliminary panel can be in closed session is the next item. 00:16:37.560 --> 00:16:50.260 I apologize. And then and just so that logistically, the panel was scheduled before the regular meeting because it's easier for staff to do it that way for me. 00:16:50.260 --> 00:17:00.260 That's easier for me to schedule it before because it's only one night, but they don't have to be scheduled on the same night. 00:17:00.260 --> 00:17:13.260 I'm used to different committees, you know, federal committees and state committees where they just don't allow the ethics committee or anybody to discuss the business. 00:17:13.260 --> 00:17:15.260 Why don't we hold that until the next item? 00:17:15.260 --> 00:17:21.260 Yeah, well, I was thinking I was directing it to this. I was agreeing. 00:17:21.260 --> 00:17:23.260 I apologize, yeah. 00:17:23.260 --> 00:17:29.260 The ex parte communication is not about what occurs during, it is about what occurs outside of meetings. 00:17:29.260 --> 00:17:30.260 Right. 00:17:30.260 --> 00:17:33.260 Yeah. 00:17:33.260 --> 00:17:41.260 Are there any other suggestions anybody has about ex parte? 00:17:41.260 --> 00:17:50.260 So is everybody comfortable moving on because we'll get to look at it again next month. 00:17:50.260 --> 00:17:55.260 So I see head nods, so we're moving on. 00:17:55.260 --> 00:18:03.260 Item C. 00:18:03.260 --> 00:18:14.260 VOE 25-018, receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding future meeting topics. 00:18:14.260 --> 00:18:15.260 Oh, no, we're on. 00:18:15.260 --> 00:18:17.260 Oh, oh. 00:18:17.260 --> 00:18:19.260 Sounds positive, but if you want to, you could. 00:18:19.260 --> 00:18:23.260 We'll skip to item D and then we'll come back and get C. 00:18:23.260 --> 00:18:34.260 So item D is VOE 25-019, receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the process for holding preliminary assessment panels 00:18:34.260 --> 00:18:44.260 for the City of Denton Court of Audiences, Chapter 2, Article 11 as ethics. 00:18:44.260 --> 00:18:47.260 So this is about the preliminary panel. 00:18:47.260 --> 00:18:52.260 So we did, I discussed this with the city attorney's office. 00:18:52.260 --> 00:19:00.260 The Open Meetings Act does permit a governing body to meet in closed session to deliberate the employment, I'm sorry, 00:19:00.260 --> 00:19:08.260 employment evaluation, et cetera, of a public officer or employee. 00:19:08.260 --> 00:19:15.260 Most people covered under the ethics ordinance are not employees, but some of them are public officers. 00:19:15.260 --> 00:19:29.260 So there might be some limitations to the way that the board could keep a complaint confidential based on those things. 00:19:29.260 --> 00:19:38.260 So even if the complaint was not publicly posted, it would still be open to subject, it would be subject to open records requests. 00:19:38.260 --> 00:19:47.260 We could, if we had a preliminary assessment panel, somebody could request, hey, I want to see the complaint, even if it was not just made publicly available. 00:19:47.260 --> 00:19:52.260 And we don't believe that there is an exception that would prevent us from having to provide that. 00:19:52.260 --> 00:19:56.260 That's my understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong, Scott. 00:19:56.260 --> 00:19:57.260 You're right. 00:19:57.260 --> 00:20:06.260 Okay, and then the preliminary assessment panel could potentially have discussions in closed meeting, but they would have to take any action in open meeting. 00:20:06.260 --> 00:20:13.260 You could have your discussion, but then you'd have to come out and be an open meeting, basically, and then say yes or no, it's actionable or baseless. 00:20:13.260 --> 00:20:15.260 That's important. 00:20:15.260 --> 00:20:25.260 Yeah, and then, but there is one caveat, like I said, not all people subject to the ethics ordinance are considered public officials or public officers. 00:20:25.260 --> 00:20:35.260 So some city officials, you would be able to have that discussion in closed session, and some city officials, it doesn't seem like you would be able to. 00:20:35.260 --> 00:20:38.260 So that might create a dichotomy. 00:20:38.260 --> 00:20:50.260 We have not had very many complaints submitted against people who would probably not, who wouldn't, you wouldn't be able to do that, but it's always possible. 00:20:50.260 --> 00:20:53.260 Does that answer some of the other questions? 00:20:53.260 --> 00:21:06.260 So are you saying we can go into closed session, and then after closed session, we can come out and open it up to, I mean, that's what most meetings do. 00:21:06.260 --> 00:21:13.260 I mean, universities or anybody else, they have a closed session to discuss the staff or whatever the issue is. 00:21:13.260 --> 00:21:26.260 And so I really felt like it would be beneficial to us that day to have that, and then, you know, to me, after that's discussed, you know, I'm all for opening it up. 00:21:26.260 --> 00:21:28.260 I mean, I have no problem with that. 00:21:28.260 --> 00:21:44.260 So yeah, so our research indicates that we could do that likely for the four appointed city officials who are actually employees in the city. So we, the municipal judge, the city manager, and the city attorney. 00:21:44.260 --> 00:21:47.260 If a complaint was submitted against them, yes, you could have a closed session. 00:21:47.260 --> 00:21:51.260 It's likely that city council members, you could have a closed session. 00:21:51.260 --> 00:21:55.260 It's likely that P&Z, you could have a closed session. 00:21:55.260 --> 00:22:07.260 I believe the historic landmark committee, but there might be some boards who are members of a board who are subject to the ordinance where you would not be able to, because they're not considered a public officer. 00:22:07.260 --> 00:22:14.260 I think one that we talked about maybe is public utilities board, but I don't know for sure. 00:22:14.260 --> 00:22:17.260 We're just concerned that there might be issues for all. 00:22:17.260 --> 00:22:23.260 We're not certain that every body subject to the ordinance, you could do that for them. 00:22:23.260 --> 00:22:26.260 I just want to be clear about that. 00:22:26.260 --> 00:22:31.260 It's not saying you can't do it, it's just about raising that as an issue. 00:22:31.260 --> 00:22:36.260 I will say I came to the very first complaint, and that's how they did it. 00:22:36.260 --> 00:22:39.260 They asked everybody to leave the room, and they had the discussion. 00:22:39.260 --> 00:22:45.260 They brought everybody back in, and each person on the board said, this is why I made this decision. 00:22:45.260 --> 00:22:50.260 I did not like it. It was, it didn't feel very transparent. 00:22:50.260 --> 00:22:55.260 I had really no idea what they were hinting their decisions on. 00:22:55.260 --> 00:23:04.260 I think there's a fine line between that and transparency, which is also an ethical concept. 00:23:04.260 --> 00:23:11.260 But we're talking about somebody that we don't even know has been found guilty. 00:23:11.260 --> 00:23:24.260 In other words, we're talking about somebody's life in front of people that we haven't even had a chance to discuss some of the things that are going on so that we can think through it. 00:23:24.260 --> 00:23:29.260 We haven't had a chance to even get together until the meeting. 00:23:29.260 --> 00:23:32.260 I'm all for transparency. I am. 00:23:32.260 --> 00:23:39.260 I want people to know, but there's got to be a time that this committee can talk privately. 00:23:39.260 --> 00:23:44.260 And then, you know, let everybody know what we said, but at least we can think. 00:23:44.260 --> 00:23:49.260 You know, I might have been asked Ken something that I didn't think about, you know. 00:23:49.260 --> 00:23:54.260 I thought, oh man, I didn't realize. I asked her, oh, you know, you guys are right on that. 00:23:54.260 --> 00:23:58.260 Maybe I need to maybe adjust what I'm saying here. 00:23:58.260 --> 00:24:03.260 But personally, I believe that that's the benefit of an open session. 00:24:03.260 --> 00:24:11.260 Because that is exactly what will create understanding in the people how people got to. 00:24:11.260 --> 00:24:19.260 I have no problem. I have done this many times where I said I have changed my mind based on the discussion that we've had. 00:24:19.260 --> 00:24:30.260 Because the things that other members have brought to the topic have, you know, broadened my view of it and have, you know, really led me to change my mind. 00:24:30.260 --> 00:24:38.260 And I think that is the power of having people watch how we come to a conclusion. 00:24:38.260 --> 00:24:42.260 I think it's more uncomfortable for the board, for sure. 00:24:42.260 --> 00:24:48.260 It is. You're absolutely right. Because you're putting yourself out there more, right? 00:24:48.260 --> 00:24:54.260 Is this for clarity only or has there been a situation that's led to this question? 00:24:54.260 --> 00:25:00.260 Well, the other day, well, the first meeting we were at, the three of us were picked. 00:25:00.260 --> 00:25:13.260 And I really, because I have never, ever been on any board or any big time board that we didn't have closed meetings before we went into, you know, into the situation. 00:25:13.260 --> 00:25:20.260 So when I walked in, I asked them, I said, is it this meeting closed? 00:25:20.260 --> 00:25:24.260 And I mean, because I was thinking the three of us were going to discuss things. 00:25:24.260 --> 00:25:38.260 And he said, no, it's an open meeting. And well, here were the people right behind us discussing it with their buddies within ear length of me. 00:25:38.260 --> 00:25:44.260 And I'm thinking this is not right. I'm thinking this is not right at all. 00:25:44.260 --> 00:25:57.260 And it made me feel very uncomfortable because I wasn't used to it. Because I, you know, I, and I look after, I always look after when you guys tell me something. 00:25:57.260 --> 00:26:02.260 Baker, my nickname is Baker, are you wrong? Do you think you're wrong about this? Blah, blah, blah. 00:26:02.260 --> 00:26:07.260 And I couldn't find anything that people didn't understand closed meetings. 00:26:07.260 --> 00:26:18.260 You know, and then they're over, the meeting's over, we told our stuff, they're out, they're right here, they're right here talking about everything, the meeting and how we discussed it. 00:26:18.260 --> 00:26:29.260 It just went all over me. It did. I just, that wasn't, that wasn't clarification. That was control. 00:26:29.260 --> 00:26:39.260 He was trying to control the situation. And he did. That's how I felt about it. 00:26:39.260 --> 00:27:04.260 I was aware as the one who picked that panel, I wanted the people who knew the least about what had gone on before, just for fairness. And I know that that threw all of you under the bus. But I think you made a very good decision. 00:27:04.260 --> 00:27:10.260 Then let me ask you this, Diana. Did you feel pressure? 00:27:10.260 --> 00:27:21.260 Me, I never feel pressure. But I think most people do. Yes ma'am. I think it's an intimidation factor. But me, I don't give a damn. 00:27:21.260 --> 00:27:39.260 You know, I don't mean to be ugly, but I don't need this. I love this committee. And I'm going to love you guys. And I'm going to support you. But for me, not. But for me as an ethical human being, absolutely. It was intimidating. 00:27:39.260 --> 00:27:42.260 Pressure from who, the public or the rest of this board? 00:27:42.260 --> 00:27:52.260 Oh, not from this board. The people right here talking about how we wrote it and what's going on and what we're doing. And they didn't get out of the room. 00:27:52.260 --> 00:28:13.260 Scott, and this is a legal thing, would us holding an open, since we are acting on the city's behalf, holding an open meeting regarding a complaint against another city employee violate any type of an employment law? 00:28:13.260 --> 00:28:16.260 City employees have their own code of ethics. 00:28:16.260 --> 00:28:29.260 Well, so talking about the employees that are subject to this code, what y'all are discussing is the subject of an ethics complaint. 00:28:29.260 --> 00:28:45.260 So if it were a, I mean, there should never be a situation where y'all would be discussing an HR matter in this meeting. It's just going to be did the person violate this code of ordinances? So that situation shouldn't arise. 00:28:45.260 --> 00:29:12.260 And I love the, I love the code that the city employees have. I think it's very well written. It's extremely clear. I really tried hard to figure out how we could take it on, but there's too much stuff in it that was just specifically for employees. So it wasn't practical. Yeah, they have their own stuff and under that, I think things have gotten a lot better in the city. 00:29:12.260 --> 00:29:25.260 Well, what kind of prompted the question was we could hold an executive session to discuss anything regarding employment. 00:29:25.260 --> 00:29:39.260 Well, in employment, the way that this would work is somebody has filed a complaint against an employee violation, which would then could affect employment, which is what would allow us to do the executive session. 00:29:39.260 --> 00:29:48.260 But an employee, unless it's those four employees that Madison mentioned, that would be handled by the, I guess, the city manager. 00:29:48.260 --> 00:30:11.260 Well, we could, we should probably narrow this excerpt from the statute because the only word in there think that is relevant to y'all is discipline. Because you're not, y'all don't have the power to make employment decisions. You don't have the power to make an appointment. 00:30:11.260 --> 00:30:31.260 Maybe, I guess, you can recommend withdrawal of a person on the board, but even that has to be approved by city council. So the only thing you can do is discipline a public officer and discipline big scare quotes, you know, on that one too. 00:30:31.260 --> 00:30:45.260 So that's really all we're talking about. 00:30:45.260 --> 00:31:04.260 Another question I have for you, who are you trying to protect? She asked me who I'm trying to protect. I'm going to ask you, who are you trying to protect in this scenario? Are you trying to protect the, well, let me, let you answer that question. 00:31:04.260 --> 00:31:15.260 Don't put it in your mouth. Who are you trying to protect by not having a closed meeting in the early parts of this? I'm not saying not open it to the people, but. 00:31:15.260 --> 00:31:22.260 The citizens right to a transparent proceeding. They're going to have it right after the closed meeting. 00:31:22.260 --> 00:31:31.260 Bring that out. It did not feel that way in that one hearing that I attended. It did not feel that way at all. 00:31:31.260 --> 00:31:41.260 I think we get in trouble because we're trying so hard to be. This is going to sound bad, but we're trying so hard to make it so right all the time. 00:31:41.260 --> 00:32:03.260 And it just, I'd rather have our ducks in a row, our understanding of what's going on before we present it to the public as we should. But everything that comes out of our mouth early, where does it go? It goes to the paper. 00:32:03.260 --> 00:32:15.260 We don't even have our act together. It goes to the paper. It goes to the TV. It goes to the radio. Yet we have not had even a together vision of where that committee is going. 00:32:15.260 --> 00:32:27.260 So we're not protecting ourselves. We're not in any control of that. And so that's how rumors start. That's how falsehood starts. And that's what I'm pushing for. 00:32:27.260 --> 00:32:45.260 I'm not pushing against the open law act. I'm pushing for us to have the same message. As we walk out, even if it's two to one or one to three, at least we have a message and we can identify why we said that. 00:32:45.260 --> 00:33:04.260 And whatever they get, they get. It was ugly back here. I was really not happy back then. Because I just wasn't used to it. It was just like you're not comfortable with this. 00:33:04.260 --> 00:33:19.260 I was like, really? We're in here talking about all this stuff. And we're a committee, an ethics committee, and everybody has control. It seems well done for us. 00:33:19.260 --> 00:33:42.260 Is there a way to make sure that that kind of talk does not happen in your shot of the committee? Can people in the audience need to be quiet? Not in a private conversation during the hearing? 00:33:42.260 --> 00:33:52.260 Well, yeah. I think that the chair has the right to tell them that they can't be making this comment. Or that they need to be quiet or leave. 00:33:52.260 --> 00:33:55.260 Right. But after the meeting is over, the chair doesn't have to. 00:33:55.260 --> 00:33:57.260 They can say anything they want to. 00:33:57.260 --> 00:34:09.260 But yes, during the meeting, whoever is the chair of the panel can pass some authority over. You can't say that or please be quiet. 00:34:09.260 --> 00:34:18.260 Why do you think -- oh, this is one more question. I'll be quiet. I'm Yankee, so you guys don't have to forgive me. Okay? I'm from New Jersey. 00:34:18.260 --> 00:34:25.260 Why do you think this person had all their buddies in here? 00:34:25.260 --> 00:34:29.260 I can't imagine. 00:34:29.260 --> 00:34:39.260 To influence? Or just because they love that person and they just wanted to be in here and have a chit chat with them? 00:34:39.260 --> 00:34:54.260 I think that's always going to happen. I know in that one, there must have been 30 people watching this hearing, and I would say it was awful being outside the room because the factions were, you know -- 00:34:54.260 --> 00:35:08.260 I'm just saying. Again, I'm saying, I just can't comprehend you guys not wanting a short, closed meeting before you open it to the public. 00:35:08.260 --> 00:35:21.260 And the other thing, and this is another thing, is you have three people on the committee, and I kept thinking, why are three people on the committee? They're sitting after -- they're sitting right here. 00:35:21.260 --> 00:35:25.260 That is just part of the process. 00:35:25.260 --> 00:35:27.260 I'm just saying, why not have all of us? 00:35:27.260 --> 00:35:36.260 It was a preliminary panel, and if it had gone forward, it wouldn't have been the full board. So I know that put all of you in a tough space. 00:35:36.260 --> 00:35:41.260 Kenneth, I want to hear from you because you were here. I mean, what was your experience? 00:35:41.260 --> 00:35:53.260 Well, I've got to apologize to Member Baker for not controlling them as the chair. I don't intimidate easy, so -- 00:35:53.260 --> 00:35:55.260 You're a lawyer. 00:35:55.260 --> 00:36:05.260 Yeah, lawyer and former Marine, so it takes quite a bit to intimidate. And so that's my fault for not feeling the intimidation. 00:36:05.260 --> 00:36:15.260 I didn't feel any pressure for you. It's more of a business thing for me. Everything I do in here is business. 00:36:15.260 --> 00:36:22.260 I think those things are going to happen. And I will say, that said, you guys made a very good decision. 00:36:22.260 --> 00:36:34.260 I'm happy with how it came out. I felt it was really important to have it hit you cold and not have anybody be able to say that you knew too much about it. 00:36:34.260 --> 00:36:38.260 And I know, I knew I was putting you in a rough position, but -- 00:36:38.260 --> 00:36:45.260 But I think it was a very productive conversation. I think it was a very productive and collaborative decision. I personally -- 00:36:45.260 --> 00:36:59.260 We had one person who knew some of the background, but, you know, so I don't know any way around it. 00:36:59.260 --> 00:37:08.260 I will say, after that hearing I attended, I think two panelists quit. I know one of them for sure did, so -- 00:37:08.260 --> 00:37:09.260 What? 00:37:09.260 --> 00:37:12.260 Do we have a moat so it's on record? 00:37:12.260 --> 00:37:14.260 So who quit? 00:37:14.260 --> 00:37:16.260 I don't even remember. 00:37:16.260 --> 00:37:17.260 Are you a board of ethics? 00:37:17.260 --> 00:37:18.260 Yeah. 00:37:18.260 --> 00:37:19.260 Who? 00:37:19.260 --> 00:37:24.260 I never saw them again, let me just say that. But this was several years ago. 00:37:24.260 --> 00:37:26.260 Oh, you're talking at a different time. 00:37:26.260 --> 00:37:29.260 Yeah, this was several years ago. 00:37:29.260 --> 00:37:30.260 I was like, wait, hold on, hold on. 00:37:30.260 --> 00:37:32.260 Yeah, that's not quite -- 00:37:32.260 --> 00:37:43.260 No, I do think that that was equally awful for those board members. I do, no, I never saw them again, because I've watched this board. 00:37:43.260 --> 00:37:54.260 So the point of order is whoever's in charge of running the panel should keep the people to not be talking during the discussion. 00:37:54.260 --> 00:38:00.260 And then when the pipe down, you know, once the meeting's over, I would just say exit as quickly as possible. 00:38:00.260 --> 00:38:01.260 Right. 00:38:01.260 --> 00:38:02.260 You know? 00:38:02.260 --> 00:38:03.260 Yeah, I know. 00:38:03.260 --> 00:38:06.260 Why can't you kill them first, well, and then -- 00:38:06.260 --> 00:38:10.260 I don't understand why you can't tell them in a second. 00:38:10.260 --> 00:38:18.260 You have control of your committee. And they're coming into your private world, and they need to be quiet. 00:38:18.260 --> 00:38:20.260 It's not private. 00:38:20.260 --> 00:38:28.260 So need and what's something that we can enforce are two different things, you know? 00:38:28.260 --> 00:38:35.260 And that is -- the city council meetings of late have been fairly chaotic. 00:38:35.260 --> 00:38:39.260 I would say the last time we came up, that was actually the best. 00:38:39.260 --> 00:38:43.260 And then there were still a lot of really pretty needs there. 00:38:43.260 --> 00:38:46.260 You know, like, do they know how to read? 00:38:46.260 --> 00:38:50.260 That was a not nice comment. 00:38:50.260 --> 00:38:58.260 You know, it's just how things are right now. 00:38:58.260 --> 00:39:02.260 And I -- not just in this city, but in a lot of places. 00:39:02.260 --> 00:39:13.260 You know, it's -- I really wish people could go learn how to debate, because in debate you argue very difficult points, 00:39:13.260 --> 00:39:20.260 and you -- but you're always civil, and that's the biggest thing that gets thrown at you if you're in debate. 00:39:20.260 --> 00:39:27.260 But that's not how politics is done. 00:39:27.260 --> 00:39:28.260 I can't change that. 00:39:28.260 --> 00:39:30.260 Well, I'll be quiet. 00:39:30.260 --> 00:39:34.260 But I don't buy that's how politics is today. 00:39:34.260 --> 00:39:39.260 I mean, I'm sorry, but I'm not buying into that crap. 00:39:39.260 --> 00:39:44.260 It's part of my language, whoever's listening. You know, I'm just not. 00:39:44.260 --> 00:39:46.260 People can be civil. 00:39:46.260 --> 00:39:47.260 I'm with you. 00:39:47.260 --> 00:39:49.260 And people can be kind. 00:39:49.260 --> 00:39:50.260 Yeah. 00:39:50.260 --> 00:39:52.260 And people can be respectful. 00:39:52.260 --> 00:39:57.260 And if they can't be, they have no business where they are. 00:39:57.260 --> 00:40:07.260 So they knew me when they put me on this committee, and I would fight for what I believed in, and I'm fighting for this. 00:40:07.260 --> 00:40:09.260 I vote for that. 00:40:09.260 --> 00:40:12.260 I don't know if it's something that we vote on. 00:40:12.260 --> 00:40:16.260 I'm going to be outlawed in five and one, probably, but the point being is I'd like to be on record. 00:40:16.260 --> 00:40:18.260 You are allowed to make a motion. 00:40:18.260 --> 00:40:19.260 Sir? 00:40:19.260 --> 00:40:23.260 You can make a motion, and if it gets seconded, then there will be a vote. 00:40:23.260 --> 00:40:26.260 Okay. I motion -- what am I motioning? 00:40:26.260 --> 00:40:34.260 I'm motioning that we have closed meetings prior to our open public meeting on complaints. 00:40:34.260 --> 00:40:36.260 Can I say it like that? 00:40:36.260 --> 00:40:37.260 Yeah, you get that. 00:40:37.260 --> 00:40:38.260 One more time. 00:40:38.260 --> 00:40:42.260 Well, if she moves that we have closed meetings -- 00:40:42.260 --> 00:40:44.260 We have a closed meeting with the -- 00:40:44.260 --> 00:40:46.260 Before we hear the complaint. 00:40:46.260 --> 00:40:48.260 During the preliminary assessment. 00:40:48.260 --> 00:40:52.260 Right. And before we open the open meeting. 00:40:52.260 --> 00:40:53.260 Right. 00:40:53.260 --> 00:40:57.260 Okay. So the motion is on the table. Is there a second? 00:40:57.260 --> 00:40:59.260 Can we vote on this? 00:40:59.260 --> 00:41:00.260 Preliminary only? 00:41:00.260 --> 00:41:03.260 Yes. Just preliminary only. 00:41:03.260 --> 00:41:04.260 Okay. 00:41:04.260 --> 00:41:05.260 To the extent that we are able to. 00:41:05.260 --> 00:41:11.260 Yeah, I think, yeah, there's going to be some major restrictions on, you know, 00:41:11.260 --> 00:41:20.260 because this will probably come back as a draft of a change to the ordinance and rule of procedure. 00:41:20.260 --> 00:41:29.260 So I think, just to clarify, that the -- effectively, what your motion will be is a motion to direct, Matt, 00:41:29.260 --> 00:41:39.260 to draft changes to the rules of procedure and that code of ordinances to allow preliminary hearings to occur at closed session. 00:41:39.260 --> 00:41:40.260 Is it? 00:41:40.260 --> 00:41:41.260 That's my answer. 00:41:41.260 --> 00:41:42.260 Does that sound -- 00:41:42.260 --> 00:41:43.260 Does that sound like -- 00:41:43.260 --> 00:41:44.260 Appropriate? 00:41:44.260 --> 00:41:45.260 Perfect. 00:41:45.260 --> 00:41:48.260 Okay. Is there a second in this motion? 00:41:48.260 --> 00:41:50.260 I'll second that. 00:41:50.260 --> 00:41:57.260 Can it be seconded? So now we have discussion. 00:41:57.260 --> 00:42:03.260 It seems like it's already -- number two says we can't have a closed session in certain circumstances. 00:42:03.260 --> 00:42:05.260 It's already listed as a possibility. 00:42:05.260 --> 00:42:15.260 Well, so this is a description of the Texas Open Meetings Act, which that doesn't govern -- I mean, that is the big umbrella. 00:42:15.260 --> 00:42:17.260 What are we allowed to allow? 00:42:17.260 --> 00:42:23.260 But our code of ordinances doesn't specifically allow closed meetings. 00:42:23.260 --> 00:42:30.260 This slide is really just saying here are the boundaries of what y'all can change the ordinance to be. 00:42:30.260 --> 00:42:32.260 That's not -- that doesn't reflect what the ordinance is now. 00:42:32.260 --> 00:42:40.260 Okay. 00:42:40.260 --> 00:42:45.260 David, I have a card for you. 00:42:45.260 --> 00:42:47.260 Well, no, I'm still processing. 00:42:47.260 --> 00:42:52.260 I kind of agree with where we're going with that second there. 00:42:52.260 --> 00:43:00.260 So I'm okay. 00:43:00.260 --> 00:43:08.260 But is the motion saying that we always have to have a closed meeting before we have an open meeting on the preliminary? 00:43:08.260 --> 00:43:09.260 Could. 00:43:09.260 --> 00:43:12.260 Or is it just could, like where it says in number two? 00:43:12.260 --> 00:43:13.260 No. 00:43:13.260 --> 00:43:17.260 I'm concerned about the complaints, you know? 00:43:17.260 --> 00:43:22.260 Okay. 00:43:22.260 --> 00:43:34.260 So the motion, if it was approved, what would occur is I would work with Scott to draft changes, red lines, like you sent to council the other day, and present those to y'all. 00:43:34.260 --> 00:43:51.260 And I clarify what the process would look like, right? So that for preliminary assessments, to the extent possible, because there might be some city officials that we are not allowed to have closed meetings, a closed meeting could occur during the preliminary assessment. 00:43:51.260 --> 00:43:55.260 So that would -- basically we would post for the -- we would post the meeting on the agenda. 00:43:55.260 --> 00:43:58.260 There would be an item that was in closed session. 00:43:58.260 --> 00:44:04.260 And then there would be an item -- there would also be an open session item, basically. 00:44:04.260 --> 00:44:08.260 And that way, y'all could move into closed if you wanted to or not. 00:44:08.260 --> 00:44:10.260 Does that make sense? 00:44:10.260 --> 00:44:12.260 That's how it would likely work. 00:44:12.260 --> 00:44:15.260 But we would have to get it vetted through the city attorney's office. 00:44:15.260 --> 00:44:21.260 And then ultimately, that change would have to go to the council before it's implemented, and they would have to adopt it. 00:44:21.260 --> 00:44:28.260 So that's the process we're looking at. That's the process we do for all of our -- any amendments to the code that we're looking at. 00:44:28.260 --> 00:44:33.260 So does that clarify a little better for everybody what we're voting on right now? 00:44:33.260 --> 00:44:37.260 Is that kind of kicking off that process to make that change happen? 00:44:37.260 --> 00:44:54.260 I will say that while I totally and completely understand what Titan is saying, I think if there had been a closed session, it would have opened the board up to problems. 00:44:54.260 --> 00:44:59.260 You know, I guess I believe that you guys were being unfair. 00:44:59.260 --> 00:45:03.260 What kind of -- can you answer what kind of problem? 00:45:03.260 --> 00:45:07.260 Like what you heard, you know, except in a more formal -- 00:45:07.260 --> 00:45:11.260 But if it was closed, they wouldn't even be here. 00:45:11.260 --> 00:45:24.260 I think if things did not go their way because of something that got said in a closed session, it would be -- I can't even imagine what would. 00:45:24.260 --> 00:45:31.260 So they're getting their way because you're concerned that what they would have said, if they didn't have an open -- 00:45:31.260 --> 00:45:36.260 I'm not trying to hurt them. I'm not trying to hurt us. 00:45:36.260 --> 00:45:40.260 No, we've said that a lot, and I totally -- 00:45:40.260 --> 00:45:47.260 I'm trying to get our ducks in a row so that our committee knows where they're heading. That's all. 00:45:47.260 --> 00:46:03.260 I totally -- believe me, more than you probably know, I understand what you're saying, but I -- in this environment, I don't think that would fly. But that's just my opinion. 00:46:03.260 --> 00:46:20.260 I want to play devil's advocate for preliminary meaning vehicles. I think it could -- depending on the makeup of the board, not that I feel intimidated by any person at the table right now. 00:46:20.260 --> 00:46:28.260 But there's a possibility for members being strong-armed in a closed session without oversight. 00:46:28.260 --> 00:46:33.260 I'm sorry, I can't hear you. 00:46:33.260 --> 00:46:39.260 In a way, it's almost like verbal ex parte communication. It feels like we need -- 00:46:39.260 --> 00:46:46.260 What I said is I would be potentially concerned for intimidation within the closed session. 00:46:46.260 --> 00:46:55.260 Just to be clear, it's not ex parte communication because it would only be within the board, which the board is allowed to do under the ordinance. 00:46:55.260 --> 00:47:09.260 Right. So it's hard for me. It's really difficult for me to -- I did not hear any of the comments. 00:47:09.260 --> 00:47:24.260 I'm not even 100% sure that I realize which party potentially was intimidating. So it's a little bit difficult for me to kind of -- 00:47:24.260 --> 00:47:36.260 You know, I really wish there was more separation because I sat in one of those chairs each time I come and the sidebar conversations were what may be miserable. 00:47:36.260 --> 00:47:49.260 And I know that you could hear some of them on camera, but it was not nice. And it was -- you know, I wish that we could be in maybe -- 00:47:49.260 --> 00:47:54.260 I just think we're missing the point. Again, the point is not intimidation. 00:47:54.260 --> 00:48:02.260 The point is that I didn't feel like the three of us had even breathing time to look at the complaint, 00:48:02.260 --> 00:48:10.260 discuss what the movement was to it or what takes place or whatever. We were just thrown in. 00:48:10.260 --> 00:48:21.260 We had these people behind us. They were chit-chatting like I felt. But if it wasn't me or David, somebody sitting here might have been intimidated 00:48:21.260 --> 00:48:28.260 because it was all their buddies. But the point being, that's not why I'm fighting for that. 00:48:28.260 --> 00:48:37.260 I'm fighting for this committee to have our -- I hate to say ducks in a row, but to really know where we're going 00:48:37.260 --> 00:48:46.260 and be consistent about where we're going versus -- like I said, I've never known anybody not to have a closed session 00:48:46.260 --> 00:48:56.260 before they discuss complaints or staff or firing or hiring. I've just never even known that and never even heard of that. 00:48:56.260 --> 00:49:05.260 So to me, it's just common sense. And then you open it up to the public and they turn their little radios on or whatever 00:49:05.260 --> 00:49:12.260 and they go on about what they're doing and everybody hears what they've talked about. 00:49:12.260 --> 00:49:18.260 And it's not like we're hiding things from them. We're trying to get our craft together. 00:49:18.260 --> 00:49:26.260 Well, I'm going to -- I'm going to speak against that because really and truly -- I mean, maybe that is because me as a teacher, 00:49:26.260 --> 00:49:32.260 for me the process of how we got to that decision is just as important to the public as the final decision. 00:49:32.260 --> 00:49:38.260 And that is where I -- that's where I stand. I understand the potential for there being, you know, 00:49:38.260 --> 00:49:44.260 interference or potential intimidation or just inappropriate comments or whatever it may be, right? 00:49:44.260 --> 00:49:52.260 But at the end of the day, the process of how we're getting to a decision is what provides the transparency for the public. 00:49:52.260 --> 00:50:03.260 It is not the decision itself. The decision is just that, a decision. But the process is where -- and I don't have a problem -- 00:50:03.260 --> 00:50:11.260 I don't have a problem with the public seeing a messy conversation that is respectful and that addresses different points 00:50:11.260 --> 00:50:18.260 and values everybody's opinion at the same time, right? Those are very, very valuable things. 00:50:18.260 --> 00:50:24.260 And that is one of the reasons I've always said is like we're not hearing about how city council operates versus how we operate 00:50:24.260 --> 00:50:30.260 because we know we have different opinions at this table. We have different perspectives at this table. 00:50:30.260 --> 00:50:34.260 But we have been nothing but respectful to each other and each other's opinions. 00:50:34.260 --> 00:50:42.260 And I think -- and that is exactly where I think even in an open meeting, regardless if we agree or disagree, 00:50:42.260 --> 00:50:51.260 I'm going to have your back in that sense because our communication with each other is respectful and we get to a point of consensus when we're done. 00:50:51.260 --> 00:50:52.260 And that's what's important. 00:50:52.260 --> 00:50:57.260 You talk about trust, though, because I listen to the radio and this has got to -- on this thing. 00:50:57.260 --> 00:51:04.260 Talk about the trust of the committee with us and they don't trust us and, you know, blah, blah, blah. 00:51:04.260 --> 00:51:12.260 Well, we had finished our conversation. We decided what we were deciding. 00:51:12.260 --> 00:51:22.260 And all the mighty people came up and they walked out like done. We accomplished what we wanted. 00:51:22.260 --> 00:51:27.260 Now, wait a minute. Just a second. 00:51:27.260 --> 00:51:36.260 We have the city council watching the video because we did the right decision we thought and we would have probably made the same decision. 00:51:36.260 --> 00:51:42.260 But talk about trust. The person that turned it in felt like they did the right thing. 00:51:42.260 --> 00:51:49.260 Oh, my gosh. You know, all you have to do is bring a bunch of people in here and boom, they all won. 00:51:49.260 --> 00:51:54.260 So that affects your trust a little bit. But I do respect your opinion. 00:51:54.260 --> 00:52:01.260 And I think that -- I can't say anything else more that is going to make you understand how I feel. 00:52:01.260 --> 00:52:08.260 And so we're holding up this and, you know, I just think that we just -- we have a motion on the floor. 00:52:08.260 --> 00:52:14.260 I think we just need to vote on it because I would like it to be in a record for future. 00:52:14.260 --> 00:52:18.260 And I just think it's the better way for us to go. 00:52:18.260 --> 00:52:25.260 And I'll respect this committee on what they're doing. Like you said, I'll have your back too. 00:52:25.260 --> 00:52:32.260 I told my people when they got me, you know me. If I don't agree, I'm not voting that way. 00:52:32.260 --> 00:52:40.260 So you need to make sure that you know what you're getting. So I just assume go on. I can't say anything else. 00:52:40.260 --> 00:52:49.260 For the vote, I will say that I am for transparency. And I think that's more important than having a closed meeting in this situation. 00:52:49.260 --> 00:52:57.260 Because I think, as Andrea said, the process needs to be transparent how to make this decision. 00:52:57.260 --> 00:52:58.260 Okay. 00:52:58.260 --> 00:53:03.260 But I have a suggestion that might help. What if we set -- what is the preliminary? 00:53:03.260 --> 00:53:18.260 I'm serious. The two times that I have been here representing the board, I was sitting right behind council members who were saying horrible things. 00:53:18.260 --> 00:53:29.260 And I couldn't even hear what Madison was saying in her presentation. I finally got up and walked out because I was so frustrated. 00:53:29.260 --> 00:53:39.260 But I think if we -- I do believe whoever was saying what they were saying knew exactly what they were saying and that you would hear it. 00:53:39.260 --> 00:53:48.260 And so I would suggest, I mean, if I'm here for a preliminary panel, I'm going to hurt everybody down to that end of the room. 00:53:48.260 --> 00:53:50.260 Okay, then I have one more question. 00:53:50.260 --> 00:53:51.260 Okay. 00:53:51.260 --> 00:54:00.260 Before we vote. And maybe it's -- let's follow this. Because I have one more question on why there's only three people on the panel. 00:54:00.260 --> 00:54:07.260 If we're going to leave it -- if you vote to leave it open, then why -- because you're going to be in the room anyway, right? 00:54:07.260 --> 00:54:09.260 Not always. 00:54:09.260 --> 00:54:12.260 Well, you're coming in for your meeting. And we have it 15 minutes before your meeting. 00:54:12.260 --> 00:54:15.260 We don't always do it that way. That has -- 00:54:15.260 --> 00:54:20.260 Okay. I just wanted to know why we're doing three instead of the whole group. 00:54:20.260 --> 00:54:25.260 Well, the preliminary panel is just to decide -- 00:54:25.260 --> 00:54:28.260 If it has any error, if the complaint has error. 00:54:28.260 --> 00:54:36.260 So there really are no decisions other than whether or not you move forward or just dismiss it. 00:54:36.260 --> 00:54:43.260 So I think you're getting a little bit deep right now on the actual function of the preliminary panel. 00:54:43.260 --> 00:54:45.260 That's my dilemma. 00:54:45.260 --> 00:54:51.260 It could also be done by one person, and I think it's far better to have three do it than just one. 00:54:51.260 --> 00:54:58.260 But if we had voted the other way, we had voted -- it was a complaint and it was rightfully -- 00:54:58.260 --> 00:55:01.260 Then the whole board would have met about it. 00:55:01.260 --> 00:55:04.260 They would have stayed in here and met about it, or would they have stayed -- 00:55:04.260 --> 00:55:06.260 No, we would have stayed at a different date. 00:55:06.260 --> 00:55:08.260 We were scheduled for a full -- 00:55:08.260 --> 00:55:14.260 Yeah, if you had voted that the complaint was actionable, you would not have been disgusted at that next meeting. 00:55:14.260 --> 00:55:18.260 We would have had to schedule another whole hearing, basically -- 00:55:18.260 --> 00:55:20.260 With the full board. 00:55:20.260 --> 00:55:26.260 With the full board and the defendant -- I'm sorry, the respondent and the complainant would have provided evidence, 00:55:26.260 --> 00:55:30.260 and then that would have been considered at that hearing at that time. 00:55:30.260 --> 00:55:38.260 And the respondent would have been allowed to basically provide a response to the complaint so that the board could consider that in full. 00:55:38.260 --> 00:55:45.260 The preliminary assessment panel, like members Oltner was discussing, is about deciding if on the complaint, on its face, 00:55:45.260 --> 00:55:50.260 if it is a violation of the ordinance, or if it would be a violation of the ordinance. 00:55:50.260 --> 00:55:55.260 So could it even possibly be considered a violation at that time? 00:55:55.260 --> 00:55:58.260 If the answer is yes, then we send it to the whole board. 00:55:58.260 --> 00:56:00.260 That's cool. I just wanted to hear your thoughts. 00:56:00.260 --> 00:56:02.260 Our motion is about the closed session. 00:56:02.260 --> 00:56:04.260 Yes, ma'am. 00:56:04.260 --> 00:56:11.260 Can we go ahead -- if we're finished with the discussion about the closed session, can we vote? 00:56:11.260 --> 00:56:13.260 Are we ready to vote? 00:56:13.260 --> 00:56:16.260 Okay. All in favor, raise your hand. 00:56:16.260 --> 00:56:17.260 Yes. 00:56:17.260 --> 00:56:18.260 The motion is to -- 00:56:18.260 --> 00:56:29.260 The motion is to direct staff to draft a proposal to allow ethics complaints to be discussed in closed session during a preliminary assessment panel to the extent possible. 00:56:29.260 --> 00:56:30.260 Okay. 00:56:30.260 --> 00:56:32.260 Everybody clear on that? 00:56:32.260 --> 00:56:34.260 During the preliminary panel. 00:56:34.260 --> 00:56:37.260 Yes. 00:56:37.260 --> 00:56:41.260 So all in favor, raise your hand. 00:56:41.260 --> 00:56:43.260 So Diane and Kenneth. 00:56:43.260 --> 00:56:47.260 And all opposed, raise your hand. 00:56:47.260 --> 00:56:50.260 It's two to four. 00:56:50.260 --> 00:56:53.260 And it fails. 00:56:53.260 --> 00:56:54.260 It fails. 00:56:54.260 --> 00:56:55.260 It fails. 00:56:55.260 --> 00:56:56.260 Yeah. 00:56:56.260 --> 00:56:57.260 Okay. 00:56:57.260 --> 00:56:58.260 Thank you. 00:56:58.260 --> 00:57:02.260 I was just trying to help get that motion cleared. 00:57:02.260 --> 00:57:05.260 I think you all were discussing a number of people on a panel. 00:57:05.260 --> 00:57:08.260 And if you all want to go back and talk about that, you can. 00:57:08.260 --> 00:57:09.260 He cleared it up for me. 00:57:09.260 --> 00:57:10.260 I'm fine with that. 00:57:10.260 --> 00:57:17.260 I was just curious on why there -- if it was open, why on that particular day, everybody was here. 00:57:17.260 --> 00:57:22.260 So I'm thinking, why isn't all of our members taking part in this? 00:57:22.260 --> 00:57:24.260 It does take a while to learn how everything works. 00:57:24.260 --> 00:57:28.260 I had no idea when I came on the board how these things work, and it does take time. 00:57:28.260 --> 00:57:31.260 And nobody would explain to you upfront how things work. 00:57:31.260 --> 00:57:38.260 Well, I'm going to be nice here, but I don't want to know how it had worked on the board. 00:57:38.260 --> 00:57:46.260 I want to come in here with a fresh two ears and look at what you have and say, yeah, you're the smartest people in the world. 00:57:46.260 --> 00:57:47.260 What about this? 00:57:47.260 --> 00:57:48.260 I don't want to. 00:57:48.260 --> 00:57:54.260 I could care less what happened two years ago because we have different counsel up there. 00:57:54.260 --> 00:57:56.260 We have different board members here. 00:57:56.260 --> 00:58:02.260 All I've heard was how bad everybody was, and I just don't want to go there. 00:58:02.260 --> 00:58:03.260 Thank you, though. 00:58:03.260 --> 00:58:09.260 I wasn't trying to be disrespectful. 00:58:09.260 --> 00:58:16.260 So can we move -- let's move on to the last, which is items for future meetings. 00:58:16.260 --> 00:58:29.260 So we'll go back to CBOE 25-01A, receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding future meeting topics. 00:58:29.260 --> 00:58:39.260 I believe the only thing we have currently scheduled for May is the return of the sanctions discussion from last time. 00:58:39.260 --> 00:58:46.260 Do you want me to advise you? 00:59:09.260 --> 00:59:13.260 Yes. 00:59:13.260 --> 00:59:24.260 I believe this is what we have for next time, but obviously you all can give direction to discuss any other things that you would like. 00:59:24.260 --> 00:59:27.260 Do you want to make a proposal? 00:59:27.260 --> 00:59:30.260 What am I proposing? 00:59:30.260 --> 00:59:38.260 The number of people on the board is a preliminary panel. 00:59:38.260 --> 00:59:51.260 This is the item where we discuss future meeting topics, so if there's other topics -- because you had that -- you wanted to make a motion to ask counsel what they would like from you all. 00:59:51.260 --> 00:59:54.260 I think that this is the time you could do something like that. 00:59:54.260 --> 00:59:56.260 I'm kind of lost. 00:59:56.260 --> 00:59:57.260 I'm looking at my notes. 00:59:57.260 --> 01:00:05.260 I wanted to talk about that, which we just did, and we talked about why everybody wasn't on it, what we did. 01:00:05.260 --> 01:00:17.260 Well, at first you had mentioned giving direction for us to talk to counsel about what they want. 01:00:17.260 --> 01:00:19.260 I think that's a really good question. 01:00:19.260 --> 01:00:21.260 Do I have the freedom to -- 01:00:21.260 --> 01:00:22.260 Yes. 01:00:22.260 --> 01:00:27.260 Okay. 01:00:27.260 --> 01:00:32.260 I just think that we're going round and round and round with counsel, and we've discussed that. 01:00:32.260 --> 01:00:35.260 They don't trust us, or we don't trust them. 01:00:35.260 --> 01:00:37.260 They don't trust each other. 01:00:37.260 --> 01:00:42.260 I mean, I don't know how we expect them to trust us when they don't trust each other. 01:00:42.260 --> 01:00:49.260 And it's like they want $500,000, $5,000, $50,000. 01:00:49.260 --> 01:00:51.260 It doesn't matter if we give them $50,000. 01:00:51.260 --> 01:00:57.260 There's always going to be somebody on there that's unhappy, because it's self-serving. 01:00:57.260 --> 01:01:00.260 And I don't mean to be respectful to the counsel. 01:01:00.260 --> 01:01:03.260 You know, they give it up their time and their effort and this and that. 01:01:03.260 --> 01:01:06.260 They're just people. 01:01:06.260 --> 01:01:12.260 But if we're going to have this problem over and over again, like I heard through your meetings, 01:01:12.260 --> 01:01:19.260 they've been dealing with it for three years, this non-trust. 01:01:19.260 --> 01:01:29.260 My question is, to keep it simple, they put us on the board. 01:01:29.260 --> 01:01:36.260 Somebody elected you and you and you, and they put us on the board for a reason. 01:01:36.260 --> 01:01:40.260 Have we just -- and you might have done this already. 01:01:40.260 --> 01:01:49.260 But have we just sat down with one or two or all of them and just said, what is your ask? 01:01:49.260 --> 01:01:53.260 What do you want from us? 01:01:53.260 --> 01:02:00.260 We will maybe meet you halfway, but we can't meet you all the way. 01:02:00.260 --> 01:02:11.260 Therefore, we want to know -- the only way we can get to a solution is, what is your ask? 01:02:11.260 --> 01:02:14.260 What do you want out of us? 01:02:14.260 --> 01:02:23.260 Don't be afraid, because they think that we're not tough women and men in here. 01:02:23.260 --> 01:02:25.260 And I believe we are. 01:02:25.260 --> 01:02:27.260 I know we are. 01:02:27.260 --> 01:02:34.260 Didn't I hear that they wanted some clarification about approaching us? 01:02:34.260 --> 01:02:35.260 About what? 01:02:35.260 --> 01:02:37.260 We discussed that, yes. 01:02:37.260 --> 01:02:43.260 I think there has been some discussion about maybe having a joint meeting. 01:02:43.260 --> 01:02:48.260 It seems like there's been some interest from some people and from y'all as well as from them. 01:02:48.260 --> 01:02:53.260 I don't think we've figured out when that could occur yet, but we can look into that further. 01:02:53.260 --> 01:02:55.260 I would very much like to do that. 01:02:55.260 --> 01:02:57.260 I think it would be great. 01:02:57.260 --> 01:03:00.260 Because everybody keeps saying no to us. 01:03:00.260 --> 01:03:06.260 No to everything we put forward until we put them and say to them, what is your ask? 01:03:06.260 --> 01:03:08.260 What do you want us to do? 01:03:08.260 --> 01:03:15.260 And okay, we'll agree to this, we'll not agree to this, but we're not going any more than this. 01:03:15.260 --> 01:03:21.260 For instance, I don't really -- I don't even understand the money, why that's such a big thing to anybody. 01:03:21.260 --> 01:03:31.260 But the point being, if we said to them, just an example, we'll give you the $5,000, make believe. 01:03:31.260 --> 01:03:34.260 But we're not budgeting one more cent over that. 01:03:34.260 --> 01:03:37.260 It's not happening. 01:03:37.260 --> 01:03:42.260 And you can do without us as members, but you put us on here. 01:03:42.260 --> 01:03:44.260 And what do you want? 01:03:44.260 --> 01:03:46.260 You want, is this the number you're wanting? 01:03:46.260 --> 01:03:54.260 Is this number important to you because of -- and just be straight with them and just say blah. 01:03:54.260 --> 01:03:56.260 Because that's how they deal. 01:03:56.260 --> 01:04:02.260 Well, we did say blah, and they just said we were stupid for saying blah. 01:04:02.260 --> 01:04:10.260 And so I -- well, I have no problem if they say no, we don't like that number. 01:04:10.260 --> 01:04:12.260 We want another one. 01:04:12.260 --> 01:04:15.260 But that's not what they did. 01:04:15.260 --> 01:04:18.260 I just want to know why they're picking that number. 01:04:18.260 --> 01:04:21.260 You know, and put it in their court. 01:04:21.260 --> 01:04:26.260 You know, we're the ones coming -- they perceive we're the ones that are trying to control them. 01:04:26.260 --> 01:04:28.260 That's what they think. 01:04:28.260 --> 01:04:37.260 But they have tried from the very start for this whole board, this entire concept of an ethics code, to just go away. 01:04:37.260 --> 01:04:40.260 I think what they want is they don't want us. 01:04:40.260 --> 01:04:46.260 Well, even the current members that sit here, you know, the very first meeting, 01:04:46.260 --> 01:04:54.260 there was a motion to try and just kill this whole thing and get rid of the ethics code from the get-go. 01:04:54.260 --> 01:04:56.260 Well, that failed. 01:04:56.260 --> 01:05:00.260 So we've been limping along back and forth. 01:05:00.260 --> 01:05:07.260 Madison, do you have any idea when the next time this council is going to deal with this, schedule-wise? 01:05:07.260 --> 01:05:12.260 I mean, you haven't forwarded any proposals to them at this time, so -- 01:05:12.260 --> 01:05:16.260 So is the ball in our court now to forward something to them again? 01:05:16.260 --> 01:05:18.260 Yes. 01:05:18.260 --> 01:05:26.260 I mean, the proposals that you have that we presented in March are being -- are on the agenda tomorrow for adoption. 01:05:26.260 --> 01:05:29.260 But that'll just solidify what y'all have already done. 01:05:29.260 --> 01:05:34.260 And then there won't be any new proposals at this time that y'all have forwarded then. 01:05:34.260 --> 01:05:42.260 So just for my -- so this whole burden, in your mind, is this whole burden a proof of history in -- 01:05:42.260 --> 01:05:45.260 No, we did get that changed. 01:05:45.260 --> 01:05:47.260 There was a change that was -- 01:05:47.260 --> 01:05:49.260 At least the wording is not burdened. 01:05:49.260 --> 01:05:50.260 So that's all over with. 01:05:50.260 --> 01:05:54.260 That's as far as we're going to get with the burden of proof. 01:05:54.260 --> 01:05:55.260 The burden of proof? 01:05:55.260 --> 01:06:15.260 I can show you what is on the agenda for tomorrow. 01:06:15.260 --> 01:06:17.260 Oh, I didn't see that. 01:06:17.260 --> 01:06:18.260 That's tomorrow? 01:06:18.260 --> 01:06:19.260 Yes. 01:06:19.260 --> 01:06:23.260 So this is what is up for adoption tomorrow. 01:06:23.260 --> 01:06:26.260 I think it's a huge improvement. 01:06:26.260 --> 01:06:34.260 You know, it was -- the two things we wanted most, we got, they will approve it tomorrow. 01:06:34.260 --> 01:06:39.260 It was just served up with a side order of nasty. 01:06:39.260 --> 01:06:43.260 But -- 01:06:43.260 --> 01:06:45.260 That's what? 01:06:45.260 --> 01:06:49.260 Let's stay on this topic. 01:06:49.260 --> 01:06:53.260 Try not to debate. 01:06:53.260 --> 01:07:03.260 So we got what was important, and I'm pretty happy about that. 01:07:03.260 --> 01:07:05.260 Well, you've got to negotiate. 01:07:05.260 --> 01:07:11.260 I mean, if we don't negotiate and meet somewhere in the middle, nothing's going to change. 01:07:11.260 --> 01:07:13.260 You're going to go around this for another three years. 01:07:13.260 --> 01:07:15.260 You know, I mean, they want something. 01:07:15.260 --> 01:07:20.260 I don't think they particularly changed these two things either. 01:07:20.260 --> 01:07:30.260 I mean, there was a lot of discussion about other things, but these two things went through kind of the way we asked them to go. 01:07:30.260 --> 01:07:31.260 Don't you think that -- 01:07:31.260 --> 01:07:36.260 They changed a little bit about -- 01:07:36.260 --> 01:07:39.260 The monetary limits were not approved, correct? 01:07:39.260 --> 01:07:44.260 Those are the ones where they said they didn't like the numbers. 01:07:44.260 --> 01:07:47.260 But they redirected us. 01:07:47.260 --> 01:07:51.260 We could look at those numbers again, right? 01:07:51.260 --> 01:07:53.260 Can I ask what topic? 01:07:53.260 --> 01:07:59.260 So what future agenda -- what potential future agenda item are we discussing right now? 01:07:59.260 --> 01:08:07.260 I would like for us to discuss the fact that we would like a set meeting with them to talk over 01:08:07.260 --> 01:08:15.260 and communicate how we can coexist because they're good people and we're good people. 01:08:15.260 --> 01:08:21.260 And there's got to become some kind of a meet in the middle. 01:08:21.260 --> 01:08:25.260 They want something from us, obviously, or they wouldn't keep saying no to us. 01:08:25.260 --> 01:08:27.260 At least that's what I'm hearing. 01:08:27.260 --> 01:08:30.260 Have we gotten a yes from them at any point? 01:08:30.260 --> 01:08:31.260 No, we did. 01:08:31.260 --> 01:08:36.260 We got a couple of misses this last time, a couple of really important ones. 01:08:36.260 --> 01:08:40.260 Well, I fell off of you the other day. 01:08:40.260 --> 01:08:45.260 I have to admit how distressed you felt. 01:08:45.260 --> 01:08:48.260 And I did. 01:08:48.260 --> 01:08:53.260 I fell off of you and protected my team. 01:08:53.260 --> 01:09:02.260 I would like to be more clear under what circumstances city council members contact 01:09:02.260 --> 01:09:06.260 members of the Board of Ethics. 01:09:06.260 --> 01:09:07.260 For a future topic? 01:09:07.260 --> 01:09:10.260 Yeah. 01:09:10.260 --> 01:09:12.260 Explain that again. 01:09:12.260 --> 01:09:19.260 I think there should be some ground rules about how council members approach 01:09:19.260 --> 01:09:22.260 Board of Ethics members. 01:09:22.260 --> 01:09:27.260 There should be ground rules on how they approach each other. 01:09:27.260 --> 01:09:29.260 About just general topics or complaints? 01:09:29.260 --> 01:09:34.260 This is for a future topic for next meeting to talk about how council members 01:09:34.260 --> 01:09:38.260 approach Board of Ethics members. 01:09:38.260 --> 01:09:42.260 That was one, and the other was setting up a meeting with both groups. 01:09:42.260 --> 01:09:44.260 That's two future topics. 01:09:44.260 --> 01:09:46.260 Are there any other future topics? 01:09:46.260 --> 01:09:47.260 No. 01:09:47.260 --> 01:09:49.260 That seems like enough to talk about next time. 01:09:49.260 --> 01:09:51.260 Those would be good things to talk about. 01:09:51.260 --> 01:09:59.260 Well, I also think we should add this money thing. 01:09:59.260 --> 01:10:00.260 Possibly talk about the money thing. 01:10:00.260 --> 01:10:05.260 We went above where they were. 01:10:05.260 --> 01:10:08.260 We went way above where they were to help. 01:10:08.260 --> 01:10:11.260 So now they're frustrated with that. 01:10:11.260 --> 01:10:14.260 So I don't feel like they're trying to meet us halfway. 01:10:14.260 --> 01:10:17.260 So what is their number? 01:10:17.260 --> 01:10:22.260 Does that make sense to you? 01:10:22.260 --> 01:10:23.260 What is their number? 01:10:23.260 --> 01:10:24.260 I'm sorry. 01:10:24.260 --> 01:10:30.260 My face is I'm still hung up on a completely different topic, future topic. 01:10:30.260 --> 01:10:32.260 So I'm sorry. 01:10:32.260 --> 01:10:35.260 I was not responding to what you were just saying. 01:10:35.260 --> 01:10:36.260 It was in my own head. 01:10:36.260 --> 01:10:37.260 That's okay. 01:10:37.260 --> 01:10:39.260 Those three things. 01:10:39.260 --> 01:10:44.260 Yeah, I think those three things will be enough to talk about. 01:10:44.260 --> 01:10:53.260 So my understanding was in May you wanted to talk about sanctions, I believe, from last time. 01:10:53.260 --> 01:11:02.260 So I think that it will take -- I mean, we can meet for two hours if you really want to. 01:11:02.260 --> 01:11:08.260 But I just think if you want to still do that, we might not be able to do all three of these things next time. 01:11:08.260 --> 01:11:15.260 I think we need to distribute them over May and June. 01:11:15.260 --> 01:11:16.260 I agree. 01:11:16.260 --> 01:11:24.260 So how would you prioritize with the discussion of sanctions next time and then one of these other ones? 01:11:24.260 --> 01:11:30.260 I really would love to have a joint meeting. 01:11:30.260 --> 01:11:39.260 But I don't know that we need to have that -- if the direction is everybody's interested in having a joint meeting, 01:11:39.260 --> 01:11:44.260 I can just work on trying to figure out the logistics of that and try to come back with a management report or something. 01:11:44.260 --> 01:11:45.260 I don't know. 01:11:45.260 --> 01:11:53.260 We need that meeting to be a topic on that. 01:11:53.260 --> 01:11:56.260 We don't want to get into what I call a war with them. 01:11:56.260 --> 01:12:03.260 It would be even easier to have a couple of them on either -- a Democrat, Republican, and a few of you guys. 01:12:03.260 --> 01:12:10.260 I mean, I don't know if we need all the munition in the room to figure out where we want to go. 01:12:10.260 --> 01:12:12.260 I think we're about to give them a hard time. 01:12:12.260 --> 01:12:22.260 Yeah, we have to have all -- what we're discussing would be a meeting of the City Council and a meeting of the Board of Ethics at the same time. 01:12:22.260 --> 01:12:27.260 The mayor would share that meeting. We would come up with -- staff would come up with topics. 01:12:27.260 --> 01:12:36.260 Like one -- or at least probably one or two agenda items for you all to discuss, at least, right? 01:12:36.260 --> 01:12:39.260 So it would -- it will not happen next month. 01:12:39.260 --> 01:12:40.260 No. 01:12:40.260 --> 01:12:43.260 It's something that would take time to arrange. 01:12:43.260 --> 01:12:46.260 And just to be clear about what it would look like, right? 01:12:46.260 --> 01:12:48.260 Yeah. 01:12:48.260 --> 01:12:51.260 I would suggest maybe after the election. 01:12:51.260 --> 01:12:53.260 There's no way we could do it before the election. 01:12:53.260 --> 01:12:55.260 Yeah, well, that's fine. That's fine. 01:12:55.260 --> 01:13:06.260 Madison, once you pulled up a minute ago on that topic, is that a discussion topic or is that an action item? 01:13:06.260 --> 01:13:07.260 This here? 01:13:07.260 --> 01:13:08.260 Yeah. 01:13:08.260 --> 01:13:12.260 This is on the agenda for City Council to adopt tomorrow. 01:13:12.260 --> 01:13:14.260 So that is for action? 01:13:14.260 --> 01:13:15.260 Yes, for City Council to adopt. 01:13:15.260 --> 01:13:21.260 For final action, so that will permanently adjust this whole -- 01:13:21.260 --> 01:13:26.260 Yes, to say this tomorrow, if it's approved. 01:13:26.260 --> 01:13:28.260 That's good, right? 01:13:28.260 --> 01:13:33.260 I thought we were going to get to discuss that with council again. Isn't that my only? 01:13:33.260 --> 01:13:40.260 No, that's -- so if we don't -- if we don't need an agenda item for the joint meeting, I would like to -- 01:13:40.260 --> 01:13:53.260 I would like to discuss next month what you brought up with how City Councilmembers approach the Board of Ethics members. 01:13:53.260 --> 01:13:57.260 I think that would be my priority for next month. 01:13:57.260 --> 01:14:04.260 I would really like to have some rules of engagement. 01:14:04.260 --> 01:14:10.260 Regarding the ordinance itself or specific complaints. I mean, which -- 01:14:10.260 --> 01:14:19.260 No, Annette said that she would like to discuss how City Councilmembers specifically approach Board of Ethics members. 01:14:19.260 --> 01:14:21.260 Some kind of procedural. 01:14:21.260 --> 01:14:23.260 Did they come at you directly to you? 01:14:23.260 --> 01:14:24.260 Oh, yeah. 01:14:24.260 --> 01:14:26.260 Did you hear my name and said ugly things to you? 01:14:26.260 --> 01:14:31.260 Call me up. 01:14:31.260 --> 01:14:33.260 Other than that one time with -- 01:14:33.260 --> 01:14:37.260 I -- yeah, but -- oh. 01:14:37.260 --> 01:14:39.260 Other than that one time with Brian? 01:14:39.260 --> 01:14:41.260 Twice. 01:14:41.260 --> 01:14:43.260 They have no right to do that. 01:14:43.260 --> 01:14:47.260 I'm not the only one who's been -- 01:14:47.260 --> 01:14:54.260 Yeah, I just want clarification on what the boundaries are, discussions with council. 01:14:54.260 --> 01:14:55.260 Are there any boundaries? 01:14:55.260 --> 01:15:01.260 I wish we had the right to say, but we need to have these discussions in public. You need to come to it. 01:15:01.260 --> 01:15:06.260 It's not personal. It should never be personal. 01:15:06.260 --> 01:15:20.260 So we -- I will discuss with the city secretary's office if there is any current guidelines for council discussing with any of their nominees to the board -- or to boards and commissions. 01:15:20.260 --> 01:15:26.260 Just to see if we can get any -- if there is anything existing and we can present any information. 01:15:26.260 --> 01:15:31.260 I would very much like that because I think it would be helpful to just say, this needs to be a public discussion. 01:15:31.260 --> 01:15:36.260 Come on. I don't hear you. 01:15:36.260 --> 01:15:37.260 Yeah. 01:15:37.260 --> 01:15:47.260 So the direction is, to my understanding, during May we'll have minutes, obviously, future meeting and topics update like normal. 01:15:47.260 --> 01:16:03.260 If we have any information on the joint meeting, we can all present that in the management risk report and then having the discussion of sanctions and the discussion about council members and board of ethics members interacting. 01:16:03.260 --> 01:16:08.260 Okay. Is there any further discussion? 01:16:08.260 --> 01:16:11.260 I think we all have enough time. 01:16:11.260 --> 01:16:15.260 It's now 646 p.m. and this meeting is adjourned.