[00:00:03]
[Ethics Advisory Commission Working Group on February 12, 2026.]
RIGHT, LET'S SEE.IT IS 10:10 AM ON FEBRUARY 12TH, 2026.
ANDREAS VIAL IS PRESENT, UH, AS IS, UH, JENNIFER STOVALL.
UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UH, MR. SCHMIDT MAY BE JOINING US IN PROGRESS.
HE HAD A HEARING THIS MORNING, BUT WE ARE GOING TO PROCEED WITH TODAY'S MEETING.
UH, THE AGENDA ITEM TODAY IS MR. CHAIR, IT'S DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 12, A CODE OF ETHICS.
ALRIGHT, UM, MR. INSPECTOR GENERAL AND STAFF, I KNOW YOU HAVE PROPOSED SEVERAL CHANGES TO THE, UH, CODE OF ETHICS.
ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IS A REVIEW OF AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON PROPOSAL PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE, UH, ETHICS, UH, UH, CODE.
UH, WE WILL, THIS GROUP WILL SORT OF VET THOSE INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS, THEN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FULL ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION.
THEY WILL THEN VET THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THIS WORKING GROUP, UH, AND THEN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.
UH, I, I THINK THE GOAL IS TO COMPLETE THIS PROCESS BY AUGUST.
SO, UH, I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BRIEF US AND HAVE YOUR, HAVE A TIMELINE.
AND I'M GOING TO TURN THE MIC OVER TO YOU SO YOU CAN GIVE US YOUR BRIEFING AND, UH, AND ANY INFORMATION YOU SHARE TO IMPART THIS MORNING.
AND, AND THANK YOU TO THE MEMBERS OF THIS WORKING GROUP, UH, FOR VOLUNTEERING OR VOLUNTOLD.
I'M NOT SURE, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE, UH, WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
UM, THIS IS A TYPICAL BRIEFING SLIDE DECK, JUST SHOWING YOU WHAT WE'LL REVIEW BEFORE WE GET TO THE ACTUAL, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
BUT, UH, TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP OF WHERE THIS BRIEFING IS GOING, IT'S, IT'S DESIGNED TO ORIENT YOU TO THE PROCESS TO DATE.
UM, SOME OF IT IS, IS REPETITIVE OF WHAT THE, THE CHAIR HAS JUST SAID, BUT, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
UH, IN THE END, I THINK THERE'S SOME DECISIONS FOR YOU ALL TO MAKE ABOUT HOW WE WILL MOVE FORWARD.
AND THEN WE WILL GET TO THE SUGGESTIONS THEMSELVES FOR AN INITIAL OVERVIEW.
UM, IF, YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS REALLY JUST TO STRENGTHEN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
UM, THE CODE OF ETHICS HAS A PROVISION 12 A 64, UH, THAT REQUIRES CITY COUNCIL TO REVIEW THE CODE IN EVEN NUMBERED YEARS IN JANUARY.
AND SO WE BEGAN THINKING ABOUT THIS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.
AND, UH, HOW CAN THAT HAPPEN? WORKING WITH DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TIMM WILLIS OUT OF GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS, UH, SHE'S THE CHAIRPERSON OF THAT.
AND THIS WAS, WAS, UH, THE SOLUTION.
SO REALLY, UH, THIS IS WHERE THAT IS ALL HEADING.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THE, WHAT YOU MIGHT ASSUME ABOUT, YOU KNOW, INCREASING AND STRENGTHENING THE CODE, UH, WE WANT YOU TO HAVE MY INPUT AS INTERIM INSPECTOR GENERAL.
WE WILL BE SOLICITING INPUT FROM CITY COUNCIL.
THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PIECE THAT IS ABOUT TO BE RELEASED.
UH, AND THEN OF COURSE, ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION PARTICIPATION ADVISORY WHEN OUR WORK IS DONE.
BOTTOM LINE IS COUNCIL'S GONNA GET A STRUCTURED, SOME STRUCTURED INPUT AND VETTED RECOMMENDATIONS AND A CLEAR PATH, UH, WAY FOR THEM TO CONSIDER AS THE POLICYMAKERS IN THE CITY.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, AS YOU KNOW, WE ARE THE WORKING GROUP.
AND THE PUMP IS PRIMED WITH, UH, A LIST OF 22 SUGGESTIONS, UH, FOR HOW THE CODE COULD BE STRENGTHENED.
A LOT OF THEM ARE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND I DON'T THINK WILL REQUIRE MUCH DISCUSSION AT ALL.
UM, SO YOU GET THE FIRST CRACK AT THOSE IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER SUGGESTIONS FLOW TO US FROM THE PUBLIC AT COUNCIL.
AND, UM, YOU AS A WORKING GROUP, YOU, YOU ARE, UH, HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO, UH, ADD SOME THINGS TO THE LIST AS WELL.
ONCE WE'VE COMPLETED OUR WORK, IT'LL GO TO THE EAC AND THEN FROM THERE, FLOW AND THE NORMAL PROCESS UP
[00:05:01]
TOWARDS COUNCIL.UM, AND THIS ONE IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU IN TERMS OF FIGURING OUT THE FREQUENCY OF WHEN WE'RE GOING TO MEET.
AS THE CHAIR MENTIONED, UH, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS' GOAL IS TO GET THIS WORK IN FRONT OF COUNCIL BY AUGUST.
DOESN'T MEAN WE COULDN'T GO FASTER, BUT AT LEAST BY AUGUST.
AND SO, UH, THE SECOND BULLET POINT SAYS THAT, UH, OR EXCUSE ME, THE FOURTH BULLET POINT, THAT THIS GROUP WILL CONSIDER RECOMMENDATIONS IN FEBRUARY THROUGH APRIL.
AND I THINK ONCE I'VE GOTTEN THROUGH THE SUGGESTIONS, THEN YOU'LL, YOU WILL HAVE MORE OF A FEEL FOR HOW MANY MEETINGS YOU THINK IT'S GONNA TAKE.
SO THAT'S THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS TIMELINE FOR TODAY.
UH, THE REST OF IT WE'VE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
UM, SO HERE'S MY PLAN, UH, FOR TODAY.
IF, UH, THIS MEETS WITH, UH, CHAIR'S APPROVAL, I WILL BEGIN WALKING THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, QUICKLY.
AND SOME OF THEM, I THINK WILL, YOU WILL LOOK AROUND AT THE WORKING GROUP AND SAY, I, WE DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS.
THE ONES THAT REMAIN, WE THEN JUST NEED TO ORGANIZE, UH, AROUND THE CALENDAR.
UH, I PUT SOME SUB BULLET POINTS IN HERE, UH, TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHAT I THINK SOME OF THOSE MIGHT BE.
THERE, THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE JUST CLARIFYING THE CODE.
UM, TO ME THAT'S AS MUCH ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AS TELLING PEOPLE WHAT'S GOING ON.
JUST MAKING THE CODE, CONTINUING TO DO THE WORK TO MAKE THE CODE AS EASY FOR, UH, THE USERS AND THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND IS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE SUGGESTIONS FROM YOU ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC.
AND THEN I THINK THE ONES THAT SURELY WILL, WILL END UP WITH MORE DISCUSSION FALL INTO TWO CATEGORIES.
ONE IS WHAT I WOULD CALL SUNLIGHT PROVISIONS.
UH, BUT IN A NUTSHELL, THOSE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE REMOVING SOME EXCEPTIONS IN THE CODE SO THAT, UH, WORK OF THE CITY AND LOBBYISTS AND VENDORS FOR THE CITY IS MORE, A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENT.
AND THAT, THAT'S JUST GONNA MERIT MORE DISCUSSION.
AND THEN ALSO SOME, UH, DISCUSSION AROUND THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AND STRENGTHENING THAT THOSE THINGS ARE MORE DETAILED AND GONNA MERIT MORE DISCUSSION.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S A PREVIEW OF WHAT I'M ABOUT TO GO THROUGH.
UM, ONE THING, AND I'LL, I'LL ASK MS. MORRISON WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE JUST TO, UH, AFFIRM THIS, BUT, UH, WE ARE SUBJECT TO ALL THE TOMA PROTOCOLS.
'CAUSE THESE MEETINGS ARE IN PUBLIC.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCES IN CHAPTER EIGHT FOR ONE THING.
BUT WE NEED TO HAVE SOME DIRECTION, I THINK, AND TO ALL BE ON THE SAME TABLE ABOUT WHAT CAN HAPPEN OUTSIDE OF OUR MEETINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
AND BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY, WE'RE NOT BURDENED WITH THE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION ISSUE THAT IS IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
SO YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND, UM, AGAIN, I'LL ASK MS. MORRISON TO AFFIRM, BUT THAT, THAT WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSIONS ONE-ON-ONE.
OUTSIDE THESE MEETINGS, WHAT WE CAN'T DO IS HAVE DISCUSSIONS AS A QUORUM OF THE BODY.
UM, CODE AMENDMENTS ARE A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AT THE CITY, SO YOU'RE RIGHT, UM, MR. INTERIM IG.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE THE ISSUE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.
UM, SO ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF THIS WORKING GROUP OR OF THE GREATER EAC CAN CONTACT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OR ME, UH, TO DISCUSS ANY PROPOSED, UH, CHANGES TO THE CODE THAT CAN THEN, THAT CAN THEN BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE GROUP, UH, FOR BRIEFING AND A VOTE.
THE, UH, THE ONE AREA WHERE WE OFTEN SEE, IT'S JUST EASY TO TRIP UP ON THIS, UM, IS REPLYING ALL TO AN EMAIL
SO I'M GONNA TRY AND, AND NOT SEND EMAILS THAT WILL, UM, MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOU TO TRIP UP INTO THAT, BECAUSE THEN WHEN YOU REPLY ALL, YOU END UP CREATING A QUORUM AND HAVING A MEETING.
UM, HERE'S A SUGGESTED, UH, FORMAT FOR HOW THE WORK WOULD PROCEED.
UM, AFTER TODAY, I, I WOULD INTRODUCE THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE, UH, SOME ANECDOTES OF WHERE WE HAVE RUN INTO THIS.
[00:10:01]
PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, UH, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD OFFER THEIR COMMENT AND, YOU KNOW, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THESE THINGS.WE'D HAVE OUR DISCUSSION AND THEN WE'D MAKE OUR DECISION TO RECOMMEND TO CHAIR I'D, I'D OFFER THAT AS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A RECOMMENDATION, BUT MY SUGGESTION FOR HOW TO PROCEED GOING FORWARD.
THAT SOUNDS GREAT, MR. UH, IT, OKAY.
UH, WITH THAT SAID, LET ME, LET ME PULL UP A, UH, THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE'LL GET TO WORK, UH, IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, IS IT APPROPRIATE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF YOU WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSALS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING ON THE TABLE TODAY? IS THAT OH, A HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND I, AND I HOPE, I HOPE WE DO.
UH, SO ALL THE MEMBERS SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF WHAT I'M PUTTING UP ON THE SCREEN NOW.
UM, THESE ARE THE SUGGESTIONS THAT I'VE COME UP WITH.
JUST WHERE DID I COME UP WITH THESE? I JUST, I KEEP A RUNNING LIST.
AND, UH, THIS GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO WALK THROUGH THE LIST AND MAKE THE SUGGESTIONS TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE DOCUMENT.
UH, IT, IT REALLY IS, IS DESIGNED TO, TO SHOW YOU WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THESE SUGGESTIONS IN TWO WAYS.
FIRST, EACH SUGGESTION IS COLOR CODED.
UM, AND THE COLORS ARE HAVE TO DO WITH GREEN.
IF WE'RE AT, IF THIS IS WOULD BE AN ADDITION OR A NEW THING IN THE CODE YELLOW, IF IT'S SOMETHING BEING CORRECTED OR ADJUSTED IN RED, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THE SUGGESTION IS, WE REMOVE IT FROM THE CODE.
SO THAT'S THE FIRST THING YOU'LL SEE IN THE DOCUMENT.
THE SECOND THING IS THAT YOU WILL SEE IS AN ACRONYM, A ONE LETTER AND, AND IN ONE CASE A THREE LETTER ACRONYM BEFORE EACH SUGGESTION.
AND THAT'S JUST TELLING YOU THE CATEGORY OF THE SUGGESTION.
UM, THE FIRST THREE HAVE TO DO WITH GOALS IN THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
UH, PROTECTING INTEGRITY, ACHIEVING ACCOUNTABILITY, AND UPHOLDING TRANSPARENCY.
SO THAT'S AN I FOR INTEGRITY, AN A FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND A T FOR TRANSPARENCY.
BUT THERE ARE TWO OTHER CATEGORIES.
UH, THE NEXT ONE IS C FOR CLARITY, AND THOSE ARE PROVISIONS THAT, UH, OR SUGGESTIONS THAT ARE MADE IN, IN ORDER, AGAIN, TO MAKE THE CODE EASIER FOR EVERYONE TO ACCESS AND CLEAR.
AND THEN THE FINAL ONE IS IND THAT STANDS FOR, UH, INDEPENDENCE.
AND THOSE ARE PROVISIONS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO CONTINUE THE WORK OF STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE OFFICE.
UM, ARE THERE ANY, ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DOCUMENT? UH, NOT AT THIS POINT, BUT I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, THOUGH, AS YOU GO THROUGH YOUR, UH, PROPOSED CHANGES OR RECOMMENDATIONS, WOULD IT BE BETTER FOR US TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS WE HAVE AT THE END OF YOUR PROPOSAL OR AS YOU GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS? WHAT, WHAT MAKES MORE SENSE TO YOU? I THINK IT, IT MAKES MORE SENSE FOR US TO DO IT, UH, LINE, UH, RULE OR SUGGESTION BY SUGGESTION.
'CAUSE IT, IT CAN GET CONFUSING.
AND ONE THING I DIDN'T DO HERE IS NUMBER IT,
THAT'S GONNA MAKE IT EVEN A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT IF WE WAIT.
PLUS, I'M HOPING THAT AS WE WALK THROUGH THESE, UH, A LOT OF THEM WILL JUST FALL AWAY AS, YEP, THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO I'LL START WITH THE FIRST ONE.
UH, THE FIRST SECTION OR SET OF, UH, SUGGESTIONS HAS TO DO WITH STRENGTHENING THE, THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE CODE.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THERE, UH, THREE DEFINITIONS, A DEFINITION OF ABUSE, A DEFINITION OF FRAUD, AND A DEFINITION OF WASTE.
CURRENTLY, THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE.
UM, THOSE THREE WORDS ARE, UM, PART OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
SO WE LOOK AT ETHICS, FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE.
AND SO TO ME, IT SEEMED LOGICAL NOT TO HAVE THE DEFINITIONS SITTING SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT TO HAVE THEM IN THE CODE.
QUICK QUESTION, IS THIS A, AN EXACT, UH, TRAN, I MEAN, TRANSFERENCE OF THE DEFINITION AS IT IS IN THE OTHER LOCATION? CAN I ASK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WASTE? IT IS, THIS, IS, THESE DEFINITIONS WERE COPIED AND PASTED DIRECTLY FROM THE EXISTING 82 14.
I MEAN, THAT MAKES IT PROBABLY MORE DIFFICULT TO MAKE A CHANGE.
[00:15:01]
JUST, THE WASTE ONE IS SO SUBJECTIVE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE THAT I, YOU KNOW, WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHERE WE USE IT IN THE DOCUMENT, IT IS, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES SENSE, RIGHT? BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK OF THOUGHTLESS OR CARELESS, THAT STANDARD IS ALWAYS VERY DIFFICULT, RIGHT? IT'S KIND OF LIKE IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER.ONE PERSON OBVIOUSLY WAS, IS GONNA THINK THAT THERE WAS GOOD REASON FOR THE EXPENDITURE AND ANOTHER ONE ISN'T.
BUT IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN, UH, DOCUMENTED SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A MOOT POINT, BUT I JUST WANT TO AT LEAST MAKE THAT COMMENT.
IT, THAT IT'S A, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT.
I I CAN ADD A LITTLE CONTEXT IN, AT LEAST IN MY VIEW, UH, ABUSE FRAUD IS OBVIOUSLY A CRIME.
ABUSE AND WASTE ARE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES, UH, IN, IN THE CITY, BUT GENERALLY ARE NOT.
UH, THERE'S NOT A, A BIG MENS REA THERE.
IT, IT, UH, AND SO THE RESPONSE TO WASTE AND ABUSE CASES, THE WAY IT'S SET UP NOW WOULD NOT BE A HEARING BEFORE THE EAC.
IT WOULD BE MORE OF A REPORT TO MANAGEMENT.
HEY, THERE'S MONEY GOING OUT THE DOOR.
UH, PROCESSORS ARE BEING WORKED AROUND.
NOT THAT THE EAC WOULDN'T BE ADVISED OF, OF THAT, BUT, UM, IT'S NOT SOMETHING NECESSARILY GIVEN THE DEFINITION OF WHAT YOU POINTED OUT THAT MEETS THE MEN'S REA REQUIREMENT UNDER THE CODE OF ETHICS OF KNOWINGLY.
SO, I, I I GUESS IS WHEN, WHEN THE DISCUSSION'S OVER OVERALL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU CHAIR TO SEEK A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO COME BACK TO IT OR GO AHEAD AND SAY THAT WILL BE RECOMMENDED TO THE EAC.
WELL, ARE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS RECOMMENDATION? UH, HEARING NONE, I, I THINK WE WOULD PROCEED WITH INCLUDING THIS IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE, OF, OF THE WORKING GROUP.
IS THAT, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? WE NEED TO LIKE, MOVE IN SECOND.
SO IT'S REALLY UP TO THE GROUP IF YOU WANT, UM, MR. CHAIR, IF YOU WANNA HAVE A VOTE ON EACH ITEM OR IF IT JUST, IF NO ONE OBJECTS, THEN IT'S INCLUDED BY ACQUIESCENCE.
WELL, I, I HAVE, I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THIS WAS COPIED AND PASTED FROM THIS ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE, HOW DO THOSE COEXIST? LIKE, DOES ONE TRUMP THE OTHER ONE, DO THEY HAVE TO BE THE SAME? WELL, THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVES ARE SEPARATE FROM CITY CODE.
THOSE ARE INTERNAL POLICIES TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
UM, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AN ORDINANCE, SO THE CITY CODE WOULD TRUMP AN ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE.
I'M, I WAS JUST CURIOUS, BUT, UM, IF YOU WANT TO VOTE, SO, SO THIS WOULD THEN BECOME PART OF THE ORDINANCE AS OPPOSED TO THE, AN ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, RIGHT? IT WOULD, YEAH.
UH, DO YOU ALL, WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE WILL OF THE BODY? DO YOU ALL WANT TO HAVE A VOTE OR, OR DO WE JUST PROCEED IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS AND THEN IT, WE PROCEED BY ACQUIESCENCE ON THOSE PARTICULAR ISSUES? I, I WOULD SAY SINCE THERE'S SO MANY, UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS AN OBJECTION, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD, I MEAN, WE WOULD GO FORWARD, RIGHT? IF, IF ONE OF US HAS AN OBJECTION SAYS WE FEEL THAT THIS NEEDS FURTHER, UH, DISCUSSION, THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PUSH IT DOWN THAT PATH.
OTHERWISE, IF WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT AND YOU ASK FOR ANY, ANY REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T MOVE THIS FORWARD AND NONE OF US OBJECT, THEN IT SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.
ANY THOUGHTS, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, UM, I KNOW WE HAVE A QUORUM, SO I GUESS IT'S A POINT, BUT, SO IF WE VOTE AND WE SAY JUST ADOPT THESE, AND THEN GRANT GOES AND LOOKS AT THE MEETING LATER AND HAS SOME SORT OF, I, I, I HAVE A SUGGESTION ABOUT THAT.
LIKE MS. MORRISON SAID, IT'S JUST, IT IS A WORKING GROUP AND, UM, IT IS A BALANCE BETWEEN EFFICIENCY AND SECOND THOUGHTS.
RIGHT? I, I DON'T PERSONALLY HAVE A PROBLEM IF WE HAVE A SECOND THOUGHT LATER AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO COME BACK TO THAT.
AND, AND I, I THINK WE HAD ENVISIONED THIS AS A SORT OF YOUR INITIAL PROPOSALS, RIGHT? AND THAT WOULD, WE WOULD HAVE A WORKING GROUP MEETING AGAIN, ANOTHER ONE.
AND THEN WE, IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES OR THINGS THAT NEED TO BE VOTED ON, WE COULD DO IT AT THAT POINT.
IS THAT, YEAH, WE COULD ALSO, ONCE THE WORKING GROUP IS WRAPPING UP ALL OF THEIR WORK, HAVE ONE LAST MEETING WHERE ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE INCLUDED ARE BEFORE YOU, UH, JUST TO HAVE A REVIEW OF WHAT,
[00:20:01]
UM, AS, AS A WHOLE PACKAGE, WHAT IS MOVING FORWARD TO THE EAC.WELL I HAVE NO OPPOSITION TO JUST ADOPTING THAT AS IS.
THIS, THIS SECOND ONE, UM, IS, UH, CLARITY YOU CAN SEE THERE.
SEE, AND IT'S WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO THE CODE, AGAIN, IN THE DEFINITION SECTION.
AND IT IS ADDING A SENTENCE TO THE EXISTING DEFINITION OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEANS.DOT, IT SAYS FOR PURPOSES OF 12 A.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, INCLUDING THE MAYOR, ARE NOT CITY EMPLOYEES.
UH, THE REASON I SUGGEST WE PUT THAT IN THERE IS THAT THAT IS A RULE THAT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS SORT OF BURIED OFF IN CASE LAW.
BUT IT WAS CONFUSING TO ME AS AN IG TRYING TO INTERPRET THE CODE, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WELL, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PAID WATER.
DID I SKIP ONE? NO, NO, YOU'RE GOOD.
UM, I NOTICED YOU WERE ASKING SOME QUESTIONS.
ARE ARE, CAN I, ARE YOU READY FOR ME TO KEEP GOING? UH, Y YES.
SO IT WAS CONFUSING TO ME JUST IN THIS ROLE, 'CAUSE I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WELL, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS GET PAID MONEY, SO THEY'RE EMPLOYEES, BUT UNDER CASE LAW IS MY UNDERSTANDING CURRENT CASE LAW, THEY'RE NOT FOR PURPOSES OF THE ETHICS CODE.
AND, AND I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW.
ANY QUESTIONS? FURTHER DISCUSSION, HEARING NONE, SHALL WE PROCEED TO THE NEXT RECOMMENDATION? OKAY.
CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN AGAIN WHY THEY'RE NOT CITY EMPLOYEES FOR PURPOSES OF 12 A IT IS BECAUSE THE, THE COURTS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS HAVE, HAVE GIVEN SOME RULINGS AND MS. MORRISON MAY KNOW MORE ABOUT, WELL, THEY'RE NOT CITY EMPLOYEES AT ALL.
SO THIS JUST MAKES IT CLEAR WHEN 12 A MENTIONS EMPLOYEES, THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE CITY COUNCIL, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S PAYROLL.
BUT WE'RE INCLUDING FOR PURPOSES OF 12 A BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THE CODE OF ETHICS TO BE THE DECIDING FACTOR OF WHETHER THEIR EMPLOYEES ARE NOT FOR THE GREATER PURPOSES OF THE CITY.
BUT IT JUST, IT, IT SHED SOME LIGHT ON WHENEVER THE CODE OF ETHICS MENTIONS EMPLOYEES, THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
AND JUST FYI, I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYBODY ELSE IS KEEPING TRACK, BUT AS WE'RE DISCUSSING THESE SUGGESTIONS, I AM NUMBERING THEM JUST SO THAT IF WE GO BACK TO, YEAH, I THINK MOVING FORWARD, IF EACH ONE COULD BE NUMBERED AND PAGES COULD BE NUMBERED AS WELL, THAT HELPS PEOPLE KEEP TRACK OF WHERE WE ARE.
I'LL, I'LL, I WILL SEND OUT A FOLLOW UP WHERE WE GET 'EM NUMBERED, PAGE NUMBERS, SUGGESTIONS, AND, UH, SOME, SOME NOTES.
UH, THIS IS MY FIRST TRY, BUT, UH, I WON'T MAKE THAT MISTAKE AGAIN.
THIS IS, IT'S HARD TO, TO COME BACK TO NOW.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO RESEND THIS, BUT TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE OTHER DOCUMENTS, 'CAUSE I'M TAKING NOTES ON HERE.
SO I DON'T NEED A, A CLEAN COPY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE.
WELL, I, I THINK IF, IF IT'S NOT TOO MUCH OF AN IMPOSITION, IF YOU COULD NUMBER 10 PATIENTS, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
EASY AS WE MOVE FORWARD, IT'S EASY.
UM, NOW THIS, THIS NEXT ONE I'M GOING TO SUGGEST WE, WE HOLD FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION LATER.
AND, AND THAT'S BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED INPUT FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, UH, IN ORDER TO, TO MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATION.
UM, THERE'S A RULE UNDER, THERE ARE ACTUALLY THREE RULES UNDER CIVILITY.
IT'S BE NICE, BASICALLY DON'T TREAT OTHER PEOPLE WITH RESPECT.
UH, THE SECOND OR THE THIRD RULE HAS TO DO WITH THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS AND, UH, BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH HOW CITY OFFICIALS ENGAGE WITH EMPLOYEES WHEN THEY NEED HELP OR INFORMATION WITH A PROJECT.
AND WHAT THE RULE SAYS IS CITY OFFICIALS NEED TO CONTACT TWO, TWO PEOPLE FIRST.
THE FIRST ONE IS ANYBODY THAT'S APPOINTED ONE OF THE FIVE.
BUT THE TRUTH IS, MOST OF THE TIME THAT'S GONNA BE THE CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE MOST OF THE DEPARTMENTS FALL UNDER THE, UH, CITY MANAGER'S PURVIEW.
AND I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A REASONABLE ADJUSTMENT TO SAY, INSTEAD OF EVERYBODY EMAILING THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, UH, THE
[00:25:01]
CITY MANAGER, EXCUSE ME, THEY COULD JUST E EMAIL THE ACMS AND THE ACMS CAN INFORM HER, BUT SHE'S NOT GETTING A CONSTANT STREAM OF EMAILS ABOUT, HEY, I NEED TO TALK TO AN EMPLOYEE ABOUT THIS PROJECT.I WANT TO GET HER FEEDBACK ABOUT IT.
MY IMPRESSION, AND THAT'S ALL IT IS, IS AN IMPRESSION, IS THAT, UM, THIS RULE IS NOT WIDELY FOLLOWED.
AND, AND I THINK THIS MAY BE ONE OF THE REASONS, BUT I THINK, UH, WE NEED TO WAIT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON IT, UH, UNTIL I CAN GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY MANAGER ON WHAT SHE WOULD PREFER.
AND ONE QUICK QUESTION IS THE IDEA THAT THE PERSON WHO'S TRYING TO GET THIS INFORMATION OR, UH, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEY'RE TRYING TO OBTAIN NEEDS TO WORK WITH BOTH OF THEM.
SO IT WOULD BE WITH THE MAN, THE CITY MANAGERS, A CM AND THE APPLICABLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR? OR IS IT, OR THE APPLI ONE OR THE OTHER THAT IT IS AN AND IT'S NOT AN OR.
AND, AND SO, SO IF I WERE TO WANT SOMETHING, I WOULD SEND IT BOTH TO THE CITY MANAGER'S, A CM, AND THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR IN ORDER TO OBTAIN WHAT I'M AFTER.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WAS THE INTENTION.
UH, WHEN WE ADD, SO WE, WE, YOU WORK THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER, MANAGERS, A CM, WHAT DO WE NEED THE ACMS? AND, AND MY ONLY QUESTION IS, WHEN YOU WORK THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER, DON'T YOU WORK THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT FALL WITHIN THAT PERSON? SO YOU WOULD GO DIRECTLY, INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE CITY MANAGER THAT CUTS THE CITY MANAGER OUT OF THIS COMMUNICATION PROCESS, YOU WOULD JUST DEAL WITH THE ACMS? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? THAT'S WHAT I'M PROPOSING.
AND AND THAT'S WHY I SAY WE, WE, WE MIGHT TABLE THIS, SO TO SPEAK, FOR A LATER MEETING UNTIL I CAN GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY MANAGER HERSELF, BECAUSE I, I, I THINK YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT SHE WOULD LIKE.
THE NEXT ONE IS ON 12 A SEVEN PERSONS DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY.
AND HAPPILY, THE EAC HAS ALREADY, UH, MADE A DECISION ABOUT THIS ONE.
AND IT IS, UH, BEING BRIEFED TO THE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS COMMITTEE TOMORROW.
AND I ANTICIPATE THEN WILL BE BEFORE THE SET, UH, THE, UH, COUNCIL, UH, AS EARLY AS, UH, NEXT MONTH, IF NOT THIS MONTH, BUT I THINK IT'LL PROBABLY BE NEXT MONTH.
SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THAT THE EAC DID A LOT OF WORK ON BACK IN MAY.
AND THEN IT GOT CAUGHT UP IN ALL OF THE, UH, MOVEMENT AROUND THE IG OFFICE WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, LOST AN IG, GOT A NEW ONE, THE, THE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS COMMITTEE WAS SHUT DOWN AND A NEW ONE CAME UP, AND IT JUST HAS BEEN SWIMMING AROUND IN, IN, UH, OTHER THINGS.
AND IT'S FINALLY GETTING UP TO BAT WITH, UH, COUNSEL NOW.
SO THERE'S NOTHING FOR US TO DO ON THAT ONE, BUT I WANTED TO REPORT ON IT.
UM, THE NEXT ONE, 12 A NINE HAS TO DO WITH, UH, ETHICS TRAINING.
AND I THINK SOME CLARITY NEEDS TO BE ADDED, UH, TO THE CODE.
THIS IS BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM, UH, SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS.
UH, AND SO THERE IS THE, UH, PROPOSED ADDITIONS, AND IT REALLY ADDRESSES THREE ISSUES.
UM, THE CODE ALREADY SAYS THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING ETHICS TRAINING, THAT TRAINING IS APPROVED BY, UH, WHAT'S CALLED THE CHIEF INTEGRITY OFFICER.
THAT'S MY NORMAL JOB, UH, WITH THE CITY.
AND, UH, WHAT IT DOESN'T SAY IS WHAT I THINK IS INTENDED AND, AND, UH, OBVIOUS, BUT IT, IT HAS CREATED A PROBLEM OF INTERPRETATION.
IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THE ETHICS TRAINING THAT PEOPLE GET HAS TO BE ABOUT THE CODE OF ETHICS.
AND, UM,
UH, THE SECOND, JUST THAT THE TRAINING CAN BE IN PERSON VIRTUAL OR, OR ONLINE, SO LONG AS COMPLETION IS VERIFIABLE.
[00:30:01]
UH, THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE'VE BUMPED INTO IS, IS, UH, SOMETIMES SOMEBODY WILL SAY, WELL, I, I, I DID THIS OR THAT, UM, TAKE MY WORD FOR IT.AND THEN THIRDLY, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVE, UH, ETHICS TRAINING FROM THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, UH, EVERY JANUARY.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT USED TO HAPPEN IN COORDINATION WITH SOME TRAINING FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
AND, UH, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.
UH, ALONG WITH THAT, I, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, I'LL BE ASKING THE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS COMMITTEE TO, UM, GIVE ME A BRIEFING WITH CITY COUNCIL SO THAT I CAN DO THIS TRAINING TO PREPARE THEM FOR, TO RECEIVE YOUR WORK.
BUT THOSE ARE THE THREE, THREE THINGS THAT I THINK WOULD CLARIFY THE CODE IN THE AREA OF ETHICS TRAINING.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? UH, I, I DON'T HAVE ANY.
UH, NEXT SUGGESTION IS IN 12 A 14 MIS MISCELLANEOUS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
THIS IS A, THIS COMES OUT OF AN ACTUAL CASE.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS PROVISION, UH, IS THAT THERE'S AN AREA OF NOTIFICATION, RECUSAL REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE.
SO IF YOU OWN PROPERTY, ANY INTEREST, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUBSTANTIAL, BUT IF YOU OWN ANY, ANY PROPERTY IN AN AREA OF NOTIFICATION, AND YOU'RE ON THAT ZONING GROUP, YOU HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF FROM THE MATTER.
THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES WHEN THE MATTER IS SETTLED, THE ZONING DECISION IS MADE, DOES THE RECUSAL END OR CAN YOU NOW START INSERTING YOURSELF INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT POLICY? UH, SO THE RECOMMENDATION HERE IS TO ADD THIS SENTENCE THAT ANY REQUIRED RECUSAL WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL AFTER THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE MATTER, NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, AND THROUGH THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY, I THINK THAT, UH, IS WHAT IS INTENDED IN SPIRIT.
AND I THINK IT'S ALSO, UH, CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER EIGHT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHERE IT SAYS, NO CITY OFFICIALS SHALL TRY AND CIRCUMVENT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A, OF A POLICY.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THAT PROPOSAL? NO.
NEXT SECTION IS SECTION 1218, REPRESENTATION OF PRIVATE INTEREST.
UH, THIS IS ONE THAT I WOULD CALL, UH, PUT IN THE CATEGORY OF A SUNLIGHT PROVISION.
AND MY, MY RECOMMENDATION ON THE RECOMMENDATION IS, IS THAT WE, UH, HAVE SOME TIME FOR DISCUSSION ON IT.
UM, BUT HERE'S WHAT IT SAYS IN RED.
UM, REMOVE THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN A COMPENSATED AND AN UNCOMPENSATED, UH, REPRESENTATION AND THE RELATED EXCEPTIONS.
AND SO, WHAT THIS ENDS UP DOING, THE WAY THE RULE WORKS IS, UH, IF YOU CHART IT OUT, IT'S, IT'S VERY COMPLEX, AT LEAST TO ME, I'LL SAY THAT.
UH, YOU DIVIDE REPRESENTATION INTO WHETHER THE, THE PERSON DOING THE REPRESENTATION IS BEING COMPENSATED OR NOT.
IF THEY'RE COMPENSATED, UH, THEN THERE IS A LIMITATION OF COMING BEFORE THE CITY AT, AT ALL.
AND BEFORE THE CITY IS A VERY BROAD DEFINITION.
I THINK I MAY HAVE PUT THAT, NO, I DIDN'T PUT THE DEFINITION IN HERE, BUT IT'S A VERY BROAD DEFINITION.
IF, IF IT'S UNCOMPENSATED, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE LEEWAY, UH, ABOUT WHO, UH, SOMEONE CAN COME BEFORE.
SO YOU CAN, YOU CAN COME BEFORE THE CITY, UNLESS IT'S YOUR OWN BOARD COMMISSIONER BODY.
AND I, FOR ME, THIS JUST SIMPLIFIES THE CODE WITHOUT CAUSING, UH, A LOT OF HARM BECAUSE THERE, IT, IT LEAVES AN EXISTING EXCEPTION FOR APPOINTED MEMBERS OF ADVISORY BODIES.
SO APPOINTED MEMBERS OF ADVISORY BODIES, THEY CAN STILL REPRESENT BEFORE THE CITY, SO LONG AS IT'S NOT BEFORE THEIR OWN, UH, GROUP.
[00:35:01]
THIS ONE, IT'S GONNA TAKE SOME TIME FOR YOU ALL TO LOOK AT THE RULE.UH, SO I WOULD SUGGEST WE, UH, WE HOLD OFF ON LOOKING AT THIS ONE AND GIVE YOU ALL A CHANCE TO READ IT AND, AND GET IT UNDER YOUR SKIN AND UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT IT.
AND, AND LET, LET ME UNDERSTAND IT.
SO YOU WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN IT IS A COMPENSATED REPRESENTATION VERSUS AN UNCOMPENSATED REPRESENTATION.
AND HELP ME, I AM SORRY IF I'M SLOW ON THIS.
CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE COMPENSATED VERSUS UNCOMPENSATED REPRESENTATION? I THINK IT, NUMBER ONE, IT MAKES THE CODE EASIER FOR CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES TO UNDERSTAND END, UM, NUMBER ONE.
AND, AND I THINK IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC'S VIEW OF WHAT HAPPENS AT, AT THE CITY, IT MAKES SENSE THAT IF YOU TAKE THAT AWAY, THEN IT, IT'S VERY CLEAR CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES, IF YOU'RE GONNA REPRESENT SOMEONE ELSE BEFORE THE CITY, THAT THAT'S GONNA BE AN ISSUE.
YOU, YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT 'CAUSE YOU ARE AN INSIDER.
AND THERE AREN'T EXCEPTIONS TO THAT, EXCEPT IF YOU ARE AN APPOINTED MEMBER OF AN ADVISORY BODY.
AND, AND IT JUST MAKES IT EASIER TO DO SO TO, TO UNDERSTAND THE RULE AS IT STANDS.
UH, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND AND THINK ABOUT, WELL, AM I BEING COMPENSATED OR NOT COMPENSATED IN THIS REPRESENTATION? AM I, UH, APPOINTED? IS THIS BODY ADVISORY OR IS IT QUASI-JUDICIAL? AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS FILTER IN.
AGAIN, I'M SPEAK FOR MYSELF, IT'S A LOT FOR ME.
AND SO I'M, I THINK IT'S IN THE INTEREST OF EVERYBODY TO MAKE IT AS SIMPLE AS WE CAN, SO LONG AS WE, WE ARE NOT PREVENTING SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE.
AND, AND I KNOW THIS RULE WAS PROBABLY BASED ON THESE EXCEPTIONS WERE BASED ON A LOT OF DISCUSSION IN THE PAST THAT I JUST WASN'T PRIVY TO.
THIS IS LAURA MORRISON, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
SO AS PROPOSED THIS, THE GENERAL RULE WILL REMAIN IS THAT YOU CAN'T REPRESENT BEFORE THE CITY A MATTER FOR REPRESENTATION OR FOR COMPENSATION.
BUT WE'RE DELETING THE RULE ABOUT REPRESENTATION WITHOUT COMPENSATION.
SO IF YOU'RE, NOW, IF YOU'RE REPRESENTING ANYTHING BEFORE THE CITY, AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT BEING COMPENSATED, YOU CAN DO IT.
THAT'S, THAT WASN'T MY INTENT IN THE SUGGESTION.
I MAY NOT HAVE HAVE PUT THAT ACCURATELY.
SO, UH, SO YOU AND I SHOULD PROBABLY SIT DOWN AND KIND OF YEAH.
'CAUSE I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING MM-HMM
BUT AS SUBMITTED, I THINK YOU'VE GOT SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES HERE THAT I SEE THAT YOU, WE SHOULD ADDRESS BEFORE THE WORKING GROUP, UH, GETS BACK TOGETHER BECAUSE I, I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY CRAFT YOUR MEANING.
UM, AND I WANNA HELP WITH THAT.
I, UH, UH, AND THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT.
BECAUSE IT'S NOT GO, IT'S, THIS IS WHAT I'VE GIVEN YOU UNFORTUNATELY IS NOT WHAT I'M SUGGESTING.
WELL THAT, THAT ONE I HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT ALSO.
AND YOU AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CAN WORK ON WORDSMITH THIS AND COME BACK TO US ON THAT ONE.
WE'LL, WE'LL GET CLOSER TO SOME FINAL EDITS ON THIS, UH, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE IT'S AN IMPORTANT TOPIC.
UH, THE, THE NEXT SECTION IS 12 A 18 A FIVE.
UM, THIS IS ONE THAT I WROTE DOWN BECAUSE IT'S COME UP IN, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS BEFORE.
THE IDEA HERE IS TO ADD A NEW SECTION THAT SAYS, UH, AN APPOINTED OFFICIAL.
AND, AND IT'S INTERESTING, THIS WILL, THIS WILL CO THIS RULE WILL COINCIDE WITH THE WORK ON THE ONE I JUST TALKED ABOUT.
BUT, UH, APPOINTED OFFICIALS ENGAGING IN REPRESENTATION SHALL BEGIN THEIR PRESENTATION BY IDENTIFYING THE BODY OR DEPARTMENT THEY SERVE AND THE ROLE THAT THEY HOLD.
SO IT'S A TRANSPARENCY ADDITION.
SO, UH, IF I WAS REPRESENTING SOMETHING, I WOULD START WITH, MY
[00:40:01]
NAME'S BARON ELIASON.I'M INTERIM INSPECTOR GENERAL WITH THE CITY SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS, UH, MOSTLY THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL AS AN EXAMPLE, GENERALLY KNOWS WHO THE PEOPLE ARE, UH, THE FREQUENT FLYERS THAT ARE TALKING TO THEM.
BUT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT ALWAYS KNOW THAT.
AND SO I THINK THAT WILL HELP WITH TRANSPARENCY.
I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
IS THERE A REASON YOU'RE LIMITING THIS TO APPOINTED OFFICIALS? ONLY? I'M OPEN TO EXPANDING IT.
THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE REASON IS? THE REASON IS THE EXAMPLE IN MY HEAD CAME FROM AN APPOINTED OFFICIAL.
I THINK SINCE THE GENERAL RULE CO COVERS ALL CITY OFFICIALS.
UM, BUT THE EXCEPTION, SO IT, IT, IT IS, THERE IS A CONNECTION WITH THE PRIOR ONE.
IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH THE SUGGESTION, APPOINTED OFFICIALS WILL HAVE AN EXCEPTION, UH, AND CITY OFFICIALS WILL BE BARRED.
I THINK THIS ONE WILL HINGE ON HOW WE STRUCTURE YES.
SO WHY DON'T WE TABLE THIS ONE? 'CAUSE IT'S SO, IT'S INTIMATELY CONNECTED TO THE ONE BEFORE THAT SATISFACTORY.
I HOPE, UH, I'M NOT PUTTING YOU TO SLEEP WITH THE, THIS IS TOUGH WORK 'CAUSE YOU'RE SEEING THIS FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I DON'T THINK IT'S INTENTIONAL IN THE CODE.
I'M HAPPY TO SHOW YOU ALL, UM, AN OUTLINE OF THE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE AT ISSUE HERE.
UM, THERE'S A, THERE ARE THREE DEFINITIONS THAT AFFECT CITY OFFICIALS IN THE CODE.
ONE OF THEM IS IN THE LOBBYIST PROVISION.
AND WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, PEOPLE THAT WORK AT THE CITY AND ARE CITY OFFICIALS, THERE'S ONE DIFFERENCE THAT SLIP THROUGH BETWEEN THE DEFINITION OF CITY OFFICIALS FOR THE WHOLE CODE AND THE DEFINITION OF CITY OFFICIALS FOR PURPOSES OF LOBBYING.
AND IT'S JUST THE CITY MANAGER'S CHIEF OF STAFF.
UH, SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT IN.
UH, OTHERWISE WHAT YOU HAVE IS FOR PURPOSES OF LOBBYING, ANYBODY CAN TALK TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF AND NOT HAVE TO REPORT.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENTION.
THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS, IS THE CHIEF OF STAFF, IS THAT THE ONLY CHIEF OF STAFF THAT EXISTS? OR DO WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S A CITY MANAGER'S CHIEF OF STAFF AND NOT SAY THE CHIEF OF STAFF FOR, FOR SOME OTHER, YOU KNOW, GROUP.
I JUST DON'T KNOW THE, THE, THE HIERARCHY AND THE, AND THE TITLES WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW WHETHER THAT CLARIFIES THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S CHIEF OF STAFF IS WHO YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
AND THE ANSWER IS THAT, UH, THIS PARTICULAR LINE COVERS THAT.
UM, YOU'LL SEE WHAT, WHAT IT SAYS RIGHT NOW IS THE CITY MANAGER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS AND CHIEFS.
AND THAT'S REFERRING JUST TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
AND THE DEFINITION EARLIER IN THE CODE IN INCLUDES THE CITY MANAGER, THE CHIEF OF STAFF, ASSISTANT, CITY MANAGERS, AND CHIEFS.
SO THIS, THIS OTHER CHIEFS AND OTHER, OTHER TYPES OF CITY OFFICIALS ARE ALSO REFERRED TO IN THE DEFINITION OF CITY OFFICIALS FOR PURPOSES OF LOBBYING.
SO IT'S COVERED IN, IN THE OTHER SECTIONS.
I JUST, IT'S HARD TO TELL FROM THE CONTEXT OF WHAT I WAS READING, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
I, I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION, SO THANKS.
AND, UM, I BELIEVE, JUST SO YOU'LL KNOW IN THE DOCUMENT, UM, I INCLUDED A CURRENT WORD VERSION OF THE CODE TO HELP YOU ALL.
SO IT SHOULD BE AT THE TAIL END OF THIS DOCUMENT.
YOU SHOULD HAVE THE WHOLE CODE OF ETHICS TO REFERENCE AS YOU'RE WORKING THROUGH THIS, JUST BY THE WAY.
WE READY TO MOVE ON? LET CITY ATTORNEY.
THIS NEXT ONE, UH, IS ANOTHER, ANOTHER ONE THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND PULLING.
I PUT IT IN THE CATEGORY OF A, OF A SUNLIGHT PROVISION.
UM, BUT HERE'S THE GIST OF IT.
UH, WHEN IS LOBBYING, NOT LOBBYING UNDER THE CODE?
[00:45:01]
LOBBYING IS NOT LOBBYING WHEN IT HAPPENS IN A PUBLIC MEETING.AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE CODE INCLUDES FOUR EXCEPTIONS, UH, TO THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYING.
AND THEY ALL HAVE TO DO WITH, WELL, THIS IS HAPPENING AT AN OPEN MEETING.
UH, OBVIOUSLY THIS HAS AN EFFECT ON A MAJOR
AND SO I THINK YOU ALL NEED TIME TO CONSIDER THIS.
UH, BUT IT COMES UP TO THE IGS OFFICE A LOT.
IN THIS WAY PEOPLE WILL SEE, UH, AN ATTORNEY OR A LOBBYIST TALKING IN A PUBLIC MEETING AND NOT IDENTIFYING THEMSELVES AS A LOBBYIST, AND COMPLAINTS WILL BE FILED.
WELL, WELL, THE PROBLEM IS THESE FOUR EXCEPTIONS.
THE, THE, THE, THE IMPACT OF THAT IS THAT THEY'RE NOT LO IT'S NOT CONSIDERED LOBBYING UNDER THE CODE, BUT THAT CUTS AGAINST TRANSPARENCY.
AND I THINK THE EXPECTATION OF, UH, THE CITIZENS THAT IF IT'S A LOBBYIST, WE NEED TO KNOW.
NOW AGAIN, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND OFFICIALS KNOW WHO THE LOBBYISTS ARE, BUT THE PUBLIC THAT'S WATCHING DOES NOT.
AND SO IF WE REMOVED THESE FOUR SECTIONS AS, AS, UH, I'M SUGGESTING THEN WHEN LOBBYISTS SPEAK IN PUBLIC MEETINGS, THEY HAVE TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, HEY, I'M A LOBBYIST.
UH, SO I NOW I, I BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POINT IS.
I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT LIMITING THE ABILITY OF A PERSON WHO IS DESIGNATED AS A LOBBYIST MM-HMM
FROM MAKING PUBLIC COMMENTS IN SPEECHES, IN MEETINGS, IN THE OPEN PUBLIC, UH, IN THE, IN THE MEDIA, UH, UH, ALL, ALL, ALL OF THESE EXCEPTIONS APPEAR TO ADDRESS COMMENTS THAT ARE MADE IN A PUBLIC FACING FORUM.
NOT A PRIVATE MEETING OR, SO, DD DOES, DOES ADDING A REQUIREMENT THAT BEFORE THEY MAKE ANY TYPE OF PUBLIC SPEECH THAT ARE LISTED IN THESE EXCEPTIONS, THAT THEY IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS A LOBBYIST, DOES THAT SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND STILL ALLOW THAT PERSON TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS ABOUT A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN? IT, IT DOES FOR, IN MY VIEW, FOR TWO REASONS.
THE FIRST REASON IS THERE'S A SECOND SECTION OF THE CODE, I BELIEVE IT'S ENTITLED IDENTIFY IDENTIFICATION OF CLIENTS.
THAT IN MY VIEW, IRONICALLY SAYS WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU ORALLY LOBBY, YOU HAVE TO TELL PEOPLE WHO YOU ARE ON THE ONE HAND.
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND IS THE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH, UH, THAT WOULD PROTECT A LOBBYIST FROM SPEAKING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF.
UH, SO, HI, I AM BARON ELIASON AND, AND I LIVE AT MY ADDRESS AND I'M, I'M SPEAKING ABOUT THIS PERSONALLY.
UH, I, SO I, I INTERESTED IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S THOUGHTS ON THIS, BUT THAT'S HOW I THINK YOU GET AT THAT SITUATION WHERE A LOBBYIST WANTS TO GIVE THEIR POINT OF VIEW IN A PUBLIC FORUM.
UH, AND THE WAY I READ THIS, AND I I MAY BE, I, I MAY BE WRONG, BUT IT APPEARS TO LIMIT THE ABILITY OF A LOBBYIST TO SPEAK IN THESE PUBLIC FORUMS OR PUBLIC SETTINGS.
I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT INFORMING THE PUBLIC THAT I'M A LOBBYIST WHEN I AM SPEAKING ON THESE MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THIS PROVISION ELIMINATES THE ABILITY FOR THEM TO SPEAK ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN.
AND I, I, I'M, I'M TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THAT.
I, I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND, AND I CAN WORK TOGETHER ON CRAFTING AN ADDITION TO THE CODE THAT WOULD SAY THAT IT WOULD SAY, THIS DOES NOT PROHIBIT A PERSON WHO HAPPENS TO BE A LOBBYIST
[00:50:01]
FROM SPEAKING ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN ON THEIR OWN BEHALF.WE COULD, MAYBE, WE COULD WORDSMITH WELL AND ALL RIGHT.
MY COMMENT ON THAT IS IF THEY'RE JUST SPEAKING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF, THEY'RE NOT LOBBYING WHETHER THEY'RE REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST OR NOT.
SO I DON'T THINK WE WOULD NEED THAT LANGUAGE.
THEY HAVE THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEAK, SPEAK ON THEIR OWN BEHALF ON ANY TOPIC.
AND, AND IF THEY ARE A LOBBYIST AND THEY IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS A LOBBYIST, ARE, THEY'RE, WHAT IS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THEM MEETING, SPEAKING ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN? MY, MY CONCERN IS THAT, UH, THE PUBLIC LOOKS AT THIS AND THEY DON'T KNOW THAT THIS PERSON IS BEING PAID.
THEY THINK IT'S SOME, SOME, UH, THIS IS SOUNDS, THIS IS PEJORATIVE, BUT SOME DO GOOD ARE IN THE CITY THAT REALLY CARES AND THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
NO, THIS IS SOMEONE THAT'S BEING PAID BY A VENDOR AND, AND THAT TRANSPARENCY IS OF INTEREST TO THE PUBLIC.
AND IF WE DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO SAY THAT, THAT SIMPLY, YES, I'M A LOBBYIST, THEN THE PUBLIC'S NOT AWARE THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE HOLDING SIGNS ARE COMING DOWN TO SPEAK ARE PAID TO DO THAT, AS OPPOSED TO CITIZENS, YOU KNOW, POUNDING THEIR FISTS AND, AND WANTING A CHANGE.
SO CAN THIS BE ADDRESSED BY REQUIRING, IF THEY SPEAK ON THESE AR AREAS THAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED, THAT THEY IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS A PAID LOT, WHATEVER LANGUAGE YOU ALL COME UP WITH, BUT THEY NO, NOT MISLEADING THE PUBLIC BY NOT FULLY DISCLOSING WHO THEY ARE AND WHY THEY ARE SPEAKING ON THESE MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN AS OPPOSED TO A PROHIBITION? OH, THIS IS NOT A PROHIBITION.
THIS JUST REMOVES THE EXCEPTIONS FROM THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYING.
SO IF YOU REMOVE THESE EXCEPTIONS, THEY CAN STILL, FOR INSTANCE, SPEAK AT AN OPEN MEETING UNDER TOOMA.
THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO REGISTER AT THE CITY AS A LOBBYIST AND SUBMIT THEIR ACTIVITY REPORTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT THE ARTICLE, UH, REQUIRES OF A LOBBYIST.
THEY WOULDN'T BE PROHIBITED FROM SPEAKING, THEY WOULD JUST BE INCLUDED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYING.
AND THIS ARTICLE WOULD THEN APPLY TO THEM.
SO THIS REALLY IS ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE A LOBBYIST, YOU HAVE, AS THIS, YOU KNOW, UH, WORKING GROUP HAS ACKNOWLEDGED REALLY TWO SIDES TO YOURSELF.
YOU ARE A PRIVATE CITIZEN AND YOU'RE A LOBBYIST.
AND WHAT WE WANT IS THAT INDIVIDUAL TO HAVE TO ESSENTIALLY DECLARE THEMSELVES, AM I ACTING IN MY CAPACITY AS A LOBBYIST, OR AM I ACTING IN MY CAPACITY AS A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL? AND DON'T PRETEND TO BE A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY A LOBBYIST THAT WAY, THAT THUS MISLEADING THE PUBLIC AS TO YOUR INTENTION IS TO YOUR, IN YOUR COMMUNICATION.
IS THAT KIND OF THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE AFTER THAT? THAT IS EXACTLY THE IDEA.
BUT I, I WILL SAY IT'S NOT JUST A VERBAL DISCLOSURE, SAY AT A PUBLIC MEETING.
IT'S THE REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER WITH THE CITY TO SUBMIT ACTIVITY REPORTS.
UM, THERE ARE RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES THEN THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS PERSON.
IF, I MEAN, THE WHOLE ARTICLE WOULD APPLY TO THEM, THEN IT'S NOT JUST A SIMPLE DECLARE ON THE MICROPHONE THAT YOU'RE A LOBBYIST.
NO, AND I, I I, I, I APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK MY, MY STATEMENT IS REALLY INTENDED TO SAY, IF I CHOOSE TO ACT ON, IF I'M ACTUALLY ACTING ON BEHALF OF A LOBBYIST, I HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, UNDERTAKE AND, AND APPLY WITH, YOU KNOW, COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF BEING A LOBBYIST.
I CAN'T PRETEND TO BE A PRIVATE CITIZEN.
SO, I MEAN, I THINK, I THINK THE INTENTION MAKES SENSE FROM MY STANDPOINT.
I THINK THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A BENEFIT TO, TO UNDERSTANDING SOMEBODY'S ROLE IN HOW THEY'RE, WE PORTRAY THEMSELVES IN HOW THEY'RE ACTING.
I THINK IT MAY NEED SOME WORDSMITHING TO MAYBE GET THAT WHERE WE WANT IT TO.
SO I WOULD SAY WE MOVE IT ALL ALONG AND, AND GIVE YOU ALL AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THIS DOES THAT.
BUT I THINK THE INTENTION OF THE CHANGE, THAT WHEN YOU ARE SOMEBODY WHO COULD POTENTIALLY BE ONE OR THE OTHER, DON'T PRETEND TO BE THE PRIVATE CITIZEN AND THUS, YOU KNOW, MISLEAD THE, THE REALITY OF, OF WHY YOU'RE STANDING IN BEFORE THE BODY OR, OR THE GROUP.
[00:55:01]
THAT YOU CAN WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ADDRESS MY CONCERNS THAT WE WOULD BE LIMITING THE MA THE ABILITY OF A PERSON WHO IS A LOBBYIST TO SPEAK ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN AS LONG AS THEY, THERE IS A FULL DISCLOSURE OF WHO THEY ARE AND MAYBE EVEN THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THEY ARE ADDRESSING THIS BODY.I WELL, THE, THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU IS, DO YOU WANT TO DELETE THESE FOUR EXCEPTIONS FROM THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYING? AND IF SO, THEN, THEN THESE WOULD, WOULD APPLY TO THE WHOLE ARTICLE.
IT WOULDN'T KEEP ANYONE FROM BEING ABLE TO SPEAK AS A LOBBYIST AT A PUBLIC MEETING OR, UM, MAKING A RESPONSE TO A PUBLIC NOTICE SOLICITING COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC.
LIKE, LIKE NO ONE WOULD THEN BE PROHIBITED FROM DOING ANY OF THIS.
IT'S JUST, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT AS A LOBBYIST, THESE FOUR THINGS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST AND COMPLY WITH OUR LOBBYIST ARTICLE.
UM, CAN WE, SO THERE'S NO REAL WORDSMITHING THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN ON MY END.
IT'S JUST THAT'S THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU, UM, WHERE, WHERE IS THE, EXCUSE ME BEFORE YOU START, I, I, BECAUSE I WANT, I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, UH, UH, UM, GRANT SCHMIDT HAS SIGNED IN, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, I'M HERE.
UM, SO YOU'RE SPEAKING OF THE, THE OTHER RESTRAIN, THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF A LOBBYIST, IF THEY'RE GOING TO SPEAK.
WHERE ARE THOSE LOCATED? JUST SO IF WE'RE GONNA GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY, WHICH IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD MAYBE TABLE THIS FOR NOW AND YEAH, I CAN ADD SOME CLARITY IF I MIGHT.
A, UM, AND YOU'LL GO TO EIGHT WHERE THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYING.
SO RIGHT NOW IN OUR CODE, LOBBYING MEANS ANY ORAL OR WRITTEN COMMUNICATION TO A CITY OFFICIAL MADE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY ANY PERSON IN AN EFFORT TO INFLUENCE OR PERSUADE A CITY OFFICIAL TO, UH, FAVOR OR OPPOSE, RECOMMEND OR NOT RECOMMEND, VOTE FOR OR AGAINST OR TAKE ANY ACTION.
AND SO THAT'S LOBBYING, RIGHT? AND SO SOMETIMES WE'LL HAVE A LOBBYIST COME TO A PUBLIC MEETING THAT MUST COMPLY WITH TOMA, AND THEY WILL COME TO THE OPEN MIC AND, UH, THEY WILL NOT ANNOUNCE THEMSELVES AS A LOBBYIST OR SAY, I REPRESENTING THIS PER THIS COMPANY AND I'M HERE ON THIS COMPANY'S BEHALF, AND I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS THESE OPINIONS.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION EIGHT B, LOBBYING DOES NOT INCLUDE A COMMUNICATION.
AND WE'RE GOING DOWN TO NUMBER FIVE, MADE AT A MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC UNDER TOMA.
SO THEREFORE, UNDER OUR CURRENT RULES, THAT'S NOT LOBBYING ANYMORE.
AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE REGISTERED AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE ANNOUNCED THEMSELVES AS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF ANY CERTAIN COMPANY.
AND SO WHAT, WHAT WE'RE THINKING IS THIS EXCEPTION IS SORT OF SWALLOWING THE RULE.
AND SO WE ARE SUGGESTING, LET'S TAKE THAT ONE OUT BECAUSE LOBBY LOBBYING, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH LOBBYING, BUT WE WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW YOU'RE LOBBYING.
AND SO WE THINK THAT THAT PERSON SHOULD COME TO THE MIC AND, AND HAVE REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST AND SAY, I'M REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST UNDER THIS CHAPTER, AND I'M REPRESENTING SO AND SO, AND HERE ARE MY THOUGHTS, COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THOUGH, IT'S ARTICLE FIVE IN CHAPTER 12 A.
THAT'S THE ARTICLE THAT HAS TO DO WITH LOBBYING.
SO EVERYTHING IN ARTICLE FIVE WOULD BE THE REGULATIONS THAT PERTAIN AND APPLY TO LOBBYISTS.
AND I, I DO THINK TO YOUR POINT, MR. CHAIR, THAT THE SUBSECTION FOUR IV, UH, IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT, UH, WHEN AND, AND BRING BACK.
MAYBE THAT ONE SHOULD REMAIN IN THERE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S, THAT THAT'S UP TO YOU ALL TO DECIDE, I SUPPOSE, BUT THAT, THAT IS REALLY TEETERING ON A FREE SPEECH ISSUE THERE.
IF A, IF A PERSON IS LOBBYING, IF THEY WANT TO MAKE A SPEECH OR SOMETHING TO THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, LET'S NOT SAY YOU CAN'T
[01:00:01]
DO THAT.YOU'RE, YOU'RE GETTING WHAT MY CONCERN IS AND YEAH, YOU, I AM PROBABLY AT A MACRO LEVEL WHEN YOU'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, WORDSMITHING ON A MICRO.
UH, BUT ANYWAY, YOU, YOU'RE GETTING MY CONCERN HERE IS I DON'T WANT TO PAINT TOO BROADLY AT THE SAME TIME UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO, TO, TO ADDRESS, BUT NOT SPEAKING SO BROADLY THAT WE INHIBIT A PERSON WHO IS, WHO IS A LOBBYIST SPEAKING ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN.
AND, AND, AND TO GO BACK TO MY COMMENT ABOUT WORDSMITHING VERSUS WHAT IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED, I THINK WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PROPOSING IS SIMPLY STRIKING THE SECTION AS IT WAS WRITTEN.
WHAT I WOULD SUGGESTING IS BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED, RATHER THAN STRIKE THE, THE SECTION COMPLETELY, MAYBE WE CLARIFY THE SECTION, RIGHT? SO LIKE THIS ONE ABOUT THE SPEECH, IF WE FEEL LIKE THERE IS SOME WAY TO RECRAFT NUMBER FOUR SO THAT IT MAKES CLEAR WHEN THEY WOULD BE LOBBYING AND WHEN THEY WOULDN'T BE, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY.
INSTEAD OF ALL OR NOTHING, STRIKE THE, STRIKE THE CLAUSE COMPLETELY OR LEAVE IT IN AS IS.
MAYBE THERE IS A MIDDLE GROUND THAT GETS WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO ACHIEVE BY REWORDING THAT PARTICULAR SECTION.
I, I, I AGREE WITH THAT, AND I WILL LEAVE THAT TO THE FURTHER COMMENTS.
I, I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST TABLING THIS AND WE CAN ALL KIND OF GO BACK AND LOOK AT ARTICLE FIVE AND THINK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THIS.
AND IF WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING, WE HAVE NOW HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS TABLED, AND IF WE CAN MOVE ON THROUGH AND JUST FIGURE OUT WHAT NEEDS MORE DISCUSSION AND THAT WILL LIMIT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE NEED TO WORK ON WHEN WE'RE NOT IN A MEETING.
AND I, I WOULD SUGGEST WHEN WE BRING THIS BACK, MAYBE AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE START WITH WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF LOBBYISTS? WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS IN THIS ARTICLE THAT LOBBYISTS HAVE TO DO? UM, AND IT, THE BURDEN IS ON THEM TO DO IT, THE BURDEN'S NOT ON THE CITY.
AND THEN WE TAKE EACH ONE OF THESE, UH, SUGGESTED STRIKEOUTS INDIVIDUALLY AND SPEAK ABOUT THEM INDIVIDUALLY, BECAUSE YOU MIGHT AGREE WITH ONE OR TWO AND MAYBE NOT WITH THE OTHERS.
AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THEM AS A LUMP RIGHT.
I JUST PERSONALLY AT LEAST, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME TIME WHEN WE'RE NOT ALL HERE, UM, ACTUALLY READING THESE CAREFULLY, AND THEN I FEEL LIKE I COULD MORE EFFECTIVELY COMMENT.
AND I THINK THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING.
IS JUST TO GET AN OVERVIEW OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S THOUGHTS, AND THEN WE WILL GO FROM THERE.
BUT GET OUR COM AT LEAST INITIAL COMMENTS ON HIS PROPOSED LANGUAGE.
WELL, IT JUST SO HAPPENS THE NEXT ONE, IT ALSO HAS, UH, A LITTLE COMPLICATED, UH, TO ANALYZE.
AND SO I THINK THIS ONE IS ONE WE'LL WANT TO COME BACK TO, BUT TO, TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHAT IT IS, UH, THERE IS A, A DEFINITION OF MUNICIPAL QUESTION THAT IS INCLUDED THERE.
UM, AND THERE IS AN EXCEPTION AT THE END, UH, TO EXCLUDE FROM THE DEFINITION OF MUNICIPAL QUESTION, LET ME, LET ME READ THE DEFINITION.
IT'S A, IT'S A PUBLIC POLICY ISSUE OF A DISCRETIONARY NATURE THAT'S PENDING OR MAYBE THE SUBJECT OF ACTION BY COUNCIL OR BOARD OR COMMISSION.
SO IT'S A PUBLIC POLICY DISCRETIONARY THING.
IT INCLUDES PROPOSED ACTIONS, PROPOSAL FOR ACTION IN THE FORM OF ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE KITCHEN SINK RECOMMENDATIONS, REPORTS AND BIDS AND ALL THIS STUFF, INCLUDING THE ADOPTION OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR AWARDS, GRANTS OR CONTRACTS.
THEN THOUGH IT ACCEPTS OUT OF THAT DAY-TO-DAY ISSUES.
AND SO WHY WOULD I WANT, UH, THAT TERM, OR WHY WOULD I SUGGEST THAT THAT DAY-TO-DAY THINGS BE INCLUDED IN THAT TERM? ISN'T THAT GONNA BE A BIG, UH, BIG HEADACHE? UM, AND THE REASON I'M SUGGESTING THAT IS BECAUSE SOME OF THE DAY-TO-DAY DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE, UH, COST A LOT OF MONEY.
AND, AND I THINK IN TERMS OF TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, UH, AT SOME POINT, IF NOT IN ALL CASES, BUT PROBABLY NOT IN ALL CASES, BUT AT SOME POINT, MAYBE IT'S A DOLLAR AMOUNT, YOU, YOU WANT DAY-TO-DAY DECISIONS THAT SAY
[01:05:01]
TO DO SOMETHING FOR TWO, MAKE A CHANGE.YOU, YOU WANT THAT TO BE CONSIDERED, UH, BECAUSE OF THE, THE SIZE OF THE DECISION, THE EFFECT IT WOULD HAVE ON PEOPLE AND RESOURCES.
SO THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, PIGGYBACKING ON, ON WHAT MR. VIAL SAID, YOU KNOW, IS KIND OF AN ALL OR NOTHING VERSION OF THAT, WHICH I, I THINK IT REQUIRES SOME DISCUSSION.
I I DON'T THINK YOU WANT EVERY DAY TO DAY DECISION TO BE CONSIDERED A MUNICIPAL QUESTION ON THE ONE HAND, ON THE OTHER HAND, AT SOME DOLLAR AMOUNT OR COST TO THE CITY.
IT, IT'S, WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT DECISION TO BE AS TRANSPARENT AS A MUNICIPAL QUESTION IS.
I, I, THE MUNICIPAL QUESTION ISSUE, I ONLY, ONLY THE PROB THE ISSUE I HAVE IS WITH THE, THE, THE STRICKEN LANGUAGE THAT EXCLUDES DAY-TO-DAY APPLICATION.
AND I, UM, MY SUPPOSITION IS, AND MAYBE I AM INCORRECT AS AT THIS, THIS WAS INTENDED TO ADDRESS THE POLICY ISSUES, THE POLICY MAKING ISSUES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH, WITH MUNICIPAL DECISION MAKING BY, BY, BY THE BODY.
UH, THIS THEN WOULD INCLUDE THE, THE, THE DEFINED PROCEDURES ASSOCIATED WITH PERMITTING PLANNING MM-HMM
THAT THAT SHOULD NOT BE A POLICY MATTER, RIGHT? THAT SHOULD BE A DEFINED PROCESS THAT IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE OR WHEREVER THOSE THINGS ARE.
AND, AND DOES THAT CONDUCT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A MUNICIPAL QUESTION, WHICH MY UNDERSTANDING IS MORE IN THE POLICY MUNICIPAL PO EXCUSE ME, MUNICIPAL POLICY REALM AS OPPOSED TO THE DAY-TO-DAY PLANNING PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES WHICH ARE IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UH, SO ANYWAY, THAT'S, UM, AND I'LL, I'LL ADD, THIS IS LAURA MORRISON AGAINST LAURA MORRISON AGAINST CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I WILL ADD THAT PERHAPS THE REASON, YOU KNOW, PERMITTING AND PLATTING ARE IN HERE AS EXCEPTIONS IS BECAUSE PERMITTING IS A MINISTERIAL FUNCTION OF THE CITY.
AS LONG AS YOU HAVE CHECKED ALL THE BOXES, YOU GET YOUR PERMIT, THERE'S NO DISCRETION ALLOWED ON BEHALF OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
UM, SO LOBBYING, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL ON A PERMIT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING.
UM, IT'S MINISTERIAL IN NATURE.
UH, THE PERMIT HAS TO BE RELEASED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IF ALL THE CORRECT BOXES ARE CHECKED AND THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE.
AND PLATTING IS, UM, A QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION OF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION FOR MOST OF WHAT THEY DO, IT IS LEGISLATIVE IN NATURE.
THERE'S ZONING CASES THAT THEY LOOK AT AT THEIR PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE LEGISLATIVE, UH, FUNCTIONS.
THERE IS SOME DISCRETION AND APPROVAL OF, UM, ZONING CASE, BUT THEY ARE THE FINAL DECIDERS WHEN IT COMES TO PLATTING.
THEY ARE THE FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY WHEN SOMEONE, UH, FILES AN A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION AT THE CITY.
AND SO, AGAIN, JUST LIKE WITH PERMITTING, IF YOUR APPLICATION IS COMPLETE AND YOU HAVE A COMPLIED WITH ARTICLE EIGHT OF CHAPTER 51 A, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MUST APPROVE YOUR PLAT.
THERE IS NO DISCRETION THERE AS WELL.
SO, AND THAT BEING A QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION OF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MEANS NO EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS ARE ALLOWED.
UM, SO THEY CANNOT BE LOBBIED IF SOMEONE IS LOBBYING A CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER ON A SUBDIVISION ITEM, THEY'RE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS.
SO I THINK MAYBE, PERHAPS I WASN'T, I DIDN'T WORK ON THIS WHEN, UM, THESE PROVISIONS WERE ADDED BACK IN, UH, 2009, BUT MY GUESS IS THAT'S WHY THOSE WERE INCLUDED AS DAY-TO-DAY FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY.
UM, THAT DON'T REALLY INCLUDE A MUNICIPAL
[01:10:01]
QUESTION BECAUSE THERE'S NO, THE DISCRETION THERE TO EVEN CONSIDER, AND THERE'S NO POLICY, UH, THAT THE CITY IS DECIDING ON.AND THE PROVISION STARTS WITH A MUNICIPAL QUESTION MEANS A PUBLIC POLICY IF ISSUE OF A DISCRETIONARY NATURE, NATURE THAT IS PENDING, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
AND THESE DON'T FIT THAT DEFINITION OF A DISCRETIONARY MATTER.
UH, THAT IS WITHIN THE PROVINCE OF, RIGHT.
PUBLIC, PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES THAT INCLUDE DISCRETION ARE, ARE GOING TO BE LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY.
UH, THE CITY MANAGER, UM, AND EVERYONE WHO REPORTS TO THE CITY MANAGER, WHICH IS MOST CITY EMPLOYEES, UM, WHAT THEY DO, WHAT THEY DO IS OPERATIONAL IN NATURE.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS IS AIMING TO EXPLAIN, IS THAT IF SOMETHING IS OPERATIONAL IN NATURE AND NOT POLICY, AND THEREFORE NOT A LOT OF DISCRETION IS BUILT INTO THE PROCESS OF OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES, THEN THERE'S REALLY NOT A MUNICIPAL QUESTION THERE.
SO, WE DIDN'T DISCUSS THIS, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S A VIABLE WAY OF PROCEEDING.
UH, WE MAY DECIDE WE LIKE IT AND WE DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS IT ANYMORE, OR WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT, BUT WE COULD ALSO JUST DECIDE BASED ON THIS BRIEF DISCUSSION, AND TO PULL THIS ONE IF EVERYBODY KIND OF AGREES.
I MEAN, GIVEN WHAT I'M HEARING, I'M LEARNING ABOUT THE CITY AND YEAH.
WE COULD HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION.
IT'S JUST, IT TOOK ME A WHILE TO THINK ABOUT IT, ABOUT WHY THAT WAS IN THERE LIKE THAT.
AND I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF DAYS.
SO, SO I, I DON'T HAVE A STRONG, STRONG OPINION ABOUT WHETHER IT STAYS AS IS OR THAT YOU WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO WORDSMITH IT.
BUT I I, I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW, I SHARE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S CONCERN THAT THIS IS NOT A DISCRE, THIS STUFF IS NOT DISCRETIONARY.
I, I, I'M JUST HAVING LISTENED TO THAT, I'M PERSUADED THAT THIS SUGGESTION ISN'T A GOOD, ISN'T A GOOD ONE, EVEN THOUGH I'M THE ONE THAT MADE IT.
I HATE TO, YOU KNOW, UH, NEGOTIATE AGAINST MYSELF, SO TO SPEAK.
BUT HAVING HEARD ALL THIS, I, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME, AND WELL, WHY DON'T, WE WILL LEAVE THAT TO YOU.
OKAY? YOU'RE GONNA COME BACK TO US WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO MAKE SOME CHANGES, YOU CAN DO SO BECAUSE WE'LL, WE, WE WILL BE VISITING YOU WITH YOU AGAIN, UH, AND, AND WE WILL COME BACK TO THIS BASED UPON YOUR THOUGHTS AND, UH, AND FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AS WE PROCEED THROUGH THE PROCESS.
DOES THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? OH, BOY.
HAPPILY, WE'RE CLOSE TO THE END.
UNHAPPILY, UM, ALSO CLOSE TO THE END OF MY BATTERY LIFE.
UH, LAURA'S GONNA GET A BATTERY CHARGER FOR US.
THE NEXT ONE, UH, THIS IS, UH, 12 A 46 B 1D.
THIS SECTION OF THE CODE OUTLINES THE CITY ATTORNEY'S, UH, ROLE TO PLAY IN THE OIG PROCESS.
IT'S, IT'S INTERESTING AND ASIDE IT, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ETHICS IN THE CITY, IT, THERE ARE A LOT OF PLAYERS.
IT'S, IT'S EAC, IT'S GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS IN ETHICS, IT'S CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
YOU HAVE INSPECTOR GENERAL CHIEF INTEGRITY OFFICE, YOU HAVE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
THIS SECTION SPECIFICALLY OUTLINES, UH, SOME OF WHAT THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DOES.
AND THE SUGGESTION HERE IS THAT THEY, UH, SHARE WITH THE OIG, THE LITIGATION STATUS, JUST NOT ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE THINGS, BUT JUST PENDING ACTIVE AND COMPLETED THAT THEY SHARE THAT WITH THE OIG.
UH, THE REASON FOR THAT IS THERE'S, UH, ANOTHER PROVISION IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
IF WE'RE INVESTIGATING A MATTER, AND, AND IT IS THE SUBJECT OF PENDING OR ACTUAL CIVIL OR CRIMINAL LITIGATION, WE HAVE TO STOP INVESTIGATING.
AND SO THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO MAINTAINING THE, FOR THE OIG TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE CONFIDENTIALITY THAT A CERTAIN INVESTIGATION IS GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME, NOT WASTE A LOT OF EFFORT IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THERE'S PENDING, WHICH IS REALLY THE HARD ONE TO KNOW, KNOW ABOUT PENDING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL
[01:15:01]
LITIGATION.AND I'M GONNA DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON THEIR THOUGHTS ON THAT PARTICULAR, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH, WELL, AS IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, IT SAYS THE CITY ATTORNEY SHALL SHARE WITH THE OIG THE LITIGATION STATUS OF CASES WITH THE CITY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF LITIGATION AT THE CITY.
AND THIS, YOU'LL, YOU'LL BE GETTING A LOT OF INFORMATION, UH, FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.
I WOULD, I, I MEAN, I, I DON'T, IT'S MY FEELING THAT THIS DOESN'T NEED TO BE IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN AGREE ON, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL KEEP THE INSPECTOR GENERAL APPRISED OF LITIGATION MATTERS THAT AFFECT, UM, INVESTIGATIONS AT THE OIG LEVEL.
UM, I MEAN, WE, WE, WE CAN PUT IT IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
UM, IT'S JUST USUALLY, YOU KNOW, UNDER, UNDER THIS ARTICLE, THIS IS WHERE WE LIST KIND OF THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
WE DON'T PUT OBLIGATIONS FOR THOSE OFFICES.
UM, WE PUT WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO, NOT WHAT YOU MUST DO.
AND SO, I WOULD HATE FOR ANYONE TO READ THIS AS IF THE CITY ATTORNEY, I DON'T KNOW, FAILS TO INFORM THE IG, THEN IT'S SOMEHOW A VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS.
I, I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT IT TO READ LIKE THAT.
AND, AND, AND WHAT MS. MORRISON AND CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS JUST POINTED OUT, UH, I, I THINK IS A GREAT OBSERVATION, UM, TO BE CAREFUL WITH ALL OF THESE.
UM, AND I, I THINK THE ONLY, THE ONLY REASON, UH, AT THIS POINT, I, I CAN TELL YOU THIS, MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN THIS ROLE AND OTHERWISE HAS BEEN THE, THE COOPERATION IS ROBUST.
UM, I THINK THE ONLY REASON TO, TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN WOULD BE IF IT WASN'T, WHICH IT IS, OR SOME KIND OF STOP GAP AGAINST WHAT HAPPENS 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
BUT THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
AND WE, WE, WE WORK THROUGH THESE THINGS ALL THE TIME COLLABORATIVELY.
SO ANYWAY, UH, WE CAN, I'M OKAY WITH NOT INCLUDING THIS AS WE GO, GO FORWARD, IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.
I, I JUST, I, I AGREE WITH LAURA.
THIS SEEMS VOLUMINOUS AND BURDENSOME, AND A LOT OF IT WOULDN'T BE PERTINENT, I ASSUME, TO ETHICS MATTERS, OR, UM, SO IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM NECESSARY TO ME.
AND I, YOU KNOW, I, I DO THINK WHEN IT COMES TO LITIGATION THAT AFFECTS AN INVESTIGATION HERE AT THE CITY, THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL WANT THE IG TO HAVE THE, THAT INFORMATION AND HAVE THOSE UPDATES.
AND THE IG IS FREE TO ASK, YOU KNOW, IF THE IG HASN'T HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THESE MATTERS IN A WHILE, UM, YOU COULD JUST INQUIRE AS TO THE STATUS OF ANY LITIGATION.
IT, IT'S, UH, NOT TO BELABOR THIS OR ANYTHING, BUT IT, IT IS ONE OF THE INTERESTING PARTS OF, OF THE WORK IS US THIS THE DANCING THAT WE HAVE TO, TO DO TO MAKE THINGS WORK.
BUT LIKE I SAID, WE COLLABORATE VERY WELL, AND SO I'M GOOD WITH THAT.
SO I THINK I'LL PULL IT IS WHAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE WORKING GROUP IS.
UH, THAT SEEMS TO BE THE, THE CONCERN.
IT MEETS THE CONCERNS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND I CERTAINLY DEFER IT TO THEM.
UH, THE NEXT ONE, I, THIS ONE, IT NEEDS YOUR THOUGHT.
TH THIS IS NOT A, AN EASY ONE.
AND WHAT I, BUT HERE'S THE SITUATION.
I THINK, UH, THERE'S AN INHERENT CONFLICT IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW BETWEEN THE, UH, SO I'VE GOT A COUPLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO TRY AND GET AT IT.
THIS IS ONE OF THEM MODELED AFTER WHAT THE WAY THEY, UH, DO WHAT I'M ABOUT TO EXPLAIN IN THE CITY OF BALTIMORE AND PERHAPS SOME OTHER CITIES.
BUT I, I HAPPEN TO KNOW THAT IG IT'S EASY FOR ME TO CONNECT WITH WITH HER.
BUT THE INHERENT CONFLICT RIGHT NOW, UH, IS THAT IF AN ALLEGATION OR COMPLAINT COMES IN AGAINST A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, AND I JUST, AND THE PERSON IN THIS ROLE BRINGS THAT FORWARD, UH, WHETHER IT'S AGAINST ONE COUNCIL MEMBER OR SEVERAL RIGHT NOW, IT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE THE ONES THAT DECIDE WHETHER YOU
[01:20:01]
NEED TO APPOINT A NEW ONE, GET RID OF ONE.THERE ARE SOME GET RID OF AN IG, AND IT'S JUST A, IT'S A CONFLICT.
UM, THERE, FOR THE PERMANENT IG, THERE IS A PROVISION, I BELIEVE IT'S PART OF THE CHARTER THAT SAYS THERE IS A TWO YEAR GUARANTEE FOR THE IG TO KIND OF GUARD AGAINST THAT CONFLICT.
THERE IS ANOTHER WAY TO GUARD AGAINST IT.
THIS FIRST ONE IS THE IDEA OF A BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE OR ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UM, I CAN SEND YOU ALL SOME ARTICLES ABOUT HOW THEY DID IT IN BALTIMORE, BUT BASICALLY, UH, THERE IS A COMMITTEE THAT COUNCIL SAYS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OVERSIGHT APPOINTMENT REMOVAL OF AN IG.
UH, AND THAT CREATES A LITTLE MORE OF, OF A BUFFER AND INDEPENDENCE FOR AN IG WHEN THEY'VE GOTTA MAKE THE CALL TO BRING AN ALLEGATION AGAINST A COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS ONE IS ABOUT.
UM, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD STRUCTURE THAT.
YOU CAN GET SOME IDEAS FROM, UH, THIS ARTICLE I GAVE YOU ABOUT HOW THEY DO IT IN BALTIMORE AND WHAT I'VE, WHAT I'VE PUT THERE.
BUT TH THIS IS A BIG DISCUSSION TO, TO FIGURE OUT.
I, I'LL START, UH, I CERTAINLY WANT TO HEAR OTHER OTHERS.
UM, THERE'S A LOT TO CHEW ON HERE.
I, I THINK IT, IT REMOVES THE CITY COUNCIL FROM A, A, A, A CERTAIN AUTHORITY THAT THEY HAVE TO APPOINT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL MM-HMM
THIS COULD, IF, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE EAC IS INTERESTED IN PUTTING INTO THE CODE, IT COULD ONLY BE AN ADVISORY BODY TO THE COUNCIL BECAUSE IT, THE CITY CHARTER SAYS THAT THE IG IS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THAT CAN ONLY BE CHANGED, UM, BY THE VOTERS DURING AN ELECTION.
SO DO WE, OR CAN WE DISCUSS THIS AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF ETHICS? BECAUSE THIS CAN ONLY BE CHANGED BY THE CHARTER.
ONLY, ONLY TO THE EXTENT, LIKE, LIKE, YEAH, ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT WOULD BE AN ADVISORY BODY, UM, WITH THE POWER STILL STAYING WITH CITY COUNCIL TO, UM, UH, ACCEPT, MODIFY, OR REJECT COMPLETELY, UH, WHAT THIS BODY RECOMMENDS TO COUNSEL AS FAR AS APPOINTMENT OF AN IG OR REMOVAL.
WELL, SO WHAT WE WOULD BE DISCUSSING IS EITHER MODIFYING THIS FOR IT TO BE AN ADVISORY PANEL, OR JUST TABLING IT OR MAKING A RECOMMENDATION SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE WHEN THE CHARTER IS GONNA BE VOTED ON, WHETHER OR NOT TO CHANGE IT.
BUT, UM, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
GENERALLY, I THINK WE SHOULD TABLE THIS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, LOOK MORE AT IT.
BUT FIRST OF ALL, A PERMANENT BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE, PERMANENT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND ALSO THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD, EACH OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD NOMINATE SOMEONE TO THE BOARD.
UM, SO THERE, THERE'S A LOT TO DISCUSS.
UH, THE WAY THEY DO IT IN BALTIMORE IS COUNCIL MEMBERS EACH MAKE A SUGGESTED APPOINTMENT, AND THEN SOMEONE LIKE THE CHAIR RANDOMLY SELECTS SEVEN OF 'EM, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT TWO LAW SCHOOL DEANS AND YOU'VE GOT A CPA AND YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT HERE TO DISCUSS.
WELL, UM, YEAH, SO I WOULD SAY TABLE THIS, BUT I MEAN, AS AN EXAMPLE, UH, WE SHOULD BE A COMMISSION OF 15 MEMBERS, AND WE'VE BEEN A COMMISSION OF NINE MEMBERS FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS, OR FIVE, HOWEVER LONG IT'S BEEN.
UM, SO LOGISTICALLY I SEE, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A, A LOT AND YEAH.
AND I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT YEAH.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? IT'S A BIGGIE.
I, I, I AGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE TABLED AT THIS POINT.
UM, SO MR. INSPECTOR GENERAL, THAT'S THE THOUGHTS OF MM-HMM
[01:25:01]
WORKING GROUP.UM, SO I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR THOUGHTS AND YOU'RE GONNA MAKE WHATEVER CHANGES YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE IN TERMS OF PROPOSALS, BUT I, I SHARE THE OPINION, UH, THAT THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN.
AND, UH, THERE'S SOME ALTERNATIVE IDEAS, UH, THAT ARE ALSO IN HERE.
WE'LL GO THROUGH THOSE, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK AND, YOU KNOW, I, I REALLY THINK WITH SOME OF THESE THAT ARE SO BIG, YOU ALMOST MOVE THEM TO THE BACK OF THE LINE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE AS MUCH PROGRESS AS WE CAN WITH THE REST OF, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS.
SO I'LL, I WILL, UH, MOVE THAT ONE ON DOWN.
UM, MANAGEMENT ALERT, POWER, UH, AND MAN, AND, UM, THAT SHOULD SAY ADVISORY.
UH, THIS ONE HAS UNDERGONE SOME CHANGES IN, AS I, WE, AS I'VE DISCUSSED THIS WITH MS. MORRISON AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
BUT, UM, WE NEED TO TABLE THIS ONE, UH, FOR THE REASON I'LL EXPLAIN IT.
BUT THE REASON IS, IT'S ALSO BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW BY GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS.
AND, AND WHAT IT IS, IS, IS IT IS FORMALIZING A PROCESS FOR REPORTING SIGNIFICANT WASTE AND ABUSE TO CITY MANAGEMENT.
SO THAT, LIKE, WITH AN AUDIT, BUT NOT AN AUDIT'S DIFFERENT, UH, CORRECTIVE ACTION CAN BE AGREED UPON AND FOLLOWED UP ON.
UM, BUT WE'RE NOT READY TO DE DISCUSS THIS ONE, BUT I WANTED YOU TO KNOW IT'S SPINNING AROUND AND I'LL BRING IT BACK.
UH, THE NEXT ONE, UH, HAS TO DO WITH ACCESS OF THE IG TO CITY INFORMATION.
AND THERE ARE REALLY TWO PARTS TO THIS.
THE FIRST ONE IS THAT, RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK THIS WAS INTENTIONAL, BUT IN A STRICT READING OF THE CODE, UH, AT LEAST MY STRICT READING, IT REQUIRES THAT IF WE WANT TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND, AND HAVE PEOPLE SHOW UP, THAT WE USE A SUBPOENA PROCESS.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARY IN MOST CASES, LARGELY BECAUSE THE CODE REQUIRES COOPERATION WITH THE IG, AND THE SUBPOENA PROCESS WOULD BE RESERVED FOR MAYBE PEOPLE DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY, OR IF SOMEONE IN THE CITY JUST WILL NOT COOPERATE AND RESIST.
AND SO I'VE ADDED, REPLACED THE WORD SHALL WITH THE WORD MAY.
UM, THE SECOND IMPORTANT CHANGE THAT I WOULD SUGGEST, SUBJECT, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT IT IS FIRST, IS RIGHT BEFORE THAT, UH, THAT AS AN ISSUE OF INDEPENDENCE, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO CITY INFORMATION, NOT INCLUDING THINGS.
FOR INSTANCE, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS, HAS A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT'S PROTECTED BY ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT, UH, WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT OR ANYTHING ELSE SIMILARLY PROTECTED.
BUT RIGHT NOW, UH, I CALL IT RINGING THE BELL.
WHEN WE WANT INFORMATION ABOUT SOMETHING, WE'VE GOT TO START RINGING BELLS AROUND THE CITY.
AND WE ARE CONSTANTLY, OR FREQUENTLY BUMPING INTO BREACHES OF CONFIDENTIALITY.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S INTENTIONAL, BUT SOMEONE IN THE CITY GETS A REQUEST FROM US, AND THE NATURAL RESPONSE IS, LET ME, OKAY, I'M GONNA GO GET WITH MY MANAGER AND MY DIRECTOR, AND I'LL TELL THE A CM AND ALL THIS STUFF AND THIS, AND THEY DON'T COOPERATE WITH US.
AND THEY DECIDE WHAT THE CIRCLE OF TRUST IS, AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHO'S UNDER INVESTIGATION.
THE POINT IS, WE NEED DIRECT ACCESS WITHOUT HAVING TO RING THE BELL AROUND THE CITY TO GET INFORMATION UNDER THE CODE.
WE'RE GONNA GET THE INFORMATION ANYWAY.
WHY RING BELLS? SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH RINGING BELLS? THERE'S TWO.
ONE IS, IF SOMEONE, IF IT, IT ENABLES SOMEONE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING.
AND MOST OF THE TIME WE EXONERATE SOMEONE FROM RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IF WE'RE RINGING BELLS, SOMETHING COULD COME UP, SAY, OH, THEY'RE LOOKING INTO BARRON ELIASON'S, UH, EMAILS ON THIS DATE.
HE MUST HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG THAT SPREADS AROUND THE CITY.
THE OTHER KIND OF PROBLEM IS IF WHEN WE RING THE BELL, IT RESONATES AND GRABS THE TARGET OF THE INVESTIGATION AND THEY START FIXING THINGS,
[01:30:02]
I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE RINGING THE BELL.AND SO THIS WOULD BE, UH, AN ADDITION TO THE CODE ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS.
THE WORKING OUT OF HOW WE WOULD GET DIRECT ACCESS IS, IS ANOTHER, ANOTHER MATTER.
I THINK WE'D HAVE TO WORK WITH DATA AND, UH, THE CITY MANAGERS TO, TO GET CLEARED FOR THOSE SYSTEMS. ALRIGHT.
SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CALLING BACK CHANNEL ACCESS TO? YES.
AND I PREFER THE WORD DIRECT, BUT I'D ALREADY, THIS WAS ALREADY OUT.
ALRIGHT, SO, SO IS THIS SOMETHING THAT MAYBE YOU COULD HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DATA FOLKS AND WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SO THAT THERE'S A CONSENSUS ABOUT WHAT YOU NEED? I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, THAT YOU NEED ACCESS TO INFORMATION, AND SOMETIMES THAT IS DATA THAT IS IN, IN THE, UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE OR OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, AND YOU NEED ACCESS TO THAT.
AND WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE ACCESS, I THINK, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE IT, IT, IT IS.
AND, AND I WANT TO BE FRANK, AND BY THAT I MEAN FAIR IN THE, IN THE IG WORLD.
AND AGAIN, BALTIMORE CITY IS GOING THROUGH THIS RIGHT NOW.
UH, IT GETS MORE COMPLICATED THAN IT SOUNDS LIKE PRETTY FAST.
UM, SO CONSIDER WHAT MS. MORRISON SAID ABOUT, WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THINGS IN THERE THAT TURN DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS INTO ETHICAL VIOLATIONS.
ON THE ONE HAND, THIS ONE, UH, CAN REALLY GET PROBLEMATIC AT SOME POINT WHEN, AND I, AND, AND I WANT TO, I WANT TO USE AN EXAMPLE THAT'S HYPERBOLE AND HAS NOTHING, I'M, I'M TRYING TO COVER MY TRACKS HERE.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A REAL CASE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF A WORST CASE EXAMPLE.
LET'S SAY THE MAYOR DECIDES YOU'RE NOT GETTING THOSE PAPERS.
THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON IN BALTIMORE RIGHT NOW, AND LAWSUITS ARE FLYING ALL OVER THE PLACE.
AND SO TO, TO SOME DEGREE, I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE IT IN THE CODE THAT DIRECT ACCESS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT MAY JUST, LIKE YOU SAID, IT MAY JUST BE WORKING IT OUT.
MS. MORRISON, DO YOU HAVE THOUGHTS ON THIS? YES.
I, YOU KNOW, I WONDER IF IT MIGHT BE WORTH CONSIDERING, UM, ADDING SOME LANGUAGE HERE THAT SAYS, SHALL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER OR DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS.
BECAUSE I CAN SEE WHEN THE OIG GOES TO A LOW LEVEL EMPLOYEE AND SAYS, I NEED THIS.
THEY ARE GOING TO GO TO THEIR SUPERVISOR.
THEY ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THEIR HIERARCHY IN THEIR DEPARTMENT.
UM, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO FEEL EMPOWERED TO HAND OVER WHATEVER AN INVESTIGATOR FOR YOUR OFFICE IS ASKING FOR WITHOUT AT LEAST COVERING THEMSELVES WITH THEIR MANAGEMENT TEAM.
SO SINCE WE HAVE THE RULE EARLIER ON IN THE CODE OF ETHICS THAT SAY THAT CITY OFFICIALS SHALL WORK THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER MM-HMM
WE MIGHT ADD ACMS, DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS, ALL OF THAT.
I WONDER IF THAT IS WORTH CONSIDERING HERE, THAT IF YOU WANT DIRECT ACCESS WITHOUT A SUBPOENA, YOU'RE AT LEAST GOING THROUGH A HIGH LEVEL, NOT THROUGH A LOW LEVEL CITY EMPLOYEE WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHO'S ASKING FOR THIS, WHY THEY'RE ASKING.
THEY DON'T KNOW THE NAME OF THIS INVESTIGATOR.
UM, AND THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE GOING TO BE ALARMED, UH, WHEN THEY RECEIVE THAT EMAIL OR GET THAT PHONE CALL.
WE DEAL WITH THE IT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS MM-HMM
AND THE ONLY, THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY, UH, SORT OF DEVIL'S ADVOCATE IS WHEN IT, THE A CM OR THE DIRECTOR IS THE TARGET, THAT'S WHEN IT BECOMES A PROBLEM.
BUT OTHERWISE, AND THAT IT, THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
WELL, AND MAYBE THAT'S WHEN YOU GET A SUBPOENA, WHICH IS A SOLUTION THAT GETS US THE INFORMATION, BUT IT RINGS THE BELL THAT THERE'S AN INVESTIGATION AND PROCESS.
AND SOMETIMES YOU WANT TO, YOU, YOU, YOU NEED THE INFORMATION, NUMBER ONE, TO ESTABLISH THE, THAT SOMETHING DID HAPPEN.
AND, AND NUMBER TWO, IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, RINGING THAT BELL WITH A SUBPOENA ON A HIGH LEVEL, SO TO SPEAK, PERSON IN LEADERSHIP IS GONNA POSSIBLY,
[01:35:01]
UH, TRIGGER DALLAS MORNING NEWS, ET CETERA, FROM WRITING A STORY THAT IF WE CAN COMPLETE OUR INVESTIGATION QUIETLY NEVER REALLY EXISTED.IT, IT'S A, IT'S AN INTERESTING PROBLEM, BUT IT IS AN ISSUE OF INDEPENDENCE, I THINK.
WELL, BOY, I
UH, GOLLY, I WOULD THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME WAY THAT WE COULD FASHION A WAY THAT THE CITY, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, CAN GET ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION AND TO THE DATA THAT HE OR SHE NEEDS WITHOUT FILING A SUBPOENA OR, OR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND OTHER SAFEGUARDS.
AND, AND IS THERE SOME LANGUAGE THAT WILL GET US THERE THAT MAYBE YOU COULD WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH, SO THAT WHEN WE MEET, WHEN WE MEET AGAIN, AND WHICH WE SHALL, UH, YOU ALL CAN PUT YOUR HEADS TOGETHER MM-HMM
AND MAYBE COME UP WITH A WAY THAT ACCOMPLISHES WHAT YOU NEED, UM, AND DO IT IN A WAY THAT, THAT THAT, UH, SOLVES YOUR PROBLEM.
AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ALSO DOES THAT.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? MM-HMM
UM, AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TAILORED.
I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES YOU HAVE.
UM, BUT THIS SEEMS EXTREMELY BROAD TO ME.
AND, AND I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO, TO UNDER, TO, TO MAYBE FOR US TO THINK ABOUT IT AND TO BE WRITING THIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHAT IF SOMEBODY MADE A FALSE ACCUSATION AGAINST ME AND THE IG GOES TO GET DOCUMENTS AND EMAILS AND STARTS RINGING THE BELL AROUND THE CITY.
THAT THAT IS A HELPFUL, UH, THING THAT, THAT'S THE NUT OF IT TO ME.
WELL, WHY, WHY DON'T YOU ALL COME BACK? YEAH.
WE'RE WORK TOGETHER ON THIS AND MAYBE WE CAN COME WITH A SOLUTION TO THIS.
UH, WE ARE ALMOST DONE, UH, 12 A 48 OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL.
UH, THIS IS A, THIS IS A DIFFERENT WAY TO GET AT THAT INHERENT CONFLICT THAT I THINK EXISTS BETWEEN THE INSPECTOR GENERAL BEING BRINGING CASES AGAINST THOSE WHO ARE IN CHARGE OF REMOVAL AND APPOINTMENT.
UM, AND, AND THERE'S SOME PRECEDENT FOR THIS IN THE, IN THE CODE.
AND WHAT THIS ONE DOES ESSENTIALLY IS SAYS, LOOK, IF, IF A COMPLAINT IS BROUGHT AGAINST A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OR IS ALLEGED, THEN YOU HIRE OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL AND THEY HANDLE IT.
NOW, I CAN SEE THAT BEING A COMBINATION OF WE INVESTIGATE IT AND THEN THEY DECIDE WHAT TO DO, OR THEY DO THE WHOLE THING, OR, UH, BUT THAT, THAT TAKES THE IG OUT OF THE, UH, I HATE TO USE THIS, SO I'M, I'M NOT GONNA, I WAS GONNA SAY, I'M JUST, I'LL JUST SAY IT, YOU KNOW, FOR BEING THE GUY THAT'S GONNA PULL THE TRIGGER ON THE ALLEGATION, IT TAKES HIM OUT FROM UNDERNEATH THAT CONFLICT.
WELL, I, I THINK THERE A, A PERSON WHO IS BEING INVESTIGATED FOR A COMPLAINT, DOESN'T THE CITY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY HI, TO HIRE OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THEIR INTERESTS? IS THAT CORRECT? MISS CITY ATTORNEY? IT'S ALL, EXCUSE ME.
WELL, IT'S, IT'S AN OPTION FOR THEM.
AND THE WAY THE CODE WORKS IS CITY WILL PAY FOR THAT.
IF THEY LOSE, THEY'VE GOTTA REIMBURSE THE CITY.
UM, SO THIS WOULD REMOVE THE IG FROM THE UNCOMFORTABLE POSITION OF FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE CITY OF, AGAINST A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OR, OR MEMBERS, OR, OR MEMBERS.
I, I'M, I, I'M NOT BEING FLIPPANT HERE.
IS THAT THE, IS THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S JOB? IT IS, IT IS.
[01:40:01]
I UNDERSTAND WHERE I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.UH, I, I WILL SAY COUNCIL MEMBERS, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL, I'D SAY THREE, UH, THAT HAVE BROUGHT IT UP.
ONE IN PARTICULAR, THE, THE FIRST THING THEY SAID IN JUST A ONE-ON-ONE MEETING WAS, I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS SITUATION, WITH THIS DYNAMIC.
IT, IT IS A FREQUENT TOPIC NATIONALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT INSPECTOR GENERALS AND HOW THAT WORKS.
THAT'S WHAT BALTIMORE IS TRYING TO GET AT.
UH, SO ON THE ONE HAND, YEP, IT'S THE RISK THAT COMES WITH THE TERRITORY.
IF YOU TAKE THE JOB, YOU TAKE THE RISK.
UM, TO GIVE YOU SOME, THE WAY THEY TALK ABOUT THIS AT A NATIONAL LEVEL IN TERMS OF TRAINING AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, IF YOU'RE GONNA DO THAT, YOU BETTER MAKE SURE YOU TACKLE 'EM TO THE GROUND.
'CAUSE IF THEY'RE STILL AROUND, YOU'RE IN TROUBLE.
AND SO, WHAT, WHAT YOU END UP WITH IN PRACTICE IS A LOT OF ALLEGATIONS, UH, SORT OF A, WHAT I WOULD CALL A CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD, WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE THROWING ALLEGATIONS BACK AND FORTH.
IT'S ALL HYPOTHETICAL, AND NONE OF 'EM ARE, ARE BIG, YOU KNOW, IN THE SENSE IT'S NOT A CRIME OR BRIBERY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WHEN AFTER YOU GO AFTER THAT, UH, YOU, YOU JUST MADE POSSIBLY A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM FOR YOURSELF.
AND SO IT'S JUST TRYING TO MANAGE THAT.
I THINK, UH, THE, THERE'S ONE IN THE SAME SECTION, UH, MS IF ABOUT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR IF, UH, IF THERE'S A, UH, A COMPLAINT AGAINST THEM, OR IT IS NOT, UH, IT'S, THERE'S PRECEDENT IN THE CODE FOR THIS PATTERN.
IT'S JUST THAT THIS PATTERN HASN'T BEEN APPLIED TO THIS SITUATION.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK, I DUNNO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THAT'S IN HERE.
BUT THIS IS ONE THAT WE DEFINITELY WOULD COME BACK TO.
IT'S JUST COMPLAINTS FILED AGAINST EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THAT WOULD BE AN, OH, NO, THERE IT IS.
NO, IT SAYS THE CITY ATTORNEY SHALL RETAIN AN INDEPENDENT OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR THOSE COMPLAINTS, BUT NOT FOR COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE CITY ATTORNEY.
SO THIS IS ONE TO COME BACK TO.
I WAS GONNA, MAY, MAY I DIGEST THIS ONE? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
I, I THINK REALLY WITH THESE TWO INDEPENDENCE RELATED ONES, WHAT I'M DOING IS I'M BRINGING THE NATIONAL CONVERSATION OF IGS TO THE EAC TH THIS IS HOW THEY'RE DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES IN THE CONTEXT OF SOME CITY, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS RECOGNIZING AND ARTICULATING TO ME, THEY SEE THIS CONFLICT.
UM, CAN I ASK, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YEAH.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I DO SEE THAT YOU HAVE REFERRED TO, YOU KNOW, ONE ARTICLE FROM BALTIMORE AND YOU, UM, SAID YOU'RE BRINGING THIS NATIONAL CONVERSATION REGARDING THIS MM-HMM
I MEAN, CAN YOU SHARE ANY, ANY OF THAT NATIONAL CONVERSATION? CAN YOU JUST SEND US LINKS TO ARTICLES OR ANY, THAT'S WHAT I'D INTEND TO DO ON THESE.
I WANNA RESOURCE YOU WITH, UH, ANECDOTES FROM THE IG, YOU KNOW, REDACTED.
BUT JUST ON, ON EVERY ONE OF THESE THAT WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS AND, AND WHEN THERE ARE ARTICLES AND SITUATIONS, BALTIMORE CITY OR WHEREVER ELSE, I'M GONNA SEND YOU THAT.
I WAS GONNA ASK THE SAME QUESTION.
THAT WILL HELP TO INFORM THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAKE WITH RESPECT TO THIS.
THE OTHER THING THAT WE COULD DO, AND I BELIEVE THAT, THAT THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO ENGAGE WITH US, IS TO ASK THE ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTOR GENERALS TO JOIN US ON WEBEX AND DISCUSS THESE THINGS.
UH, WE COULD GET THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION TO, I'M SURE THEY'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
THIS IS THE KIND OF, THEY'RE REAL INTERESTED IN POLICY IN IGS AROUND THE COUNTRY.
AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO THE, TO THE BODY IF YOU WANT.
WHY, WHY DON'T YOU START WITH GIVING US THE LINK SO THAT WE CAN OKAY.
AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND VISIT WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP WITH RESPECT TO THIS RECOMMENDATION? OKAY.
12 A 50 JURISDICTION AND POWERS, UM, THERE IS A PHRASE IN THERE.
[01:45:01]
THERE IS A SECTION ON JURISDICTION AND POWERS, AND IT LISTS OUT, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT, UH, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE CODE OF ETHICS ISSUES, AND THEN IT LISTS, UH, A NUMBER OF MAYBE SIX OR SEVEN ALL THE WAY TO M HOWEVER MANY LETTERS THERE ARE FROM A TO N, UH, OTHER SECTIONS AND ORDINANCES THAT WE HAVE JURISDICTION TO LOOK AT.AND THEN IN M LIKE, UH, MOTHER, UH, THERE'S SORT OF A CATCHALL.
AND THE CATCHALL IS, UH, IF THE ORDINANCE OR PROVISION QUOTE PERTAINS TO ETHICS, UM, IT'S, THAT LEAVES ME IN, IN THIS ROLE, UH, OFTENTIMES TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF, IF I CAN CONNECT SOMETHING TO ETHICS.
AND SO I, I CAME UP WITH A SUGGESTED DEFINITION THAT WOULD FOLLOW ON THAT SECTION.
M UH, I THINK THIS ONE NEEDS SOME WORDSMITHING AND CRAFTING AND TIME.
THIS WAS OFF THE CUFF, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME USABLE LINES FOR THAT PHRASE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
THAT IS SORT OF LIKE A LAUNDRY LIST OF BOTH CITY AND STATE LAW AND ALL OF THOSE POTENTIAL ETHICS VIOLATIONS THAT IT IS.
AND THIS IS THE CATCHALL AT THE END.
I THINK, UH, I, I'D LIKE TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO REALLY STRENGTHEN THIS DEFINITION, AND IF WE CAN FAIR ENOUGH.
WE WILL REVISIT THAT UPON OUR, WHEN WE GET BACK TOGETHER.
UH, THE NEXT ONE HAS TO DO WITH SECTIONS 58 AND 59.
THESE SECTIONS DEAL WITH, UH, WHAT HAPPENS AFTER AN INVESTIGATION IS SUBSTANTIATE OR COMPLAINT IS SUBSTANTIATED BY THE EAC.
UM, I'VE GOT TWO OBSERVATIONS.
UH, THE FIRST ONE IS SPEAKING FOR MYSELF.
IT WAS CONFUSING TO ME THAT THE WORD DISCIPLINE WAS USED IN 58 AND SANCTIONS IN 59.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IN 58 IS 58 OUTLINES THE PATHWAYS OF DISCIPLINE, WHETHER YOU'RE AN EMPLOYEE, A CURRENT FORMER CITY OFFICIAL LOBBYIST, ET CETERA.
SO I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO USE THE SAME WORD AS THE NEXT SECTION SANCTION AND JUST CALL THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION SECTION SANCTION PATHWAYS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, BECAUSE IN MY MIND'S EYE, I KEPT THINKING, WELL, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISCIPLINE AND A SANCTION? AND THAT WAS JUST A USELESS, UH, EXERCISE.
BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
COULD IT JUST BE CALLED SANCTIONS? WELL, THAT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED IN, IN OTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THAT WE JUST COMBINE SECTIONS 58 AND 59.
AND THEN MY SECOND SUGGESTION WITH THIS IS ONE I WANT TO PULL AND, AND NOT BRING AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UH, I, I DON'T THINK LOOKING AT THOSE STANDARDS OF INTENTION, INTENTIONALITY, AND RECKLESS DISREGARD, UH, IS REALLY SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO TO, TO HELP YOU TO UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT IT DOES IS THE EAC MAKES, UH, SUBSTANTIATES A CLAIM, AND THEN IN, IN ALMOST EVERY CASE, THE SANCTION GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND WHEN THE, THE TARGET OF THE, OR WHEN THE PERSON, UH, IN THE COMPLAINT IS A, SAY, A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, THE RANGE OF DISCIPLINE DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF INTENT.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS DOING.
I DO THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION OF INTENTIONAL VERSUS KNOWINGLY, KNOWINGLY, BY THE WAY, IS DEFINED IN THE CODE, BUT INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS DISREGARD, SO THAT COUNSEL WOULDN'T HAVE TO MAKE UP A DEFINITION IN THE MIDST OF, OF DECIDING WHAT THE SANCTION WOULD BE.
SO, SO ARE INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS DISREGARD, ARE THOSE TERMS THAT ARE USED IN THE SANCTIONS REQUIREMENT OF THE CODE? OR IS IT JUST KNOWINGLY IN THE SANCTIONS? IT USES ALL THREE.
THE MEN'S RAY IN THE, THE MEN'S RAY FOR SUBSTANTIATION OF A COMPLAINT IS JUST KNOWINGLY.
THE PATHWAY FOR SANCTIONS USES INTENTIONAL
[01:50:01]
AND RECKLESS DISREGARD, AND KNOWINGLY INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS DISREGARD DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION CURRENTLY.AND SO WHAT I FORESEE IS CITY COUNCIL TRYING TO DETERMINE BASED ON, UH, INTENTIONAL OR OR RECKLESS DISREGARD.
AND THEN ON THE FLY, TURNING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND SAYING, WELL, HOW WOULD YOU DEFINE THAT? AND AT THAT POINT, DEFINING IT DEFINES WHAT THE SANCTION'S GONNA BE.
LET'S, LET'S, LET'S DO THAT IN ADVANCE, IS MY SUGGESTION HERE.
OH, MY COMMENT IS JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE CAN DEFINE THESE THINGS, UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THE RULE AT THE CITY IS IF A TERM IS NOT DEFINED, WE GO WITH THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF THE TERM.
SO UNLESS THE IG PROPOSES A DEFINITION, SOMETHING, THAT'S SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION, MY COMMENT WOULD JUST BE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DEFINE IT IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
WELL, HERE, HERE'S, THERE, THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS CULPABLE MENTAL STATE.
AND AT SOME POINT, I, I THINK THERE WAS A, I, I'M NOT GONNA SAY A CONSENSUS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WELL, THAT, THAT THERE WAS A, A LOT OF THOUGHT THAT KNOWINGLY WAS AN IMPORTANT STANDARD TO BE USED WHEN MAKING THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS THAT A COUNCIL PERSON OR CITY OFFICIAL CAN I HAVE TO HAVE ACTED KNOWINGLY.
THE, THE STANDARD OF KNOWINGLY COME, THAT'S WHAT THE EAC USES AS THE STANDARD TO D IN PHASE ONE OF AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT A VIOLATION OF THE CHAPTER OCCURRED.
THESE OTHER TERMS, UM, LET'S SEE, INTENTIONALLY AND KNOWINGLY OR INTENTIONALLY OR RECKLESS DISREGARD, THOSE COMES, THOSE TERMS COME IN IN PHASE TWO WHEN IT COMES TO DETERMINING WHICH SANCTION, UH, SHOULD BE APPLIED.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIKE A LETTER OF NOTIFICATION, YES, YOU KNOWINGLY VIOLATED THE CODE OF ETHICS, BUT LIKE, IT REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD.
IT'S NOT UNTIL YOU GET UP TO LIKE, UM, A, A REPRIMAND OR A RESOLUTION FOR CENSURE.
AND THESE TERMS ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF, IF DURING THE PROCEEDINGS EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT SOMEONE HAS HAD A RECKLESS DISREGARD FOR THE CODE OF ETHICS, THEN THAT STEPS UP THE, THE SEVERITY OF THE SANCTION.
SO I, YOU KNOW, IT'S MY OPINION THAT WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN ALL OF THE, TO ME, THERE'S NO CONFUSION.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO KNOWINGLY, YOU HAVE TO BE FOUND TO HAVE KNOWINGLY VIOLATED THE CODE OF ETHICS.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO WHICH SANCTION THE EAC IS GONNA RECOMMEND, OR WHICH SANCTION THE COUNCIL, UM, FINALLY DECIDES ON, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHEN YOU GET INTO THESE OTHER TERMS, WHEN IT COMES TO THE SEVERITY OF THE SANCTION AND WHAT LEVEL YOU'RE AT.
SO DO WE MAKE NEED TO MAKE A CHANGE IN THIS AT, AT THIS POINT THEN? WHAT, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? UH, WELL, I'M GOING TO FIRST ASK THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
I THINK THAT THE, I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE, IN THE WORKING GROUP TO, I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT THE DECISION OFF ON YOU.
IN MY, IN MY OPINION, I WOULD SAY I PREFER THE DEFINITIONS TO BE IN THE CODE.
BUT I, YOU KNOW, I'M HAPPY WITH WHATEVER THE WORKING GROUP THINKS.
AND, AND I THINK IT, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S, MS. MORRISON'S OPINION'S VALID TOO.
UH, IT'S, IT'S, AT THIS POINT, YOU'RE ALMOST AT THE LEVEL OF PERSONAL PREFERENCE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU DON'T WANT THE CODE TO JUST KEEP GROWING AND GROWING.
I'LL, I'LL TELL ON MYSELF A LITTLE BIT.
UM, COMING FROM A CRIMINAL DEFENSE BACKGROUND, UH, AND BEING A LICENSED ATTORNEY, THE STANDARD OF KNOWINGLY WAS NOT FAMILIAR TO ME.
AND I, AT FIRST GLANCE, I, I THOUGHT OF IT AS AN INTENTIONALITY STANDARD.
IT TOOK ME A MINUTE BEFORE I REALIZED THIS IS LESS THAN INTENT.
UH, SO FOR ME IT WAS, THAT'S ONE THING THAT'S ONE REASON WHY THIS, OR ONE PLACE THIS IS COMING FROM, IS I LEARNED SOMETHING COMING INTO THE CODE OF ETHICS THAT I'D MISSED.
SO YOU THINK KNOWINGLY IS A LESSER STANDARD.
IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY, UH, UNDERSTANDING THAT YOUR ACTIONS WILL RESULT IN WHAT HAPPENED.
IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU DID IT ON PURPOSE, BUT IT JUST COMMON SENSE.
IF I PUSH THIS GLASS, IT MAY FALL OVER KIND OF A STANDARD.
[01:55:01]
IT'S, IT'S DEFINED.I CAN READ YOU THE DEFINITION.
KNOWINGLY IS DEFINED IN THE CODE OF ETHICS.
SO THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS DO WE NEED TO DEFINE RECKLESS DISREGARD OR INTENTIONALLY, I THINK PEOPLE KNOW WHAT INTENTIONALLY MEANS, AND THEY KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO BE RECKLESS, AND THEY KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO DISREGARD SOMETHING.
UM, SO UNLESS WE'RE, WE HAVE UNIQUE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE NOT THE DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS, I DON'T THINK THEY NEED TO BE DEFINED HERE.
UM, BECAUSE WE USE DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS THAT AREN'T DEFINED IN THE CODE.
UM, YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD TEND TO, UH, AGREE WITH, UM, THAT, AND ADDITIONALLY, I THINK THAT DEFINING THESE CHARMS MIGHT, I DON'T LIMIT THE ABILITY TO, UH, IT MIGHT LIKE PUT IT IN A CORNER AND THEN YOU CAN'T USE COMMON SENSE AND GET OUT OF IT.
IT WOULD GIVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOMEBODY AN OUT, IF THEY COULD SAY, OH, WELL THAT'S NOT IN THE DEFINITION, THAT SPECIFIC LITTLE THING, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.
AND I, THAT'S MY OPINION IS THESE ARE NOT DIFFERENT THAN THE, THE DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS.
AND SO IT WOULD JUST MUDDY THE WATERS.
AND I I WILL SAY DURING PHASE TWO OF AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING, THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, UM, HAS THE ABILITY TO PUT ON EVIDENCE TO SHOW INTENTIONAL DISREGARD.
AND THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE INTENTIONAL DISREGARD.
AND HERE'S THE EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THIS PERSON DID HAVE INTENTIONAL DISREGARD FOR THE CODE OF ETHICS.
SO YOU'LL REALLY BE WALKED THROUGH THAT, UM, BECAUSE THE IG WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON SANCTION AND THEN ARGUE TO WHY THAT RECOMMENDATION IS BEING MADE.
AND IT'LL GO TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT STANDARD YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT FOR THAT RECOMMENDED SANCTION.
SO DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE CURRENT LANGUAGE WITH RESPECT TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION AND SANCTIONS MS. CITY ATTORNEY? WELL, IT'S NOT MY RECOMMENDATION TO DO SO.
I, I DON'T THINK SO, BUT THIS IS THE I G'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO, UM, I THINK HIS RECOMMENDATION IS TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS OF THESE, THESE TERMS. WELL, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA GO BACK AND, AND READ ALL THIS.
I'VE BEEN NOTING WHAT PAGES MM-HMM
SO, UM, I MEAN, WE DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING OFFICIAL AT THIS MOMENT, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS NOT CHANGING IT PERSONALLY.
AND THEN ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS HERE FROM THE IG IS TO TRY TO MAYBE COMBINE THESE TWO MM-HMM
DO DOES, DOES THE WORKING GROUP WANT ME TO GO AHEAD AND DRAFT THAT AND BRING IT AFTER I REVIEW IT WITH THE IG? UH, SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE? BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRETTY HELPFUL.
SO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD BE COMBINED? I, YEAH.
UM, YEAH, I DO THINK IT'S, I THINK THE IG IS RIGHT, THAT IT IS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING THAT WE HAVE ONE SECTION THAT'S, THAT REFERS TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION, AND THEN THE VERY NEXT SECTION IS SANCTIONS.
UM, AND I THINK I CAN WORK ON THAT FOR, FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR.
WELL THEN YOU ALL WILL COME BACK WITH MM-HMM
A RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION AND SANCTIONS.
AND WE WILL DO THAT WHEN WE CAN, WHEN WE RECONVENE, UH, THE DISBARMENT STUFF, IT LOOKS LIKE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN.
SO THE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS, THIS IS ONE THAT THE EAC HAS ALREADY CONSIDERED, AND IT WILL BE COMING BEFORE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND ETHICS.
THIS IS ALONG WITH THE OTHER ONE.
AND THE FINAL ONE, UH, IS JUST A CLEANUP AND, BUT I RECOMMEND WE TABLE IT.
AND THIS IS WHY, UM, THE WORK, UH, REGARDING PERSONS DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY COMING BEFORE THE COUNCIL, WHAT THE COUNCIL DOES WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION WILL AFFECT MY SUGGESTION IN 12 A 62.
BUT IF, IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES IT AS WRITTEN, THEN IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO ADD THE WORD SUBCONTRACTOR IN 12 A 62.
BUT WE, WE NEED TO SEE WHAT THE COUNCIL DOES.
WE'LL BE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, BUT I AGREE WE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL YOUR, UH, GROUP FINISHES ITS WORK AND THEREFORE WHEN YOU COME BACK
[02:00:01]
AND MAKE SOME FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS, MAYBE IT CAN INCLUDE WHATEVER THE WORK OF THAT OTHER COMMITTEE IS.SO THAT CONCLUDES MY SUGGESTIONS.
UH, MS. PHELAN HAS A LIST OF ALL, EVERYTHING WE PULLED, AND SHE CAN TELL YOU THAT.
AND THEN, AND THEN I THINK THAT'LL HELP US TO DETERMINE THE PACE OF THE MEETINGS GOING FORWARD.
AND I, I GUESS I, I HAVEN'T ASKED, ARE THERE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES BY MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE? UH, IF THEY ARE, CAN YOU GET THEM TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OR THE CITY ATTORNEY? UH, SO THAT WHEN WE MEET AGAIN, UH, IF THERE WERE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ANYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE WITH REGARD TO CHANGES THAT THEY WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE CAN DO THAT AT THE SAME TIME SO WE CAN MOVE THINGS MM-HMM
ALONG AND FINISH THE WORK OF THIS TASK FORCE AND MOVE ALONG TO THE NEXT PART OF THIS PROCESS.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? MM-HMM
I DON'T HAVE ANY AT THIS TIME, BUT IF I HAVE ANY, I WILL OF COURSE FOLLOW THAT.
AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL COME TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, UH, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND THEN TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THEN THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WILL JUST, UM, KEEP ME APPRISED OF WHAT'S COMING IN AND WE'LL WORK TOGETHER ON THE, ON THE PROPOSALS.
AND CAN I ADD, UH, PROFESSOR PERKINS, THIS IS GRANT, SORRY, I'M SORRY AGAIN THAT I WAS DELAYED, I THINK BE BECAUSE OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS.
I HAD A HEARING THIS MORNING, SO I WASN'T ABLE TO JOIN.
BUT CAN I EMAIL WHO CAN I, IF I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS? UM, I JUST WANNA LOOK AT THIS AS WELL, BUT I ALSO KNOW WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT WE'RE COMMUNICATING OVER EMAIL.
SO DO I JUST NEED TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT TIME OR, UH, CAN I CONTACT MS. MORRISON? UH, YEAH.
COMMISSIONER, SINCE THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AT THE CITY, SO IT'S A CODE AMENDMENT.
YOU CAN CALL THE IG DIRECTLY OR YOU CAN CALL ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS OKAY.
OH, WELL, JUST TO JUST GOTTA GIVE YOU, UH, A SENSE OF THE, HOW MUCH WORK WE PUT ON A PLATE DOWN THE ROAD AND, AND THEN DECIDE WHEN OUR NEXT MEETING IS.
UH, JUST BRIEFLY, UM, I'M LAURA FELAN WITH THE OIG.
WE DID, UH, PULL 12 DIFFERENT THINGS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED ME TO LIST 'EM OFF HERE OR WE CAN JUST EMAIL THEM AROUND, BUT THERE'S 12 OKAY.
UM, SUGGESTIONS THAT WE WANTED TO TABLE.
SO IS OUR WORK HERE DONE? I, I, I THINK SO.
UNLESS YOU WANT TO, UH, DECIDE WHEN OUR NEXT MEETING OR, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO SORT OF BACK OUT OF THAT TIMELINE FROM DEPUTY MEMBER PRO TIM.
AND CAN, HOW MANY MEETINGS DOES IT TAKE? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE A, A JOKE.
HOW MANY MEETINGS DOES IT TAKE FOR A WORKING GROUP TO GET THROUGH THESE 12? LET'S TALK ABOUT IT.
WELL, GOLLY, I WOULD THINK HOPE WE CAN DO THIS IN ONE MORE MEETING,
SO WE CAN MOVE THIS THING ALONG.
AND SO WE CAN POLL EVERYONE'S AVAILABILITY FOR THAT DAY.
OH, WE CAN MEET IN THE MORNING OR THE AFTERNOON IF THAT'S EASIER FOR PEOPLE.
WHY DON'T WE TRY MORNING? UH, AND, BUT IT'S TAKEN US A COUPLE OF HOURS TO WORK THROUGH THIS.
YEAH, MAYBE WE CAN START AT NINE.
COMMISSIONER RAEL, DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? THAT SHOULD WORK FOR ME.
[02:05:01]
I AM, I ENFOR THE NEXT WEEK IS GREAT.THAT WEEK I WILL BE IN A TRIAL UNLESS IT GETS RESOLVED.
UM, BUT I, I DON'T WANT TO IMPACT THINGS.
I CAN ALWAYS SEND MY, SEND THE THOUGHTS THAT I HAD AHEAD OF TIME.
UM, SO WAIT, YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE IN TRIAL THE WEEK OF THE 26TH OR THE FOLLOWING WEEK? THE WEEK OF THE 20.
UM, AND I'LL BE OUTTA TOWN THAT FIRST WEEK IN MARCH, BUT I WILL BE, I CAN, I CAN CALL IN YOU, YOU WANNA SHOOT FOR THE FIRST WEEK IN MARCH THEN THAT WAY WE MAYBE HAVE THE ABILITY FOR THE ENTIRE WORKING GROUP TO GET TOGETHER.
WOULD YOU, IS THAT POINT, WOULD THAT WORK FOR YOU? I CAN, I, I JUST WON'T BE HERE IN PERSON.
I, UH, I AM FORTUNATELY HAVE A ETHICS TRAINING.
LET'S, WELL, LET'S HOLD IT LIGHTLY AND WE'LL SHOOT FOR THAT ONE.
I'LL SEE IF WE CAN, IS YOUR ETHICS TRAINING THAT ENTIRE WEEK OR JUST ONE PARTICULAR DAY? IT'S JUST THURSDAY MORNING.
WELL THEN I HAVE, LET'S JUST PICK A DIFFERENT DAY.
I HAVE PLAN COMMISSION ALL DAY ON THURSDAY, SO, SO HOW ABOUT A DIFFERENT DAY THIS WEDNESDAY? OR NO, WEDNESDAY COUNCILS WOULD MONDAY THE SECOND WORK? MY, UH, MONDAY WOULD WORK.
WELL, I, TUESDAY'S FINE WITH ME.
I'M AVAILABLE THAT WHOLE WEEK.
WAS THAT TUESDAY, MARCH, MARCH 3RD.
AND THEN THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE WILL WORK ON BOOKING US A ROOM.
TUESDAY, MARCH 3RD WE WILL RECONVENE AND HAVE MORE FUN.
UH, MS. UH, MR. INSPECTOR GENERAL, ARE THERE ANY, YOU HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? I AM DONE.
MS. CITY ATTORNEY, IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? UH, NO.
MR. CHAIR WOULD, UM, THE ONLY BUSINESS LEFT IS TO ADJOURN.
THEN WE WILL ADJOURN AND GET BACK TOGETHER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 3RD.
THANK YOU EVERYONE HAVE A GOOD DAY.
1212 17:00 PM ARE ADJOURNED AT 12:17 AM THANK YOU VERY MUCH.