[00:00:05]
MR SHEETS, GLAD YOU'RE WITH US.
[CALL TO ORDER]
MORE TIME NOW THAT WE HAVE ALL PARTIES PRESENT.I AM CHAIR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.
I CALL THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER IT IS JUNE 9TH, WEDNESDAY 6:06 PM.
THE COMMISSIONERS ARE ATTENDING THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY VIA WEBEX, AND THIS MEETING IS BEING RECORDED DUE TO LIMITED ATX AND CAPACITY.
THE MEETING IS NOT BEING BROADCAST LIVE ON PTX.
AND SO I'M GOING TO CALL THE ROLL COMMISSIONERS.
PLEASE UNMUTE YOUR COMPUTERS OR PHONES AND ANSWER OUT LOUD WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, THEN MUTE YOURSELF.
I'M GOING TO GO IN THE ORDER AS WE APPEAR ON THE AGENDA.
UM, SECRETARY LEARNER, COULD YOU TRY THAT ONE MORE TIME? THERE YOU GO.
DANBURG COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
LEVIN'S PRESENT COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK, COMMISSIONER STANTON, PRESENT COMMISSIONER.
UM, BEFORE WE DIVE IN, UH, JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE, UH, THREE NEW COMMISSIONERS, TWO COMMISSIONERS, UM, WHO I BELIEVE IT'S THE FIRST COMMISSION MEETING AND WANT TO EXTEND A WARM WELCOME TO, UH, MR. LEVIN'S AND MS.
UM, WELCOME TO THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.
WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU, AND WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR SERVICE AND WELCOME BACK COMMISSIONER STANTON AROUND TWO.
[CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
DO CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS.WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS WHO HAVE REGISTERED TO SPEAK THIS EVENING.
UM, SO FOR EACH OF THE SPEAKERS, I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE, UM, EACH OF THE THREE SPEAKERS KIND OF A NOTICE.
SO THREE MINUTES IS A LOT OF PER CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.
UM, IF YOU REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM OR SOMETHING THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA, YOU HAVE THE OPTION OF EITHER GIVING YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES NOW, OR WHEN WE GET TO THAT ITEM LATER IN THE EVENING, WHEN WE, AS WE PROCEED THROUGH THE MEETING.
UM, SO I'M GONNA GO ONE BY ONE, UM, AND ASK EACH OF YOU, UH, WHETHER YOU'D LIKE TO LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS NOW, OR IF YOU'D LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL THERE'S A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM YOU'RE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING ON.
SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE MISS OLIVIA OVER TURF WITH US.
ARE YOU THERE? YEAH, SOME HERE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN.
UM, SO THE REGISTERED HI, YOU'RE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM FOUR.
UM, YOU CAN SPEAK NOW OR, UH, WE CAN WAIT UNTIL AGENDA.
WE HAVE TWO HEARINGS THAT ARE SCHEDULED BEFORE.
I THINK WE GET TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR, BUT, UM, I WILL LEAVE IT TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO, UH, GIVE SOME COMMENTS NOW OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE MY COMMENTS NOW JUST IN THE EVENT THAT ANYTHING IS POSTPONED.
WELL, SECRETARY LERNER IS, UM, OUR WONDERFUL QUALIFIED TIMEKEEPER, UM, AND SHE WILL BE, UH, KIND OF KEEPING TIME FOR US, BUT WHEN YOU HIT THREE MINUTES, UM, I'LL LET YOU KNOW AND LET YOU KIND OF FINISH YOUR THOUGHT OR YOUR, UH, SENTENCE.
SO WHENEVER YOU ARE READY, MISS OVERTOOK, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
MY NAME IS OLIVIA OVER TURF, AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH I AM THE ACTUAL COMPLAINANT ON.
UM, I OBVIOUSLY FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT HAVING A FULL HEARING FOR MANY REASONS ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M FIGHTING FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATES.
NO CITIZENS SHOULD EVER BE PUBLICLY ATTACKED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER DURING OUR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION.
NO COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOULD DEFEND THEMSELVES DURING OUR CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.
WE ALL ACKNOWLEDGED THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED TO ANYONE, WHICH I BELIEVE WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST HEARING.
UM, WHILE I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED VIDEO OF MY OWN HEARING FROM LAST MONTH, I'D LIKE TO ADD A FEW THINGS.
FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING PRESENT AND CONSCIOUS DURING MY MEETING, I AM NOT A LAWYER.
UM, I HAD A LOT OF PHONE CALLS AFTER THAT.
UH, PEOPLE ASSUMED I WAS, I'M NOT A WINNER.
UM, I WORKED EXTREMELY HARD PREPARING FOR MY PRELIMINARY HEARING.
I SUPPLIED DEFINITIONS, EVIDENCE,
[00:05:01]
GOVERNMENT LAW EXCERPTS THAN ANYTHING ELSE AHEAD OF TIME.SECONDLY, THERE ARE SERIOUS ISSUES OF HOW MY HEARING WAS HANDLED.
NOT ONLY WAS I SHUNNED DURING MY CITIZEN COMMUNICATION AT COUNCIL, I FEEL LIKE I GOT A SECOND DOSE OF NOT BEING HEARD AT THE HUME.
IF THIS IS NOT A PATH, CITIZENS CAN TAKE THE FIGHT FOR THE RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE.
THEN WHAT IS THIRDLY, UM, INTEGRITY REPORTING LEAVES, CITIZENS EMPTY HANDED.
WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING HOW ANYTHING WE REPORT PANS OUT.
SOME OF YOU QUESTIONED IT BY SKIED THE FILING TO FIT THE OFFENSE, BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT I, ALONG WITH OTHER NON-MOTOR CITIZENS READ THE CODE AT FACE VALUE AND CHAPTER ONE DASH ONE DASH THREE WORDS AND PHRASES IN THE CITY ORDINANCE.
IT STATES THAT ALL WORDS AND PHRASES SHALL BE READ IN CONTEXT WHILE IT WAS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO GO BACK AND REWATCH THE VIDEO OF MY OWN HEARING IN MAY.
AND WHILE I WAS NOT EXPECTING BOTH THE BACKLASH, UM, AND OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT, ALONG WITH THE LEVEL OF PUBLICITY I RECEIVED, I'M HERE TODAY SAYING I WOULD GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT AGAIN, BECAUSE THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR SHOULD NOT HAVE EVER HAPPENED TO BEGIN WITH.
IF WE ALLOW ONE CITY LEADER TO VIOLATE THE QUORUM, THEN WHO'S TO SAY OTHERS WON'T.
SO IT'S TO SAY THEIR COMMISSIONERS MOVE A LEADERSHIP ISSUES, ROLL DOWNHILL.
I CAN NO LONGER ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO SPEAK AT PHYSICS AND COMMUNICATION.
I'VE SPENT THE MAJORITY OF THE LAST 10 YEARS ADVOCATING AND ASSISTING PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CITY'S GOVERNMENT BY SUPPORTING THEM, ENCOURAGING THEM, HELPING THEM WITH RESEARCH AND HAVING REVIEW SESSIONS ON MY OWN TIME.
I HAVE ENCOURAGED PEOPLE TO FILE COMPLAINTS, TO RUN FOR COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS, AND TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE.
AND AT THIS TIME I'M STILL APPALLED THE SERIES OF EVENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THE DAY I BOUGHT FOR THE PEOPLE AT MOUNT CARAMEL, THAT I'VE LOST ALL HOPE IN THE CITY'S VISION.
WE HAVE TO HAVE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WE HAVE TO HAVE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SYSTEMS IN PLACE.
SO WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG, WE CAN ASSURE PEOPLE.
AND FOR THE RECORD, I JUST FOUND OUT TODAY THAT ANY CITIZEN THAT TRIES TO FILE AN ACTUAL COMPLAINT ABOUT AN ETHICS COMMISSIONER, THERE'S NO RECOURSE.
THERE'S NO WAY TO FILE COMPLAINT, NO OFFENSE TO ALL OF YOU GUYS.
BUT, UM, I DO THINK THE POLICY NEEDS TO CHANGE, UM, WHICH WE SORT OF DISCUSSED AT MY HEARING.
UM, IT'S JUST AN IMPOSSIBLE PATH FOR CITIZENS TO GO ON AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME AND ENERGY THAT THEY PUT INTO HEARING MY FIRST HEARING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MISS OVER TURF.
AND UM, IF, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO STICK AROUND WHEN WE TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM FOUR, I THINK, UM, IF THERE'S A WAY FOR YOU TO LISTEN IN, UH, TO THE HEARING, WE'D LOVE TO HAVE YOU THERE, UM, JUST TO KIND OF HEAR THE OPEN MEETING DISCUSSION ON THAT AGENDA ITEM.
UM, BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS AND THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING, UM, AND ENGAGING.
UM, WE HAVE TWO OTHER SPEAKERS TONIGHT AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE ON THE LINE WITH US.
I THINK MS. TIFFANY WASHINGTON, UM, YOU, ARE YOU WITH US? YES, I'M HERE.
UM, SO, UH, SAME AS BEFORE YOU'RE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM SIX.
UM, YOU CAN SPEAK NOW OR WAIT UNTIL ITEM SIX IS CALLED AND AGAIN, UM, WE DO HAVE TWO OTHER HEARINGS.
UM, I THINK WE HAVE A FEW OTHER AGENDA ITEMS TO WORK THROUGH, UH, BEFORE WE GET TO AGENDA ITEM SIX, BUT WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE OPTION.
WHENEVER, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
UM, MY NAME IS TIFFANY WASHINGTON AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM FIVE, BUT I THINK I MAY HAVE PUT SIX, BUT THAT'S FINE.
UM, I, I AM EXTREMELY EXHAUSTED.
UM, I WANT TO REITERATE EVERYTHING.
THEY MISS OLIVIA OVER TO THIS BED.
UM, LAST TIME I WAS HERE, I DEFINITELY LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT I'M A VETERAN SERVICES, ABLE COMBAT VETERAN, AND EVERY TIME I COME OR I SIT IN THESE MEETINGS ON COMMISSIONS AND COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS, I GET TRIGGERED BECAUSE NOT ONLY ARE PEOPLE BEING DISRESPECT, THEY'RE DOING AFTER CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.
UM, BUT WE'RE NOT BEING HEARD.
I WAS LITERALLY SITTING ON IN SPEAKING DURING CITIZEN COMMUNICATION THAT WAS NOT RECORDED ON JUNE 1ST AT THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN RESOURCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING LIKE THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE AND NOT EVERYONE KNOWS HOW TO NAVIGATE THE SYSTEM.
I HAVE NO CLUE HOW TO NAVIGATE FILING INTEGRITY REPORTS AND AT THE COMMITTEE REVIEWS AND STUFF.
PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.
AND AS A BLACK WOMAN, WHEN IT COMES TO THE MARGINALIZED AND VULNERABLE COMMUNITY, I CAN TELL YOU FOR A FACT THAT NO ONE IS COMING HERE TO, TO FILE COMPLAINTS AGAINST PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE COMMISSIONERS AND WHO ARE ALSO ORGANIZES WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
THEY DON'T KNOW HOW THEY DON'T KNOW WHO TO TALK TO WHEN THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'VE
[00:10:01]
BEEN WRONG OR DISRESPECTED OR TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF, OR, OR TREAT IT IN A DEROGATORY MANNER.UM, NO, I DON'T EVEN KNOW RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE LISTENING, I'M NOT ABLE TO SEE YOU GUYS.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE'S ROLLING THEIR EYES OR, OR TREATING ME IN A MANNER THAT IS INAPPROPRIATE AS A CITIZEN.
WHEN ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS COME IN AND VOICE MY GRIEVANCES.
I HAVE LITERALLY HAD COMMISSIONERS HAVE THEIR FAMILIES THREATENED, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S RIDICULOUS.
THAT CAUSES HARM TO ME MENTALLY AND EMOTIONALLY.
I HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE PROCESSES AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO NAVIGATE THEM.
IT'S LIKE YOU'RE TAKING SOMEBODY TO COURT AND WHO WANTS TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT.
THIS IS THE TIME FOR ME AS A CITIZEN TO COME AND SPEAK TO YOU GUYS ABOUT UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR THAT GOES ON IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE ON BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS.
WE, I DON'T KNOW WHO TO CONTACT AND COOK AND MAKE THESE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT ORGANIZERS AND ORGANIZATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY WHOSE LEADERSHIP SITS ON THESE BOARDS.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ATROCIOUS, IT'S THE WORST THING EVER.
AND SO, LIKE I SAID, I JUST HAVE TO COMPLETELY REITERATE WHAT MS. OVERTURN SAID, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND I WAS LISTENED.
I WAS THERE ON THAT LAST MEETING.
AND I DEFINITELY SAID IF I HAD TO SERVE MY COUNTRY WHERE I'M ENCOURAGING AND COMMITMENT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ELECTED AS OFFICIALS TO SIT ON THESE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING TO YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. WASHINGTON.
UM, I WANT TO, I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF, UH, SEEING THE COMMISSIONERS RIGHT NOW.
UM, I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT EVERYONE WHOSE VIDEO IS ON WAS ATTENTIVE AND LISTENING.
UM, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
UM, AND I ALSO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE WORKING ON AS A COMMISSION IS I THINK, UM, A PROJECT TO TRY TO BETTER INFORM, UH, THE, OUR NEIGHBORS IN AUSTIN, JUST THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE, HOW THE COMMISSION WORKS, HOW TO ACCESS THE COMMISSION, UM, TO HOPEFULLY ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU WERE RAISING.
BUT THANK YOU AGAIN FOR COMING.
IT'S MS. ZENOBIA JOSEPH, ARE YOU HERE WITH US? YES.
HOW ARE YOU SITTING? I'M DOING, I'M DOING VERY WELL.
UM, SO I WILL LET SECRETARY LERNER GET READY FOR THREE MINUTES.
UM, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU DIDN'T SPECIFY AN AGENDA ITEM, SO I'M GONNA WAIT FOR THE GREEN LIGHT, I THINK.
SO WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, MS. JOSEPH, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES AND THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR MEMBERS I'M AS AN JOSEPH, MY COMMENTS ARE INDIRECTLY RELATED TO ITEM FIVE, A B N SIX, WHICH RELATES TO LEAVE IDENTITY AND EQUITY STATEMENT THAT YOU'RE REFORMING.
BUT SPECIFICALLY I WANTED TO SPEAK TO PROJECT CONNECT.
I WANTED TO INFORM THE MEMBERS THAT THE FEDERAL REGISTER IS OPEN UNTIL JUNE 23RD, 2021.
THAT IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE YOU'RE ABLE TO PUT COMMENTS IN THE REGISTER FOR FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT TO GIVE CAPITOL METRO THE 45% IT'S MONDAY THROUGH THE $75 MILLION MAIL.
AS YOU ARE AWARE, NORTH MEMORIAL TRANSIT CENTER, THE NORTH LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER, THE TECHREADY PARKING LIGHT IT'S 24 TO 30 YEARS.
AND AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ETHICS AND THE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT AND HONEST ON CITY COUNCIL'S AGENDA TOMORROW, AS IT WAS LAST WEEK, WHICH WAS ITEM 40 LAST WEEK, IT'S 93 TOMORROW THERE'S EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
THE CITY HAS USED ACTUALLY NORTH LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER, AS I'VE JUST MENTIONED, IT'S 24 TO 30 YEARS, BUT THAT WILL INFORM, UH, THE RAIL SYSTEM.
THEY RECEIVED A MINI CAPITOL METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, $900,000 BEFORE AN EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT GRANT.
THEY DID NOT USE THE DATA FROM DOWNTOWN.
AND AS YOU MAY BE AWARE, THE DEVELOPERS PAID A FEE IN LIEU OF BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOWNSTAIRS, DOWNTOWN.
SO THEY ARE ACTUALLY USING THE DATA FROM NORTH MEMORIAL TRANSIT CENTER.
THAT'S THE TEXTS THAT'S RIDING LATE.
IT'S IN THE JULY 27TH, 2020 BOARD PACKET, WHICH SPECIFIES THE NEED FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN CAPITAL METRO, THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND TEXTILES.
I ALSO WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND AND LISTEN DIRECTLY TO SAVE US FROM NOW TO THE PROPOSITION M A THAT WAS RELATED TO PROJECT CONNECT.
I JUST WANT TO CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION A REMINDER AS WELL THAT THE BLUE LINE WAS REZONED BACK ON OCTOBER 17TH, 2019, AND THEN LESS THAN A YEAR LATER, THERE WAS A PRESIDIUM.
[00:15:01]
ACTUALLY REQUESTED INNOVATIVE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO EARN APPROXIMATELY 80,000 TO $90,000 FOR TWO THIRDS OF THE UNIT.AND SO IT IS VERY DISINGENUOUS FOR COUNCIL TO CONTINUE TO USE PROJECT CONNECT AS A GATEWAY TO EQUITY.
WHEN IN FACT THERE'S NOTHING EQUITABLE ABOUT THE SYSTEM.
I DO WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND LASTLY, THAT THE CITY ACTUALLY NEEDED, UH, APPROVAL FROM THE STATE FOR HOUSE BILL 3 8, 9, 3, IN ORDER TO BUILD A DOWNTOWN TUNNEL.
AND I WAS ABLE TO GET THE REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO UNDERSTAND THAT TITLE SIX OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 TO VIVID DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN.
AND IF THEY PASS THAT BILL, THEY WOULD BE A COMPLICIT IN THE DISCRIMINATION, CRYING IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
AND JUST AS A REFRESHER, I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THE CHAIRMAN LEE COOPER DID ACKNOWLEDGE DISPARATE IMPACT ON JANUARY 28TH, 2019 IN THE BOARD MEETING, UH, THE BLACKS WAIT 60 MINUTES FOR THE BUS.
IT'S SIX MINUTES IF YOU'RE IN METRO RAIL, UH, KRESGE STATION.
SO BLACKS LIKE 10 TIMES LONGER AND TITLE SIX UPDATE WAS ON OR ABOUT MAY 19TH, 2021.
AND I ASKED, UH, DIETER WHO IS THE SENIOR PLANNER, IF HE WOULD WE ANALYZE AND EVALUATE THE ROUTES.
AND HE SAID THAT THEY WERE NEVER GOING TO DO SO.
SO THAT IS WHY IT IS, UM, IN YOUR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY.
IF YOU WILL SUBMIT COMMENTS TO LET THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION KNOW THAT THE ROUTER AND EQUITABLE, THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
THEN MR. CHAIR, I DID SEND YOU A MEMO THAT I TYPED FOR COMMISSION LAST NIGHT, THE CDC COMMISSION, UM, AND I ALSO SENT IT TO A COMMISSIONER GREENBURG, NO OFFENSE TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
I WAS JUST RUNNING OUT OF TIME.
AND THE TWO OF YOU WERE IN MY INBOX REAL QUICK.
SO THE STAFF, WE WOULD FORWARD IT TO THE REST OF THE MEMBERS.
I THINK THEY WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL.
AND SO THE LINKS TO THE ORANGE LINE AND BLUE LINE ARE THERE AS WELL.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MY BLEND MANS THE METHODS TIME, AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE SO EXTENSIVE AS ALL OF COURSE.
AND THANK YOU, MS. JOSEPH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO BE WITH US AND SHARING THAT WITH US.
I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT, UM, I ACTUALLY APPRECIATE YOU NOT SENDING IT TO EVERY COMMISSIONER'S EMAIL BECAUSE THAT OPENS UP A CAN OF WORMS, BUT I DID TAKE, UH, THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU SENT US.
UM, I FORWARDED IT TO LYNN CARTER, THE LIAISON AT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT WORKS WITH US AND HELPS US, AND SHE'LL BE ABLE TO DISTRIBUTE, UH, THAT MEMO TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS SO THEY CAN REVIEW IT AS WELL.
I LOVE YOU GET TO STAY FOR THE COMMISSION WHO DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF SEEING THE SLIDES RIGHT NOW, BUT I ACTUALLY SUBMITTED THE CHARTS FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE 24 TO 30 YEARS.
UM, AND I'M NOT SURE I THINK I PUT IT IN THERE, BUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND MANY IN 2019, THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSION QUIP, WE WERE ALL A PROXIMATELY 1.3 TO FOUR MILES AWAY IN NORTHEAST AUSTIN.
UM, THEY HAD NINE PROJECTS AND THERE WAS EVEN A FIVE MILE RADIUS FROM THEM, UH, THE PROJECT IN SOUTHEAST AUSTIN.
AND SO IT'S JUST DISINGENUOUS.
THERE WAS A, UM, THIS IS MY LAST TIME AND I DON'T WANT ME TO BE TOO LONG WINDED.
THERE IS, UM, UH, AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING SEARCH TOOL THAT YOU CAN USE, AND IT SHOWS WHERE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ARE WITHIN HALF A MILE OF THE CORRIDOR.
BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THREE OF THE NORTHEAST METRO RAPID BUSES WERE ELIMINATED.
SO THE CORRIDORS ARE THERE AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS THERE THAT'S DISINGENUOUS BECAUSE THAT NORTH LAMAR, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK AT SAMSUNG, THE APPLE THAT WAS ELIMINATED, BUT THAT'S STILL A MAJOR CORRIDOR IN THE 30 YEAR PLAN, YOU JUST HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LOOK AT IT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT AND RECOGNIZE THAT NORTHEAST, THE 180 3 IS, UH, IS REALLY SUBSTANDARD SERVICE, EXCEPT I WILL TELL YOU THAT WITH THE SOCCER, UM, THE ADVENT OF FC SOCCER, THE BUS ROUTES THAT I WAS FOUGHT SO HARD FOR 3 92 AND 3 83 TO LIFELINE, BUT THEY WILL ACTUALLY RUN THOSE BUSES 20 MINUTES AND EVERY 15 MINUTES FOR THE SOCCER GAMES, BUT NOT FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO WORK.
BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT AND FOR THE MEMBERS TO KNOW THAT I ALSO PUT, UM, THE INFORMATION FROM THE SURVEYS THAT WE COLLECTED WAY BACK IN 2016.
SO THEY WOULD KNOW THE SYSTEM IS ACTUALLY WORKING AS IT WAS DESIGNED FOR THE WHITE MILLENNIALS, BUT OF COURSE THEY DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.
WELL, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION AND FOR YOUR, YOUR LONG, LONG, UH, HISTORY OF ADVOCACY ON THESE KINDS OF ISSUES REALLY APPRECIATED.
AND LIKE I SAID, UM, UH, SENT IT TO LYNN LYNN CARTER WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT WHO SHOULD BE FORWARDING IT TO EVERYONE SO THAT THE REST OF THE COMMISSION CAN REVIEW IT AS WELL.
UM, BUT REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TAKING THE TIME AND SPEAKING WITH US, MS. JOSEPH, AND I APPRECIATE IT, MR. CHERRY, YOU KNOW, THE ONE THING I WOULD JUST ASK YOU WHEN YOU'RE
[00:20:01]
CONSIDERING YOUR, UM, YOU KNOW, THE STATEMENT IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS JUST SAYING EQUITY AT NAUSEUM, DOESN'T MAKE IT EQUITABLE.AND THAT IS WHAT UNFORTUNATELY HAS BEEN THE TREND WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
IT'S BEEN, EVERYTHING HAS EQUITY DIVERSITY, BUT WHEN YOU JUST LOOK AT THE DATA AND YOU LOOK AT THE BUS ROUTES, YOU JUST HAVE TO PULL OUT A SYSTEM MAP AND YOU CAN SEE 60 MINUTES AND BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS AND 10 TO 12, YOU KNOW, IN SOUTHWEST AND CENTRAL.
I MEAN, THAT IS REALLY WHAT ALL THE SENATORS, UM, IS.
I JUST USED CAPITOL METRO SYSTEM.
AND I DIDN'T HAVE TO JUST SAY BLACK AND WHITE.
I JUST TOLD THEM THAT 60 WAS WHERE THE BLACK CHILDREN, 10 TO 12, AND THEN IT WAS HALF OF THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE PANDEMIC.
SO IT'S PRETTY BLACK AND WHITE AND THEY DON'T HIDE IT.
SO ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE TO THE MOMMY.
THANK YOU AGAIN, MS. JOSEPH, UM, YOU WILL, UH, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AT A FUTURE MEETING.
UM, BUT, UH, I HOPE YOU HAVE A GOOD EVENING, NONETHELESS.
UM, SO BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE REST OF OUR AGENDA, A COUPLE OF THINGS, UM, SO VICE-CHAIR, OR HURRY IS GOING TO BE RICKY'S ABSENT, BUT HE WANTED TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS KNOWN THAT HE WAS RECUSING FROM AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR AND ITEM ONE C RELATED TO COMPLAINT FILED BY OLIVIA OVERTURN AGAINST MAYOR PRO TEM HARPER, MADISON, AND OUR COMMISSIONER DANBURG HAS DECIDED TO ABSTAIN FROM PARTICIPATING IN AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR AND ITEM ONE C AS WELL.
UM, SO, UH, I'LL KIND OF DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT ITEM ONCE WE GET TO IT.
UM, IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK, YES, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ACTUALLY
[1.EXECUTIVE SESSION]
TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION TO TAKE UP THREE ITEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 5, 5, 1 0.07.
ONE OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION WILL CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ON LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING.
THE COMMISSION MAY GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS A, A COMPLAINT FILED BY JOSEPH CASINO AGAINST ANA AUTO SWINDLER, WHICH COMPLAINT ALLEGES VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO DEATHS TO CAMPAIGN FINANCE SECTIONS TWO TO 23 AND TWO TO 26 B COMPLAINTS FILED BY MARK LITTLEFIELD AGAINST STEVE AUSTIN NOW, WHICH ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODE CHAPTER, THE CITY CODE SECTIONS TWO TO 23 AND TWO TO 26, AND THEN SEE A COMPLAINT FILED ON MAY 17TH, 2021 BY OLIVIA OVERTURN AGAINST MAYOR PRO TEM, NATASHA HARPER, MADISON WITH THE LEGENDS VIOLATION CITY CODE SECTION 2, 2 1 B AND E, AND THEN SEVERAL SECTIONS OF CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO DASH SEVEN, WHICH RELATES TO ETHICS AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THE ITEMS ANNOUNCED HEARING AND SEEING YOUR NUN PERMISSION? WE'LL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE UP BOTTOM A FIRST? UM, OH, THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, UH LET'S SO IF YOU'RE LEVEL YEAH, NO, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK, UM, UH, IF IT'S, IT MAY BE MORE CONVENIENT TO TAKE, UH, ITEMS B AND C FIRST IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION SO THAT YOU CAN JUMP IN AND ADVISE US, AND THEN WE'LL GET LYNN TO ADVISE US ON A, UM, SO GREAT.
THANKS FOR, UH, THANKS FOR THE HEADS-UP ON THAT.
SO SEEING NO OBJECTIONS AND HEARING NO OBJECTIONS, THEN THE COMMISSION WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THE TIME IS 6:30 PM AND COMMISSIONER, AS A REMINDER, YOU WILL LEAVE THIS MEETING IN WEBEX, GO BACK TO THE EMAIL AND THEN FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND JOIN THAT MEETING.
AND I WILL SEE YOU ALL ON THE OTHER SIDE.
ALL RIGHT, I'LL WAIT FOR COMMISSIONER DANBURG TO COME BACK TO CAMERA AND THEN WE WILL JUMP BACK INTO OPEN SESSION.
[00:25:12]
HI THERE.IN THE MEANTIME, I WILL GET US BACK INTO OPEN SESSION.
SO WE ARE OUT OF CLOSED SESSION.
WE TOOK UP AND DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO A COMPLAINT FILED BY JOSEPH CASINO AGAINST ALDO SWINGER, WHICH COMPLAINT ALLEGES VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODES.
SECTIONS TWO DASH TWO DASH 2 3 2 DASH TWO DASH TWO SIX B COMPLAINTS FILED BY MARK LITTLEFIELD AGAINST STEVE AUSTIN.
NOW, WHICH ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODE SECTIONS TWO DASH 2 2 2 3 AND TWO DASH TWO DASH TWO SIX IN A COMPLAINT FILED BY OLIVIA OVER TURF AGAINST MAYOR PRO TEM TO TOUCH HER HARPER, MADISON, WHICH ALLEGED VIOLATION OF CITY CODE SECTION TWO DASH ONE AND SEVERAL SECTIONS CHAPTER TWO, DESKS SEVEN.
UM, THERE WAS A SLIGHT ERROR, UH, AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING.
UM, I HAD SAID THAT, UH, DUE TO ATX SENSE, LIMITED CAPACITY THAT WE WEREN'T BEING BROADCAST LIVE ON ATX AND IT TURNS OUT THAT WE ARE ON ATX AND THREE.
ATX N UM, AND WITH THAT, UH, WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY, WE'LL JUMP INTO OUR NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH I BELIEVE AT THE TIME, MAYBE YOU DID.
I THINK I SAID IT WAS 8 0 3, UH, WHENEVER WE GOT OUT OF OUR CLOSED SESSION OR BACKDOOR OPEN SESSION EITHER.
AND I SAID THAT OPEN SESSION AS WELL.
IT IS NOW 8 0 4 FOR THE SAKE OF THE RECORDING.
UM, WE ARE IN OPEN SESSION AGAIN, SO WITHOUT OBJECTION, UM, WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO OUR NEXT
[2. PRELIMINARY HEARING Discussion and possible action regarding the following: A complaint filed by Joseph Cascino against Otto Swingler, which complaint alleges violations of City Code Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance) Sections 2-2-23 (Political Committees) and 2-2-26 (Filing Campaign Finance Report Data) of Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance).]
ITEM ON THE AGENDA.IT'S A PRELIMINARY HEARING A COMPLAINT BY JOSEPH CASINO AGAINST AUTO SWINDLER, WHICH COMPLAINT ALLEGES VAC CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATIONS SPECIFICALLY, I THINK TWO DASH TWO DASH 2 3 2 DASH TWO DASH TWO SIX.
AND WILL THE PARTIES PLEASE ANNOUNCE WHO IS APPEARING, UM, FOR THE COMMISSION? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDENT ARE HERE AND ANNOUNCE THEMSELVES ACCORDINGLY.
UH, THIS IS JOSEPH CASINO, UH, THE COMPLAINANT.
HELLO, MR. CASINO, AND TWO RESPONDENT, UM, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT.
IS THAT YOU? YES, THIS IS ERIC HOPI, ELLA FOR RESPONDENT, AND ALSO, UH, RESPONDENT IS IN ATTENDANCE AS WAS GREAT.
UH, MR. SWINDLER, AND THANK YOU, MR. PILA, UM, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT.
HOW DO I PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME? I'M SORRY.
UM, OKAY, WELL, UM, I'M HAPPY TO, UH, BRIEFLY GO OVER THE PROCEDURES, UM, IN A PRELIMINARY HEARING, IF YOU'D LIKE, UM, I BELIEVE THAT BOTH COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDENT SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN A NOTICE OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING THAT INCLUDED THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, UM, AND KIND OF THE PARAMETERS FOR HOW THE PRESENTATIONS ARE GOING TO GO.
UM, I AM HAPPY TO, IF YOU DIDN'T, I SEE SOME LOOKS, I'M HAPPY TO DO A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT WHAT'S IN STORE IN A PRELIMINARY HEARING, UM, AND A REMINDER TO MUTE YOURSELF IF YOU'RE NOT TALKING, JUST SO THAT WE MINIMIZE FEEDBACK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE COMMISSIONERS PARTIES, EVERYONE ALIKE.
UM, SO A PRELIMINARY HEARING, UM, THE QUESTION BEFORE THE COMMISSION IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
UM, AND IF THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED, UM, WHETHER WE GO TO A FINAL HEARING OR IF IT'S UNCONTESTED AND THE RESPONDENT ADMITS THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION, WHAT THE APPROPRIATE SANCTIONS ARE.
THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS AT A PRELIMINARY HEARING.
UM, BOTH THE COMPLAINANT AND THE RESPONDENT ARE A LOT OF 10 MINUTES FOR A PRESENTATION.
UM, AND AT THE END OF THAT 10 MINUTES, UM, COMMISSIONERS AT THE END OF EACH 10 MINUTE PRESENTATION, RATHER AT THE END OF BOTH 10 MINUTE PRESENTATION.
SO COMPLAINANT WILL HAVE 10 MINUTES.
RESPONDENT HAS 10 MINUTES, AND THEN THE COMMISSIONERS ARE OPEN TO ASK QUESTIONS OF EACH PARTY.
UH, THERE'S NO CROSS EXAMINATION.
UM, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO POSE TO THE OTHER PARTY, YOU CAN ASK THE COMMISSION, UH, AND
[00:30:01]
THE COMMISSION THEN IN TURN, IF THEY THINK IT'S AN INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION, CAN POSE THAT TO THE OPPOSING PARTY, BUT THERE'S NO KIND OF CROSS EXAMINATION ALLOWED.UM, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF LYNN, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE YOU JUMP IN IF I'M MISSING A KIND OF IMPORTANT KEY THING JUST FOR THE SAKE OF EVERYONE'S UNDERSTANDING, BUT THAT'S KIND OF THE GIST OF IT.
LEN CARTER, UH, ATTORNEY FOR THE COMMISSION, I WILL JUST ADD THAT THE COMMISSION HAS THE OPTION OF IF THERE IS AN ADMISSION, THERE'S ESSENTIALLY NO CONTEST ABOUT THE VIOLATIONS.
THE COMMISSION COULD DETERMINE SANCTIONS AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, OR IT COULD CHOOSE TO PROCEED TO FINAL HEARING.
UM, IT HAS BOTH THOSE OPTIONS, RIGHT.
THEN, UH, SECRETARY LEARNER IS GOING TO BE KEEPING TIME FOR US.
UM, SHE'LL I THINK SHE WAS DOING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, UM, 10 MINUTES.
UM, AND SO, UH, SHE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN I THINK WE'RE GETTING CLOSE OR, UM, YEAH.
THAT'S HOW WE, HOW WE USUALLY DO IT.
I DON'T WANT TO INTERRUPT Y'ALL SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE CLOCK.
AND SO I JUST ASK YOU TO TRY TO WATCH, IF NOT, UM, I'LL, ONCE YOU TAKE A BREAK AFTER THE 10 MINUTES ENDS, I'LL TRY TO LET YOU KNOW THAT YOUR TIME IS UP.
WELL, YOU CAN FINISH YOUR THOUGHT OR YOUR SENTENCE, BUT WE'LL TRY TO KEEP IT TO 10, UM, AS BEST WE CAN.
SO WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, MR. CASINO IS THE COMPLAINANT.
I LEFT 10 MINUTES AND WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, YOU CAN START.
MY NAME IS JOE CASINO AND I AM A STUDENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, AND I'M ACTIVE IN LOCAL CAMPAIGNS.
I WON'T NEED ALL 10 MINUTES NOR DO I HAVE ANY SORT OF FANCY POWERPOINT, BUT I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO ROADMAP MY COMPLAINTS.
BACK IN LATE MARCH, A FRIEND OF MINE SENT ME A SCREENSHOT OF A GENTLEMAN NAMED WALT FERGUSON'S FACEBOOK POSTS, SOLICITING FUNDS FOR A PRO PROP B BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN, UH, AFTER ACTUALLY GOING TO THE LINK I SAW THERE WAS A FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN CONNECTED TO A CITY ELECTION THAT WAS ORGANIZED BY MR. SWINDLER, AS WELL AS A JOHN HENRY SWINDLER AND A KENDALL BROWN AFTER ACTUALLY GOING TO THE LINK.
I SAW THAT THERE WAS A FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN CONNECTED TO A CITY ELECTION, UM, YOU KNOW, ORGANIZED BY THESE, THESE THREE GENTLEMEN.
AND AT THE TIME THAT I CHECKED, UH, IT HAD RAISED OVER $25,000 OUT OF A 30,000 GOAL.
THERE WAS NO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF ANY KIND, AND SOME OF THE DONATIONS WERE LISTED AS ANONYMOUS, WHICH NOT ONLY VIOLATES SECTIONS TWO DASH TWO SECTIONS IN CHAPTER TWO DASH TWO OF THE CITY CODE, SPECIFICALLY CHAPTER TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 AND 33 BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF DISCLOSURE AND IT'S ANONYMOUS SOURCES AS WELL AS 23 AND 26, DUE TO THE APPARENT LACK OF A TREASURER'S REPORT FILED FOR SOMETHING CONNECTED TO A CITY ELECTION.
IT ALSO VIOLATES CHAPTER 2 50, 2 OF THE STATE ELECTION CODE.
UM, I MIGHT BE YOUNG, BUT I KNOW THAT THE VERY FIRST THING ANYONE MUST DO IN ANY CAMPAIGN OR, UM, IN ANY PACK OF ANY KIND IS TO FILE A TREASURER'S REPORT.
UH, IT'S NOT ONLY IN THE CITY CODE, BUT IT'S STRAIGHT UP STATE LAW.
UH, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, MR. SWINDLER HAS NO PAC REGISTERED WITH THE CITY CLERK OR WITH THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION.
ADDITIONALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. FERGUSON, THE, UH, GENTLEMAN WHO POSTED THE LINK THAT KIND OF TIPPED ME OFF TO THIS WAS ACTING IN A PRIVATE CAPACITY, UH, OR WAS HIMSELF CONNECTED TO THE GROUP PUSHING THESE BILLBOARDS.
BUT IF HE WAS CONNECTED, HE WAS SIMULTANEOUSLY SOLICITING FUNDS FOR SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW PACK IN THE FACEBOOK POST AND QUESTION, WHICH ABSENT A SWORN STATEMENT AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER TWO DASH TWO DASH 32, SUBSECTION B IS A VIOLATION, UH, ON HIS PART UPON LOOKING BACK AT THE GOFUND ME SEVERAL DAYS LATER, THE FUNDRAISER HAD BEEN QUOTE THE ACTIVATED BY THE ORGANIZER, UH, BUT SAID THAT IT HAD RAISED ITS $30,000 GOAL.
UH, WHILE I HAVE A SCREENSHOT OF THE DEACTIVATED FUNDRAISER STANDING, IT HAD REACHED ITS GOAL AND THAT THE $30,000 HAD BEEN RAISED.
I REGRETFULLY DID NOT TAKE ONE WHILE THE FUNDRAISER WAS STILL ACTIVE, UM, SHOWING THESE ANONYMOUS DONATIONS AND THE LACK OF DISCLOSURE, UH, AS MENTIONED ALL OF THAT PREVIOUS INFORMATION WAS HIDDEN NOW.
UM, UH, UM, SO NONETHELESS THOUGH, UM, IF YOU GOOGLE, UH, MR. SWINDLERS ORIGINAL GOFUNDME ME LINK TODAY, I'M CLICKING ON IT IS A 4 0 4 ERROR, BUT IT STILL READS IN DESCRIPTION ON GOOGLE QUOTE.
I HAVE SPENT $10,000 OF MY OWN MONEY CREATING ARTWORK AND PRINTING VINYL FOR BLANK.
AND THEN IT ENDS THOUGH THE ORIGINAL FUNDRAISER HAS, UM, BEEN DEACTIVATED.
AND MY VIEW IT IS WITHIN THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR OPEN KNOWLEDGE OF WHERE THE RAISE $30,000
[00:35:01]
WINS AND WHO PROVIDED IT.I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COMMITTEE HAS THE POWER TO ALTER, UM, UH, COMPLAINTS TO BETTER FIT, UH, OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE.
AND IT SEEMS THAT MY COMPLAINT HAS BEEN, UH, CHANGED TO SECTIONS TWO DASH TWO DASH 23 AND TWO DASH TWO DASH 26.
THAT'S COMPLETELY FINE WITH ME.
UH, I'M NOT BY ANY MEANS AN EXPERT, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AUSTIN'S MODEL CAMPAIGN FINANCE RULES, THE ACTIONS BY MR. SWINDLER WARRANT LOOKING INTO BY THIS BODY, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO SEND OVER WHATEVER SCREENSHOTS OR SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION I HAVE AND ANSWER ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS.
I WANT TO JUST VERY BRIEFLY CLARIFY SOMETHING.
I HAD ACTUALLY MADE AN ERROR IN DESCRIBING THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.
UM, THE COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE THE POWER TO KIND OF TAILOR TO DIFFERENT KIND OF, SO THE ORIGINAL CHAPTERS SECTIONS OF CITY CODE THAT YOU HAD INITIALLY INDICATED IN YOUR COMPLAINT, THOSE ARE THE THAT'S THE COMPLAINT BEFORE US.
THE RESPONDENT WAS CONFUSED BY THAT EITHER.
UM, UH, MISSTATEMENT ON MY PART AS TO WHICH CITY CODE PROVISIONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S THOSE THAT WERE IN THE COMPLAINT THAT YOU FILED.
UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CASINO.
WE'LL GO TO RESPONDENT NOW FOR 10 MINUTES.
UM, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT, ARE YOU GOING TO BE SPEAKING FOR THE 10 MINUTES OR IS THIS YES.
UH, IT PROBABLY WON'T BE THE ENTIRE 10 MINUTE PERIOD.
UH, WE DO HAVE A POWERPOINT TO SHARE.
CAN YOU ALL SEE THAT YOU CAN? YES.
WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, UM, UH, UH, HEARING OUR RESPONSE, UH, AND OUR REASONS FOR THIS, THE COMPLAINT AGAINST, UH, MR. SWINDLER THAT WAS RAISED BY MR. CASINO AS A, THE CHAIR NOTED THE AGENDA FOR THE MEETING TONIGHT DID NOT STATE THE ACTUAL REASONS, UH, UH, CORRECTLY FOR THE COMPLAINT OR THAT CITY CODES, UH, PROVISIONS THAT WERE ALLEGED TO BE VIOLATED.
HOWEVER, THE NOTICE THAT WE RECEIVED DID CORRECT FROM, UH, MS. LYNN CARTER, WHO'S YOUR COUNSEL DID CORRECTLY STATE THOSE.
UM, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL WILL HAVE TO WORK ON AND DECIDE WHETHER PROPER NOTICE WAS GIVEN FOR THIS MEETING, UH, BECAUSE IT DID NOT NOTE THE ACTUAL, UH, PROVISIONS THAT WERE RAISED, UH, IN THE PUBLIC NOTICE THAT WAS GIVEN FOR THIS MEETING.
BUT NEVERTHELESS, I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE SPECIFICS OF THE COMPLAINT, UH, AND, UM, AND I, AND, UH, WE'LL START FIRST OF ALL, WITH THE FIRST ALLEGED VIOLATION.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN FRONT OF YOU, UH, YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THAT COMPLAINT.
UH, BUT THE FIRST ALLEGATION IS, UH, AS MR. CASTIANO MENTIONED THAT THE GOFUND ME SOLICITATION DID NOT HAVE THE DISCLAIMER REQUIRED BY SECTION TWO DASH TWO DASH 33 OF THE CITY CODE.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I WILL NOTE THAT WE WILL SHOW, UH, THAT GOFUNDME DID NOT CHARGE FOR THIS PAGE.
UH, IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE GOFUND ME SYSTEM, IT IS A, UH, WEB BASED SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE AT NO CHARGE TO, UH, POST NEEDS, UH, THAT THEY HAVE, UH, FOR FUNDRAISING PURPOSES.
AND THOSE FUNDS ARE THEN BECOME THE PROPERTY.
THE PERSON WHO IS RAISING THOSE, THOSE FUNDS, THERE IS NO CHARGE BY THE WEBSITE FOR THE SOLICITATION.
UH, AND HE MENTIONED THIS FACEBOOK POST THAT WAS MADE BY MR. FERGUSON AT FIRST WAS NOT MADE BY THE RESPONDENT.
AND SO HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OR INVOLVEMENT IN THE POST.
UM, BUT IT ALSO WAS WITHOUT CHARGE AS YOU WELL KNOW, FACEBOOK IS NOT, UH, DOES NOT CHARGE FOR POSTS, UH, IN SOME HERE, NO PERSON MADE ANY POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO RESPOND IN AN EXCESS OF $500 SHIFT FUND.
THE GO FUND ME SOLICITATION PAGE BECAUSE IT HAD NO CHARGE.
THEREFORE THE $500 EXPENDITURE LIMIT THAT IS IN TWO DASH TWO, TWO DASH 33 WAS NOT REACHED AND NO DISCLAIMER WAS REQUIRED FOR THAT PAGE.
AND YOU'LL NOTE IN TWO DASH TWO DASH 33 SUB BEET SUB D.
UH, IT DOES NOT APPLY TO, UH, ITEMS THAT COST LESS THAN $500 MOVING ON TO THE SECOND ALLEGED VIOLATION.
UH, AND THIS WAS THE FIRST ALLEGATION REGARDING TWO DASH TWO DASH 32, WHICH DEALS WITH DIRECT EXPENDITURES.
NOW, FIRST NOTE, UH, HIS, HIS ALLEGATION WAS THAT SOME CONTRIBUTIONS WERE ANONYMOUS.
I WILL NOTE THAT TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 ONLY APPLIES TO DIRECT EXPENDITURES, AND THERE WAS NO DIRECT EXPENDITURE THAT WAS MADE, UH,
[00:40:01]
UH, TO BENEFIT ANY BALLOT PROPOSITION THAT, THAT WAS THERE.IT WAS IN FACT, THE FUNDS THAT WERE COLLECTED WERE, UH, CONTRIBUTED, UH, TO, UH, SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, UH, THE PLAN ORIGINALLY BY MR. SWINGER WAS TO, UH, ENGAGE IN A BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN, BUT ONCE HE REALIZED HE COULD NOT EFFECTIVELY DO SO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW, HE THEN DONATED THOSE FUNDS, WHICH SAVE AUSTIN NOW REPORT IT AND NEVER MADE A DIRECT EXPENDITURE.
UH, BUT NEVERTHELESS, NO CONTRIBUTIONS WERE ANONYMOUS WHILE THE PAGE ITSELF ALLOWS DONORS TO DESIGNATE WHETHER THEIR NAME SHOWS UP ON THE PAGE.
UH, ALL DONOR NAMES WERE PROVIDED TO THE FUNDRAISER, UH, TO, UH, TO RESPONDENT.
UH, AND EVEN THOUGH HE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DO SO UNDER CITY CODE, HE PROVIDED THE NAMES OF HIS CONTRIBUTORS TO SAY, BOSTON PACK UPON THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL, UH, AFTER HE ENGAGED COUNSEL.
AND SO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, SAVE AUSTIN NOW IS IN THE PROCESS OF AMENDING THEIR REPORT TO, UH, UH, TO DISCLOSE THOSE TO THE PUBLIC, BUT HE DID FULFILL, UH, ANY OBLIGATIONS HE WOULD HAVE UNDER STATE LAW.
AND OF COURSE THERE WERE NO OBLIGATIONS UNDER, UH, THE CITY CODE THAT IS ENFORCEABLE BY THE AUSTIN ETHICS COMMISSION TO, UH, TO PROVIDE THOSE NAMES OF THOSE CONTRIBUTORS.
SO, UH, UH, IN, IN, IN ANY CASE, SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES AND WHAT THE DEFINITION OF THAT IS.
UM, IT, A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE IS DEFINED IN TWO DASH TWO DASH 31, UH, AND IT IS AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION, UH, THAT HAS MADE WITHOUT THE PRIOR CONSENT COOPERATION, STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION OR CONSULTATION, UH, BETWEEN A CANDIDATE, UH, OR A PERSON OR ENTITY MAKING THAT EXPENDITURE.
UH, AND, UH, WITHOUT ANY SHARING OF MATERIAL INFORMATION, IN THIS CASE, HE DIDN'T MAKE ANY DIRECT EXPENDITURES.
HE MERELY POSTED A FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN, REALIZED THAT HE COULDN'T ACTUALLY CONDUCT THAT CAMPAIGN.
AND THEN, UH, IN, IN GOOD FAITH, UH, DONATED THOSE FUNDS, UH, TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW WHO ENGAGED IN WHATEVER ACTIVITIES THAT THEY, THEY ENGAGED IN WITH THE, UM, UH, WITH THE FUNDS THAT THEY RAISED FOR THEIR BALLOT PROPOSITION CAMPAIGN.
SO IT'S, THERE WERE NO REQUIREMENTS ON, UH, MR. SWINDLER TO REPORT DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES.
HE ALSO DID NOT, UH, UH, FORM A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE.
AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN JUST, JUST A MOMENT.
UM, JUST A QUICK ASIDE ON GO FUND ME, GO FUND ME.
DONATIONS ARE A, ARE THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE RESPONDENT.
THEY WERE NOT ACTUALLY, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT HOW THE PLATFORM IS SET UP, THEY, ONCE THEY'RE RECEIVED, THEY ARE THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE RECIPIENT.
THEY'RE CONSIDERED GIFTS FOR FEDERAL INCOME TAX PURPOSES, AS IT STATES ON, ON THE GOFUND MAY SITE, UH, UNLESS THEY'RE ACCEPTED IN EXCHANGE FOR GOODS OR SERVICES, IN WHICH CASE THIS CASE, THEY WERE NOT, UH, THEY ALSO, UH, WERE PROPERLY REPORTED AS A CONTRIBUTION BY THE RESPONDENT TO, UH, SAVE AUSTIN NOW PACK WHEN THEY MADE THEM, UM, HE, HE REFERENCED THE COMPLAINANT REFERENCED, UH, THIS TEAM THAT WAS SET UP WHEN THEY WERE, HE SET UP THE FUNDRAISER.
HOWEVER, MR. SWINDLER DID NOT, UH, SEEK ANY APPROVAL OR WAS NOT REQUIRED TO EITHER BY, UH, GOFUND ME OR INTERACTION BY THE TEAM MEMBERS.
HE DIDN'T NOTIFY THEM PRIOR TO NAMING THEM AS TEAM MEMBERS, NOR DID HE OBTAIN ANY CONSENT TO DO SO.
HE MERELY NAMED HIS RELATIVES AND THAT'S WHO, WHO WAS, UH, LISTED IN THE EVENT.
HE WAS UNABLE TO PROCEED WITH THE FUNDRAISER DUE TO ANY UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IN NO WAY, HE, HE DID WORK IN CONCERT WITH THEM OR THEY WITH HIM, UH, WHICH IS FUNDAMENTAL TO THE DEFINITION UNDER STATE LAW.
AND EVEN THOUGH THE CITY CODE DOESN'T DEFINE WHAT A POLITICAL COMMITTEE IS.
UH, AND SO THE SHORT ANSWER FOR GOFUND MADE YOU USE THIS SITE TO RAISE MONEY FOR ANY CAUSE THAT, THAT YOU WOULD WANT, IT'S NOT A POLITICAL FUNDRAISING SITE.
UH, YOU CAN RAISE MONEY FOR A CHARITY.
YOU CAN RAISE MONEY FOR ANY EXPENSES THAT YOU HAVE, AND THE TERMS OF THAT WEBSITE STATE, EXPLICITLY THAT THEY BECOME THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE RESPONDENT.
AND SO HE THEN REPORTED WHAT HE KNEW, UM, UH, TO, UH, UH, TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW PACK.
AND THEN LATER ALSO, UH, FULFILLED ANY ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS HE MIGHT HAVE UNDER STATE LAW BY DISCLOSING THOSE NAMES AND, UH, UM, IN AMOUNTS AND, AND, UH, AND DATES OF CONTRIBUTIONS TO, UH, THE RECIPIENT PACK,
[00:45:02]
HIS FINAL VIOLATION THAT HE, UH, THAT, THAT MR. CASTIANO ALLEGES IS, UH, ANOTHER ALLEGATION REGARDING TWO DASH TWO DASH 32.WELL, UH, FIRST OF ALL, HE SAID THAT HE SAW A SWORN STATEMENT OF NON COORDINATION WAS REQUIRED BY MR. FERGUSON.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, MR. FERGUSON HAD NO COOPERATION WITH MR. UH, SWINDLER, UH, RESPONDENT HAD NO, UH, DID NOT SOLICIT THAT FACEBOOK POST BY MR. FERGUSON AND HAD NO INVOLVEMENT IN IT.
AND SO THERE WAS NO STATEMENT OF NON COORDINATION REQUIRED.
FIRST OF ALL, CAUSE THERE WAS NO DIRECT EXPENDITURE.
THIS IS DEALS WITH THE DIRECT EXPENDITURE SECTION, UM, RESPONDENT, UH, AS WE STATED EARLIER, RAISED FUNDS AS AN INDIVIDUAL SET UP THIS CAMPAIGN AND THEN DONATED THOSE FUNDS ONCE HE WAS NOT ABLE TO EXECUTE ON THAT CAMPAIGN.
UM, AND THEN IN PARTICULAR WITH REGARD TO THE COMMISSION RULES, UH, THIS LAST ALLEGATION DOES NOT FOLLOW YOUR COMMISSION RULES, UH, FOR A VALID COMPLAINT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT SPECIFY A DATE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION AND YOUR COMMISSION RULES, UH, ONE B ONE SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT YOU CANNOT CONSIDER A, UH, COMPLAINT THAT DOES NOT ALLEGE A SPECIFIC DATE OF A VIOLATION.
HE IS NOT AN OFFICE HOLDER IS, UH, ALSO NOT A POLITICAL COMMITTEE BECAUSE STATE LAW REQUIRES IN DEFINITION THAT A POLITICAL COMMITTEE HAS TWO OR MORE PERSONS ACTING IN CONCERT WITH THE PRINCIPLE PURPOSE OF ACCEPTING POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS OR MAKING POLITICAL EXPENDITURES.
AND IT DOES NOT, EXPRESSLY DOES NOT INCLUDE A GROUP COMPRISED EXCLUSIVELY OF TWO OR MORE INDIVIDUAL, UH, PERSONS, UH, AS WELL.
UH, AND SO HE RAISED MONEY FOR AN EFFORT.
ARE WE AT TIME, UH, WE'RE OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS? UM, I WANT TO, BEFORE WE, UH, LEAVE THE PRESENTATION, WE ARE REQUIRED TO NOTICE IF WE DO GO TO A, A FORMAL HEARING, UH, THE WITNESSES THAT WE NOTICED TO BE CALLED, AND THAT WOULD BE MR. SWINDLER, MR. FERGUSON, MR. UH, SWINDLERS, UH, BROTHER, AND ALSO, UH, KENDALL BROWN.
UH, MR. O'KEEFFE, UM, SO WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS, I AM HAPPY TO, UH, OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS FOR EITHER COMPLAINANT OR RESPONDENT.
UM, AND I SEE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG'S HAND FIRST, SO GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
UM, THE FIRST IS FOR THE COMPLAINANT.
UM, SO ARE YOU NOT MAKING A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE BILLBOARDS, THAT TYPE OF DISCLOSURE ON THEM? UH, NO.
I JUST SAW THESE, UH, UM, ON THE GO FUND ME FOR A BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN, BUT, UM, THIS IS NOT RELATED TO WHAT WAS ON THE BILLBOARDS THEMSELVES.
AND THEN, UM, FOR THE RESPONDENT, UM, DID MR. SWINDLER DONATE $30,000? UM, DID I DONATE THE MONEY TO SAY BOSTON NOW? YEAH.
THE WHOLE, DID YOU COLLECTED, DID YOU COLLECT $30,000 JUST IN YOUR OWN NAME? SO ALL, ALL THE MONEY THAT WAS RAISED ON GO FUNDING, WE, UH, DONATED THE ENTIRETY, UH, TO, UH, SAY BOSTON NOW, PAC IN AN EFFORT TO FOLLOW THE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE LAWS.
UM, SO WE DIDN'T CONTRACT FOR PAPER CONSISTENT WITH THE GOFUND MAY, UM, BEING THE PROPERTY OF THE PURSE, PEOPLE WHO COLLECTED IT WERE THOSE NATIONS OWN NAME.
SO, SORRY, IT JUST CUT OUT A TAG-TEAM ON, WE'RE GETTING THE QUESTION.
SO, UM, YOUR LAWYER SAID THAT THE GOFUND MAY, UM, CONTRIBUTIONS ARE THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF WHOEVER COLLECTED THAT.
SO WAS THAT A CONTRIBUTION WHERE ALL WAS ALL THE MONEY CONTRIBUTED IN YOUR NAME? ALL THE MONEY? UH, IN MY NAME, IN MY NAME
[00:50:01]
TO SAY BOSTON VALPACK, AND THEN IN ADDITION TO MY NAME BEING LISTED, UH, AS A CONTRIBUTOR, WE, UH, LISTED ALL OF THE NAMES OF ANYBODY WHO GAVE ME MONEY AND HONESTLY, A PRETTY COMPLICATED SET OF RULES FOR ALL OF US.AND SO WE TRIED TO PROVIDE ALL THE MANS AND DATES AND AMOUNTS, UM, OF ANYBODY WHO'D DONE AIMS TO GET A FUNDING, INCLUDING MONTERREY, SPECIFICALLY THE ANONYMOUS THAT'S JUST ANONYMOUS FOR POSTING ON THERE.
SO I COULD SEE IT UNTIL I HAD A RECORD OF EVERYTHING.
BY THE WAY, I WAS LIKE 101 OR 102 PEOPLE, SOME OF THESE DONATIONS WERE AS SMALL AS 10 BUCKS, 25 BUCKS, YOU KNOW, AS LARGE AS TWO OR 300 BUCKS.
UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY 90,000 PEOPLE SHOWED UP IN OUR CITY TO VOTE, UM, UH, FOR PROPERTY.
AND I THINK THE OVERWHELMING SUPPORT AND SAW THE POLLS WAS, WAS SEEING, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN WE RAISED MONEY FOR THIS EFFORT, I THINK BEING AN AUSTINITE BORN AND RAISED MY WHOLE LIFE HERE, UH, THEN WENT TO AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL AND IN UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS.
SO, UH, AS, AS, AS JOE, UH, YOU KNOW, W WE IN ANYBODY ELSE, SO THANK YOU TURNED OUT TO VOTE, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY THEY VOTED, YOU KNOW, CARED ABOUT THE, THE, UH, UH, OUTCOME OF THIS ELECTION.
I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT ALL THAT.
I THINK YOU'VE ALREADY ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. SWINDLER.
UM, WHEN DID YOU, A COUPLE OF TIMES I'VE HEARD, UM, THE TERMINOLOGY FROM YOUR COUNSEL THAT YOU REALIZED YOU WOULDN'T REACH THE GOAL OF, OF RAISING THE MONEY FOR YOUR BILLBOARD EFFORT.
AT WHAT POINT DID YOU REALIZE THAT AND, AND DECIDE TO DONATE TO SAY BOSTON NOW INSTEAD? UM, I THINK HE WAS REFERRING TO THE, UH, FOLLOWING OF THE RULES FOR POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES.
UM, WE, WE ACTUALLY HAD OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE RESPONSE ON THE GO FUND, ME PAGE.
I, I WAS FRANKLY SHOCKED THAT WE RAISED THAT MUCH MONEY.
UM, I THINK IT WAS JUST AN ISSUE THAT, THAT PEOPLE CARED A LOT ABOUT, UM, AND WERE WILLING TO DONATE, YOU KNOW, 30 GRAND WAS RAISED AND IN 72 HOURS, I DIDN'T EXPECT TO RAISE THAT MUCH MONEY.
UM, IT MEANS, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF PLANNING TO SEND IT TO A FEW PEOPLE THAT MIGHT SHARE THE SAME, YOU KNOW, CONCERN FOR A CITY THAT I DID.
AND, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THANK THANKFUL OBVIOUSLY FOR THEIR DONATIONS, BUT IT WASN'T THE, IT WASN'T THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, I THINK WHAT, UH, ERIC CAPPIELLO WAS REFERRING TO WAS THE ABILITY TO EXECUTE ON THE BILLBOARDS WAS SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT, HEY, LIKE I THINK, YOU KNOW, KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE OF RAISING THIS MONEY, I HAD SOMEBODY TELL ME, HEY, I THINK YOU SHOULD DONATE THIS TO A PACK IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE YOU FOLLOW THE RULES, THE PACK AD, YOU KNOW, PAID FOR BY SAVE AUSTIN NOW, PACK ON ALL THE BILLBOARDS AND INCLUDING THE TOP FIVE DONOR DONOR, UH, DONORS OF SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, JUST LIKE THE SIGNS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SAY.
SO THE INTENTION, UH, DESPITE IT NOW ENDING UP ON THIS, UH, ZOOM CALL, THE ATTENTION WAS IN FACT, ACTUALLY YOU CAN FOLLOW ALL THE RULES.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE RAISED MONEY IN AN EFFORT, YOU KNOW, TO, TO MAKE PEOPLE AWARE OF A LOCAL ELECTION THAT HISTORICALLY SPEAKING, IT'S VERY LOW VOTER TURNOUT.
THE GOAL IS, HEY, IF YOU CARE ABOUT THIS ISSUE, GO VOTE.
UM, AND, UH, YEAH, UH, YOU KNOW, INITIALLY I HAD PLANNED TO CONTRACT FOR BILLBOARDS MYSELF, DO NOT END UP DOING THAT.
UM, SAVE AUSTIN NOW, CONTRACTED THE BILLBOARDS AND, YOU KNOW, PUT THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS, YOU KNOW, PAID FOR ADVERTISING ON BILLBOARDS THEMSELVES.
I GUESS I'M ASKING AT WHAT POINT IN THAT PROCESS, DID YOU PIVOT TO DONATING THE MONEY TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, INSTEAD OF DECIDING TO DO, DO YOUR CONTRACT FOR YOUR OWN BILLBOARDS? WHAT PLENTY OF THE PROCESS? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE, WE RAISED THAT MONEY WITHIN A THREE OR FOUR DAY, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, TIMEFRAME FROM A HUNDRED, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED HUNDRED PEOPLE DONATED.
AND, UH, THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, WITHIN A FEW DAYS, UH, DONATED TO THEIR KIND OF, AS SOON AS WE CLOSED THEIR FUNDING, IT WAS DONE.
WE DONATED IT TO THE, TO THE, TO THE PACK.
MR. DANBURG, IF WE DO GO TO A FINAL HEARING ON THIS, UM, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF AN ONGOING ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AT A DATE, CERTAIN, UH, SAVE AUSTIN NOW WENT FROM BEING 5 0 1 OR C ORGANIZATION TO BEING A PACK.
AND SO IF THOSE, IF THIS GOES FORWARD, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK BOTH THE COMPLAINANT AND THE RESPONDENT TO PROVIDE FOR US, UH,
[00:55:02]
A LITTLE, UH, TOWEL UNDER MORE OR LESS OF ON WHAT DATES THIS HAPPENED ON WHAT DATES THAT HAPPENED SO THAT WE CAN GET IT STRAIGHT IN OUR HEADS AS TO THAT TRANSITION FROM BEING A 5 0 1 EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION TO BEING A PACK DEBRA, JUST TO MAKE SURE I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION IS JOE AND MYSELF, I DON'T THINK EITHER OF US HAD ANY INVOLVEMENT IN SAVE AUSTIN.NOW, ARE YOU JUST TALKING ABOUT MY GO FUND, ME, YOU KNOW, GO BOARD CAMPAIGN DATES, RIGHT? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE DEGREE TO WHICH ON THIS DAY OR THAT DAY YOU WERE IN YOUR MIND, OR IN FACT, IN, IN LAW DONATING TO A 5 0 1 C EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE GROUP VERSUS A PACK.
I DO KNOW THE DATES IN WHICH, UH, PRIOR TO MYSELF, STARTING TO GO FUND ME, SAY BOSTON OUT HAD ALREADY CONVERTED TO A PACK BECAUSE I HAD DONATED IT DONATED TO IT PRIOR TO, UH, SORRY, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, ALL THE WORK THAT, UH, I WAS SO IMPRESSED BY WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
I ACTUALLY, THAT'S WHAT PART OF WHAT MOTIVATED ME TO, TO, TO MAKE THE DEALS I MADE FRANKLY, WAS, OH MAN, I'M GOING TO NEED TO CONTINUE TO RAISE AWARENESS OF THOSE.
SO I, IT DEFINITELY WAS A PAC BY THAT TIME AND, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, JUST SO I CAN CLARIFY AS WELL.
UM, DO YOU NEED ANY SORT OF TIMELINE FOR ME? I MEAN, REALLY, IT WAS JUST LIKE, I SAW THE, I SAW THIS, I THINK MARCH 25TH FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I THINK I FILED THE COMPLAINT APRIL 2ND.
THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT DATE, BUT, UM, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE COMPLAINT IN FRONT OF ME.
I APPRECIATE BOTH OF Y'ALL'S CANDIDNESS ON THIS.
I, UM, AS I SAY, IF WE DO GO FORWARD, I DO WANT TO ACTUALLY GET Y'ALL TO BOTH CHECK DATES AND THEN WE'LL CHECK IT AGAINST THE ACTUAL NORMAL RECORDS.
UH, I WILL NOTE, UH, EVEN THOUGH WE, WE OBVIOUSLY DO NOT THINK THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION THAT OCCURRED, UH, BY, UH, BY, BY RESPONDENT.
HE'S, HE'S MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE THE DATES WHEN HE STARTED THE CAMPAIGN.
I BELIEVE HE, HE DID BY RECOLLECTION THERE.
AND I, I UNDERSTAND, I JUST LOOKED IT UP THAT, UH, THE ACT WAS FORMED IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR.
SO COMMISSIONER KALE, GO AHEAD.
I WAS, SO CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME HOW YOU FOUND OUT THAT TO, UH, COMPLY WITH THE RULES YOU NEEDED TO DONATE IT TO THE SAVE AUSTIN NOW, INSTEAD OF PUTTING IT TOWARD BILLBOARDS? UH, YEAH, JUST, UM, ONE OF MY CONTRIBUTORS SAID, HEY, YOU SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS AND THE RULES AROUND, YOU KNOW, UM, THE RULES AROUND POLITICAL ADVERTISING, YOU KNOW, VERY COMPLICATED.
I THOUGHT IT WAS AS SIMPLE AS, HEY, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO, I WANT TO PAY FOR A SIGN.
AND APPARENTLY IF YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SPEND MORE THAN $500, UH, PERSONALLY, I THINK YOU HAVE TO FORM A PAC, UM, BECAUSE WE HAD RAISED MONEY FOR, I THINK, 17 OR 18 BILLBOARDS AT THE TIME.
UM, SOMEBODY HAD SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT WANNA LOOK INTO RULES AROUND THIS.
I THOUGHT, HEY, I'LL CALL AND SAY, BOSTON.
NOW, PEOPLE, THEY CLEARLY HAVE THE SET UP.
IT SAYS PACK UP IN THERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY, UM, AND THEY WERE HAPPY TO RECEIVE THE DONATIONS, BUT THE IDEA, YOU KNOW, CONTRACTED FOR THE BILLBOARDS, YOU KNOW, I, I THOUGHT I WAS FRANKLY DOING EVERYTHING, UH, AS MUCH ON THE UP AND UP AS POSSIBLE.
AND ALL THE BILLBOARDS DID STAY, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL ADVERTISING AND PAID FOR, BY SAY BOSTON NOW, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY ELSE'S MAYOR ENOUGH.
I THINK IF YOU EVEN A FEW OF THE TOP DONORS TO SAY BOSTON HOUSE NAME.
SO, UH, IN MY MIND, WHEN I GOT THIS COMPLAINT, I WAS KINDA LIKE, MAN, HOW DID I NOT HOLD THE GOALS? LIKE I, I, UH, WAS ABOUT TONIGHT.
I, AND THEN I THOUGHT I WENT TO GREAT WHITES IN ORDER TO, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT INVOLVED WITH POLITICS THAT ARE INTERESTING AND IT JUST LIVES HERE MY WHOLE LIFE AND WANTING TO, TO, TO TRY AND RAISE AWARENESS, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT KIND OF THE EXTENT OF IT.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, THE COMPLAINANT.
IS THAT HOW IT'S PRONOUNCED? YES, SIR.
UM, DO YOU STILL CONTEND THAT THE IDENTITIES OF THE DONORS, UM, ARE HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC VIEW? YES.
AND THAT IS BECAUSE, UM, TWO REASONS, ONE, UM,
[01:00:01]
UH, SO THEY WERE ANONYMOUS AND THERE WERE SOME ANONYMOUS LISTED AT THE TIME AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS THROUGH GOFUNDME, UM, KIND OF SYSTEM, UH, THAT WAS THE CASE.AND THEN SECONDLY, THE WEBSITE HAS BEEN TAKEN DOWN.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE FUNDRAISER ENDED IN THAT THAT HAD KIND OF CLOSED BY THE FIRST WEEK OF APRIL AND SO GOOD.
I, I DON'T, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT YES, SIR.
WHAT, WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE RESPONDENT, FROM THE ATTORNEY AND THE RESPONDENT HIMSELF, IS THAT ALL THOSE NAMES HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED IN FILINGS.
DO YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT? WELL, YES, SIR.
AND I DON'T, I EVEN, IF THAT IS THE CASE, RIGHT? EVEN IF, AS THEY'VE MENTIONED, THEY SENT THE DONATIONS AND NAMES TO SAVE OFTEN ON.
I'M HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR, EVEN IF, BUT FIRST I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU UNDER, IF YOU AGREE THAT THE IDENTITIES OF THOSE DONORS IS NOW A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.
BUT IF IT'S BEEN REPORTED, BUT THE MONEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO THE DONORS, NONETHELESS.
AND I MEAN YOUR COMPLAINT THOUGH, IS IT SIR? NO, BUT I'M, I'M JUST COMMENTING ON WHAT, WHAT YOU STATED TO ME.
AND I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT EVEN IF THE GOFUND ME, ISN'T A POLITICAL FUNDRAISING SITE.
AND EVEN IF THOSE FUNDS BECOME, UH, MR. SWINDLERS PERSONAL PROPERTY, UM, I BELIEVE THAT EVEN EXCEEDS CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.
SO YOU DON'T BELIEVE WHAT EXCEEDS CON MR. SWINGER'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE, THE SAVE AUSTIN NOW PACK.
IF IT, IF IT'S ARGUED THAT THAT IS HIS PERSONAL PAR PROPERTY, THEN YES.
I WOULD BELIEVE THAT THAT EXCEEDS CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN AGAIN, THAT'S NOT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE, CORRECT.
I'M JUST SAYING, WELL, WE CAN'T REALLY CONSIDER COMPLAINTS THAT YOU HAVEN'T BROUGHT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE CLAIMING COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S IF I MIGHT CORRECT A COUPLE OF ISSUES, FIRST OF ALL, THERE, THERE ARE NO LIMITS, UH, WITH REGARD TO, UH, MEASURES.
AND, UH, ALSO I WANT TO ALSO NOTE THAT WE DID PROVIDE THOSE TO, UH, UH, SAY BOSTON NOW.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE FILED AN AMENDED REPORT.
AS OF RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE WORKING TO TRY TO ADD THOSE TO THEIR REPORT AND THEY, THEY HAVE NOT DONE THAT YET OUT OF JUST, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD'S CLEAR, THANK YOU.
JUST TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR, 102 NAMES, 102 ADDRESS IS 102 DATES AND 102 AMOUNTS.
IN ADDITION TO THE SIX HOURS OF ZOOM CALLS, I SPENT MAYBE AN HOURS COMPILING AND ALL THAT, AND IT'S DEFINITELY ACCURATE AND THEY CERTAINLY HAVE A COPY OF IT.
SO THERE'S NO MISSING DATA, BUT MR. SUELA DID FILL HIS OBLIGATION TO, SO IT'S UNDER CITY CODE BY THE WAY AS WELL, WHICH IS WHAT THIS COMMISSION I WANT TO, I WANT TO THANK THE PARTIES REAL QUICK AND JUST REMIND, UM, PARTIES TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED, UM, AND NOT TO KIND OF, UH, IF, IF A QUESTION IS NOT ASKED OF A RESPONDENT OR COMPLAINANT THE OPPOSITE PARTY, UH, SHOULDN'T CHIME IN ON THEIR OWN ACCORD, THEY SHOULD BE WEIGHED.
UH, THEY SHOULD WAIT TO HEAR A QUESTION FROM A COMMISSIONER.
UM, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING INTO CROSS EXAMINATION OR DIRECT EXAMINATION TERRITORY IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.
UH, BUT MR. LEVIN OR COMMISSIONER ELEVEN'S IF YOU HAD, UM, THE QUESTIONS I DIDN'T WANNA INTERRUPT YOU.
OH, NO, I, I THINK I HAVE ASKED ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW.
UM, UH, MISSIONARY COMMISSIONER STANTON, GO AHEAD.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS SUPPORTING YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS THIS CASE WAS THAT, UH, WAS THAT IT WAS ELATED, THE COMMISSION'S, UM, CODE, I GUESS, OR, OR BYLAW, PERHAPS A SECTION ONE B ONE REGARDING, UM, REGARDING, UM, WHAT IS IT A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMPLAINT COMPLAINT REQUIREMENTS THAT IT HAD TO HAVE A DATE? YES.
AND THAT WAS ONLY WITH REGARD TO, UH, THE THIRD ALLEGATION, WHICH DID NOT ALLEGE THE DATE, THE OTHER ONES DID.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND, BUT IS IT THAT, THAT ALLEGATION IS, UM, ALL THREE OF THOSE ALLEGATIONS RESIDE ON ONE COMPLAINT? CORRECT.
AND SO THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THIS, AND MAYBE THIS WAS A QUESTION FOR CHAIR OR SOMEONE ON THE COMMISSION TO CLARIFY FOR ME IS THE DATE THAT THAT IS MENTIONED AS THE COMPLAINT REQUIREMENT IS THE DATE, IS THERE A, CAUSE I GUESS IS WHAT I'M ASKING.
IF, IF THERE ARE THREE ALLEGATIONS AND ONE ALLEGATION DOES NOT HAVE A DATE, DOES THAT, DOES THAT NECESSARILY VIOLATE OUR CODE? SO, UM, I WILL, I'LL LET LYNN
[01:05:01]
CORRECT ME IF I MISSED IT AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WHEN YOU WERE ALWAYS WELCOME TO INTERRUPT ME AND TELL ME WHY I'M WRONG.BUT, UM, I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER.
UM, I THINK THE ARGUMENT'S BEEN MADE THAT THERE IS A COMMISSION RULE THAT SAYS THAT EACH VIOLATION, EACH COMPLAINT NEEDS TO HAVE DATES.
UM, AND IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN FACTOR INTO OUR DELIBERATION ON THIS.
UM, BUT, UH, THE, I THINK I CAN POINT YOU TO THE RULE ITSELF IF YOU'D LIKE TO KIND OF FOLLOW ALONG, I HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO ASK, IS THIS NOT? AND LET ME KNOW CHAIR, IF THIS IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE TIME FOR ME TO ASK A QUESTION, PROCEDURE-WISE THAT NEITHER MR. OPL OR MR. CASINO CAN ANSWER TO NO.
BY ALL MEANS, ASK, ASK AWAY, THIS IS OUR CHANCE.
UM, THERE'S THIS IS OUR Q AND A PERIOD.
THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OF DIRECTED AT THE, UH, PARTIES, BUT IF YOU HAVE A KIND OF CLARIFYING PROCEDURAL QUESTION, UM, YOU CAN ASK ME, ASK, UM, OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND CARTER.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE IF, IF I MAY CONTINUE.
I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, PROCEDURAL, UM, WHICH IS, UM, I THINK IT WAS BOTH MR. CASINO AND MR. OPLS HAD MENTIONED THAT THE MEETING NOTICE HAD REFERENCES INCORRECT INFORMATION REGARDING THIS COMPLAINT.
AND MY QUESTION IS WHAT DOES THAT, WHAT IMPACT DOES AN INCORRECT MEETING NOTICE HAVE ON HOW WE CAN PROCEED WITH BUSINESS AND VOTING AND DECIDING? IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE MEETING NOTICE IS INCORRECT, DOES IT NOTIFY, ARE WE SUPPOSED TO WAIT FOR D TO DELIBERATE AND TO DISCUSS THIS CASE UNTIL THAT MEETING NOTICE IS EITHER CORRECTED OR SENT RE SENT OUT WITH CORRECT INFORMATION, AND THEN WE CONTINUE.
SO, UH, I'M GONNA, I'LL MAKE A, I THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.
I'LL MAKE A CLARIFICATION IN THAT.
I THINK THAT THE NOTICE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE PARTIES HAD THE CORRECT VIOLATES INCITED, BUT THE AGENDA THAT WAS POSTED FOR THIS MEETING DID NOT HAVE THE CORRECT CODE VIOLATIONS.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S THE ARGUMENT THAT COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT WAS MAKING, UM, AS TO WHAT THE EFFECT OF THAT IS.
UM, THAT'S KIND OF ANOTHER THING FOR THE COMMISSIONER CONSIDERING ITS DELIBERATIONS, BUT I'LL LET LYNN, UH, CHIME IN.
UM, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD THERE, I'M HAPPY TO KIND OF GIVE 2 CENTS, BUT, UM, I WANT TO KIND OF GIVE ALL THE ROOM FOR COMMISSIONERS TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE PARTIES WHILE WE HAVE THE CHANCE, BUT WHEN ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT.
UM, SO THE PARTIES RECEIVED PROPER NOTICE THROUGH THEIR PRELIMINARY HEARING NOTICES THAT HAS THE PROPER CODE SECTION CITED.
THE, UM, AGENDA HAD INCORRECT CODE SECTION CITED, BUT IT INCLUDED THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES, THE DATE OF THE COMPLAINT.
AND SO I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER BEING, MEETING THE OPEN MEETING REQUIREMENTS FOR NOTICE.
UM, AND SEPARATELY DEWEY, UH, I MAY, I MAY HOLD OFF AND WAIT UNTIL WE'RE DONE WITH Q AND A, I DON'T WANT TO TRAMPLE ON ANY COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS.
UM, SO I'M GOING TO JUST LEAVE THE FLOOR OPEN FOR A LITTLE BIT LONGER COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE PARTIES OR COUNSEL? OKAY.
I AM SEEING AND HEARING NONE, WHICH MEANS THAT WE KIND OF OPENED THE DOOR TO MOTIONS OR DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM GENERALLY.
SO FLOOR IS OPEN COMMISSIONERS IF ANYONE WANTS TO DISCUSS, UM, OR IS SO INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION.
I FIRST HAVE A PROCEDURAL QUESTION IF I MAY.
UM, SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE ONE DOCUMENT, BUT THERE ARE THREE COMPLAINTS.
UM, I ASSUME THAT WE CAN VOTE, WE CAN VOTE DIFFERENTLY ON THE THREE COMPLAINTS.
WE COULD SAY PROCEED TO FINAL HEARING ON ONE AND NOT THE OTHER TWO OR ANY, ANY MIXTURE OF THAT.
AM I CORRECT? IN THAT UNDERSTANDING? YEAH.
UH, AND IN THE PAST WE HAVE, UM, WE HAVE KIND OF GONE AHEAD ON, UH, WITH LIKE ONE MOTION TO SAY THAT THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS
[01:10:01]
TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED.AND THEN IN THE FINAL GEARING STAGE KIND OF DIFFERENTIATE WHICH ONE, UH, IS GOOD OR BAD IS A VIOLATION, NOT A VIOLATION IN SEPARATELY.
WE'VE KIND OF DONE SPLIT MOTIONS AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING STAGE AS WELL AT TIMES WHERE WE WANTED TO SAY THAT THERE WERE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION UNDER THIS SECTION OCCURRED, BUT NOT THIS SECTION.
SO THE FINAL IS GOING TO BE JUST ABOUT THIS ONE, NOT THIS ONE.
A REMINDER TO MUTE YOUR MICROPHONES IF YOU'RE NOT TALKING, BUT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS, UM, I'LL, I'LL MAKE A, UH, KIND OF BRIEF AND MAYBE MINOR POINT, UM, WHICH IS, UH, AS FAR AS THE MEETING AGENDA, UM, BEING INCORRECT.
I DON'T A, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF A KIND OF SUBSTANTIVE ERROR THAT WOULD MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO THROW OUT THE COMPLAINT ALTOGETHER.
UM, IF ANYTHING, IF IT WERE, UH, INAPPROPRIATE VIOLATION FOR US TO CONSIDER AND THINK ABOUT, OR AN ERROR WAS SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE US TO STOP DOING WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, THEN I THINK MAYBE THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY WOULD BE TO POSTPONE.
UM, BUT EVEN THEN, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE, AS A COMMISSION THAT THAT'S ALLEGING A VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT IN A SENSE, OR IT'S AN ERROR THAT IT'S OCCURRING UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S, IT'S REALLY FOR US TO ADJUDICATE, UM, UNLESS IT'S A REALLY OBVIOUS AND BLATANT ERROR THAT LIKE, IF WE HAD THE COMPLETELY WRONG NAMES FOR THE PARTIES, AND SO THE PARTIES THEMSELVES, LIKE NO ONE KNEW WHO WAS GOING TO BE BEFORE THE COMMISSION DOING WHAT.
UM, BUT, UM, THAT'S MY THOUGHT ON THAT QUESTION.
SO, CAUSE I THINK THE OPTIONS BEFORE US RIGHT NOW, AS A REMINDER ARE, IF WE WANTED TO, WE COULD SAY WE POSTPONE THIS.
UM, AND THE PITFALLS OF POSTPONING ARE THAT IT IS ONLY THOSE MEMBERS WHO ARE PRESENT HERE RIGHT NOW THAT CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE HEARING NEXT TIME.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE DISCUSSED IN PRIOR HEARINGS, BUT THAT'S ONE OPTION.
ANOTHER OPTION IS TO SAY THAT THERE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED AND PROCEED TO A FINAL HEARING.
I'M JUST KIND OF DOING THIS FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR COMMISSIONERS.
JUST IF THE PARTIES ARE CURIOUS AS TO WHY I'M WALKING THROUGH THIS RIGHT NOW PROCEED TO A FINAL HEARING BECAUSE THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO QUITE SPECIFY WHICH OF THE ALLEGATIONS IN THAT MOTION IS THE THING.
UM, WE CAN GO TO THE FINAL HEARING AND DECIDE THEN, UH, AND THEN WE CAN ALSO KIND OF SPLIT UP THE COMPLAINT IF IT HAS MULTIPLE ALLEGATIONS AND GO TO A FINAL HEARING ON THIS ONE OR THAT ONE.
UM, AND THEN SEPARATELY WE CAN, UH, DISMISS, UM, ON ITS OWN MOTION TO SAY THAT THEY'RE NOT REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED.
UM, AND THERE'S ONE OTHER OPTION AS WELL.
UM, WHICH IS, I THINK FUNCTIONALLY THE SAME THING AS A DISMISSAL, BUT IT'S, UM, IN DISMISSAL BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE THE COMPLAINT ITSELF WAS KIND OF INCORRECT AND GIVES THE COMPLAINANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT THE COMPLAINT.
BUT EVEN IF WE WERE TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT KIND OF OUTRIGHT, UM, WOULDN'T STOP.
I DON'T THINK THE COMPLAINT WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION LAST TIME TOO.
WOULDN'T STOP THE CONSENT FROM SUBMITTING A NEW COMPLAINT, ALLEGING DIFFERENT VIOLATIONS.
UM, SO IF THAT WAS A WORD SALAD, I APOLOGIZE, BUT, UM, UH, FLORA IS STILL OPEN FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE MOTIONS.
IF YOU HAVE THEM SECRETARY LEARNER, GO AHEAD.
I AM EMBARRASSED TO SAY THIS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO JUST RE CLARIFY SOME FACTS, SOME FACTS, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, IT IS HARD FOR US TO DO ALL THIS STUFF IN, UM, A VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE WE, I HAVE LIKE ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT OPEN HERE, MY BOOK, THE COMPLAINT, THE AGENDA, LIKE EVERYTHING.
SO I APOLOGIZE VERY BASIC FOR BOTH THE COMPLAINANT AND THE RESPONDENT.
SO, UM, THE ALLEGATION IS THAT, UH, THE, THE BILLBOARD DID NOT DISCLOSE, THIS IS WHAT I WASN'T REALLY SURE.
THE BILLBOARD ITSELF DISCLOSE THE PACK, SAVE AUSTIN NOW ON THE BILLBOARD IT DID.
AND THE TOP FIVE FUNDERS FOR THE BILLBOARD, UH, SAVE AUSTIN VALPACK, UH, WHO CONTRACT IT FOR THE BILLBOARDS, LISTED THE TREASURER AND THE FIVE TOP DONORS ON THE BILLBOARD.
NOW WHEN YOU RAISED MONEY FOR WHEN
[01:15:01]
YOU'RE A GO FUND ME, UM, AND YOU TURN THAT OVER TO SAVE AUSTIN, UNPACK IT.SO THIS IS FOR THE COMPLAINANT OR IS THE COMPLAINANT ALLEGING YOU STILL HERE? THANK YOU.
OKAY, JOE, UM, ARE YOU STILL, ARE YOU ALLEGING THAT EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL DONOR SHOULD HAVE BEEN LISTED? NO.
NO, MA'AM NOT ON THE BILLBOARDS.
MY, MY COMPLAINT IS NO, NO, NO, NO.
NONE OF THE BILLS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED.
BUT, BUT DO YOU, DID YOU AGREE THOUGH THAT THE, WHAT DO YOU, WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE THRESHOLD OF $500? I MEAN, MY, MY, MY ISSUE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THEY CLAIM TO HAVE TURNED OVER THE NAMES TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, WHICH MIGHT BE TRUE, BUT I DON'T, AS THEY'VE STATED, IT'S NOT BEEN REPORTED YET.
AND SO, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT $500 THRESHOLD.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE VIOLATIONS, I BELIEVE.
UM, YOU KNOW, SINCE THAT, I MEAN, THERE'S EVEN IN THE DESCRIPTION AT RED THAT, YOU KNOW, HE HAD SPENT, UH, $10,000 OF HIS OWN MONEY.
SO MR. SPANGLER, I, I BELIEVE, BUT THAT'S STILL A DESCRIPTION THAT'S PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AND I CAN SEND A SCREENSHOT OF ANY SORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL HEARINGS.
OKAY, MR.
UH, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE SHARING THE AMOUNT THAT YOU DONATED TO THE GOFUNDME? ME? YES.
IF Y'ALL WOULD PREFER, I HAVE THE SPREADSHEET THAT I SENT, UH, WITH ALL THE NAMES AND ALL THE AMOUNTS, I GUESS I'VE ASKED FOR ERIC'S OPINION ON THIS, BUT I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO JUST SHARE WITH Y'ALL RIGHT NOW IN REAL TIME, BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT, AND I HAVE LISTS, UH, IN AN EMAIL.
I CAN JUST PULL IT UP AND SHOW EVERYBODY WELL, I MEAN, IT'S PUBLIC, IT'S IT? IT WAS PROVIDED TO, TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
AND IT, UH, IF IT ISN'T ALREADY PUBLIC INFORMATION, IT WILL BE I'M SURE WHENEVER THEY GET AROUND TO AMENDING THEIR REPORT.
SO, UH, THEY HAVE, I BELIEVE 14 DAYS OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT TO, UH, TO DO THAT.
UM, WELL, IF, IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE SHARING HOW MUCH YOU YOURSELF, UH, UH, DONATED MR. SWINDLER, THAT'S FINE.
UM, THE, THE REASON I'M CURIOUS, UH, AND I WANT TO THANK SECRETARY LERNER FOR MENTIONING THE $500 THRESHOLD IS JUST, UM, IF, HOW ABOUT THIS? WAS IT MORE THAN $500? UM, JUST TO BE CLEAR, UH, I DONATED NUMEROUS TIMES TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW BACK, AND EACH TIME WAS, WAS WELL IN EXCESS OF $500.
SO SPECIFICALLY TO THE GO FUND ME, IF YOU PUT MORE THAN $500 OF YOUR OWN MONEY INTO YOUR GIRLFRIEND.
I DONATED DIRECTLY TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
I DIDN'T EVER LIKE CONTRIBUTE TO, UH, THERE WAS NO REAL NEED.
I MEAN, I WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE DONATING TO MYSELF FROM RECOLLECTION, SO I'D DEFINITELY DONE IT AND SAVE ALSO NOW PACK, NOT, NOT TO MY OWN GOFUNDME, THAT MONEY ALL CAME TO MY OWN CHECKING ACCOUNT.
LIKE, SO YOU DIDN'T LIKE PUT MONEY INTO THE GO FUND ME TO LIKE MOVE THE BAR OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
NO, I'D HAVE TO GO AND BE ON MY SPREADSHEET IF I DID.
I QUITE FRANKLY, I CAN'T REMEMBER IT.
I DONATED A FEW TIMES TO SAVE ALSO NOW.
SO, UM, DOES THAT, UH, I GUESS I'M CURIOUS IF THE QUESTION THOUGH, DOES THAT, I MEAN, WHETHER IT DID OR DIDN'T DOES THAT MATTER FOR THE, I'M JUST CURIOUS, LIKE HOW THAT APPLIES? WELL, SO, NO, IT'S, IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.
UM, PART OF THE, UH, ONE OF THE THRESHOLDS IS THAT, UM, YOU SPEND $500 OR MORE, UM, IN DOING ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS.
UM, AND I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE, UH, I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE VIOLATIONS THAT COULD BE, OH, THERE'S NO MONEY TO SPEND ON ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS.
IF ANYTHING, I WOULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE SAME CAUSE.
I THINK THAT WAS LIKE, ERIC WAS TRYING TO MAKE THE POINT OUT IS WE SPENT ZERO MONEY ADVERTISING ANYTHING.
YOU GO FIND NEW PAGE WAS COMPLETELY FREE.
I GUESS ERIC MAYBE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THEY, THE AMOUNTS WERE, UH, FOR, FOR PAYING FOR ADVERTISING, WE PAID FOR ZERO ADVERTISING.
THE THRESHOLD IS FOR AN EXPENDITURE FOR A DIRECT EXPENDITURE.
YES, FOR SURE EXPENSES, NO ONE, NO PERSON WAS AID, NO COMPANY WHO WAS PAID.
I GUESS I WAS JUST WONDERING IF BY, I THINK WE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE HAD ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SPEND ANY MONEY, YOU KNOW, WE JUST RAISED MONEY WITHOUT SPENDING ANYBODY.
SO THERE WAS, THERE WAS NO LIKE POLITICAL ADVERTISING PAID FOR BY DISCLOSURE NEEDED WITHIN SPIN ANYTHING TO ANYTHING.
[01:20:01]
WAS JUST, UH, I THINK A USEFUL DATA POINT AND KIND OF EVALUATING WHETHER OR NOT IT'S WORTH GOING TO FINAL HEARING, WHICH IS KIND OF THE WHOLE POINT OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.DO YOU HAVE THE SPREADSHEET IN FRONT OF YOU? UM, ONE TO FINISH MY QUESTIONS.
YEAH, GO AHEAD, PLEASE DIP IT IN THAT FOR A SEC.
AND THEN WE CAN, YOU CAN LOAD UP THE SPREADSHEET.
IT IS MY, IS IT, IT IS YOUR POSITION RESPONDENT THAT THIS COMPLAINT SHOULD BE MADE AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN NOW AND NOT AGAINST YOURSELF? IS THAT CORRECT? UM, NO, NOT, NOT REALLY AT ALL.
I, I, I THINK WE TOOK ALL OF IT.
UM, I MEAN THE WHOLE POINT OF ME DONATING THE MONEY TO SAVE US AN HOUR IS JUST TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW THE RULES.
I THINK, SAVE US NOW, CONTRACTS WITH THE BILLBOARDS PAID FOR THEM, PUT ALL THE CORRECT DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS ON THE BILLBOARDS TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY GOT THE WORDING WRONG OR SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ASK THEM ABOUT THAT.
BUT I ASSUME THAT THEY GOT THAT RIGHT.
UM, I THINK THAT MY UNDERSTANDING OF ALL OF THIS IS THAT MAYBE JOE THOUGHT THAT I RAISED ALL THIS MONEY AND CONTRACTED FOR THESE BILLBOARDS, UM, WHICH I DIDN'T DO, UH, IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THESE RULES, YOU KNOW, BACK IN MARCH OR APRIL OR WHENEVER IT WAS, I DONATED ALL THE MONEY TO SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, PROOF OF THAT THAT'S IN, THAT HAS BEEN DISCLOSED FOR MONTHS OR AT LEAST A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
SO WHEN YOU DONATED THAT, IT WAS FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE FOR THEM.
YOU KNOW, I, I CERTAINLY TALKED TO THEM ABOUT, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WAS PLANNING TO DO.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I WAS TRYING TO FOLLOW ALL THE RULES TO, TO GIVE THEM, UH, MONEY, BUT YEAH, CERTAINLY THEY COULD SPEND IT ON, ON WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, THEY WANTED.
AND SO, BUT AT THIS POINT, I MEAN, MR. APPEAL, AND THIS IS WHY WE, I I'M SENSING THAT YOU FEEL AS THOUGH THIS COMMISSION SHOULD BE WAITING TO SEE WHAT I MEAN, THAT THE INFORMATION WILL SHOW UP AND SAVE AUSTIN NOW HIS FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES.
WHAT, WHAT MR. SWINDLER DID NOT VIOLATE ANY OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODES THAT WERE ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN VIOLATED BY MR. CASTIANO.
AND SO, UH, TO THE EXTENT THAT HE'S ALLEGING ANY VIOLATIONS, THEY, THEY'RE NOT BY MR. SWINDLER AT ALL.
UM, AND SO, UH, HE, HE HAS, HE'S MET HIS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW AND, UH, I, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH, UH, UH, I MEAN, THESE ARE GOING TO BE PUBLIC IF THEY'RE NOT ALREADY, UH, IF, IF YOU'RE, IF THIS COMMISSION WANTS TO REVIEW THE NAMES AND THE AMOUNTS, I DO HAVE THE SPREADSHEET, UH, THAT IF THAT WILL HELP THE COMMISSION FEEL COMFORTABLE, THAT HE DIDN'T VIOLATE THE LAW.
WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE IT AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, THEN COMMISSIONER STANTON.
I BELIEVE SHE'S MUTED REMINDED ON ME YOURSELF.
WHEN, UM, DID THE RESPONDENT PROVIDE THE LIST OF NAMES AT THE, WAS IT AT THE SAME TIME AS THE DONATION AND YOU MENTIONED THEY HAVE 14 DAYS AND I WAS WONDERING 14 DAYS FROM WHEN.
SO, UM, WITH, WHEN HE MADE THE DONATION, UH, BECAUSE OF THE TERMS OF, LIKE I EXPLAINED OF GOFUND ME, UH, HE MADE THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM HIS OWN FUNDS.
AND SO HE DISCLOSED HIS NAME AS THE DONOR AFTER, AFTER HE, UH, HIRED ME AS HIS COUNSEL.
UH, I ADVISED HIM THAT EVEN THOUGH THE CITY CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE IT, IT'S PROBABLY IN, UH, HIS BEST INTEREST TO DISCLOSE THOSE NAMES, TO SAY BOSTON NOW PACK.
SO I'M GOING TO LOOK UP THE, UM, THERE, THERE WAS KIND OF A BACK AND FORTH WHERE HE DISCLOSED THEM AND THEN THEY SAID, WELL, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION FROM YOU.
UM, UH, I BELIEVE THAT THE FIRST, UH, WE, WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION THE DAY I WAS HIRED, UH, RIGHT BEFORE THE, UH, UH, THE LAST HEARING THAT WAS POSTPONE.
UH, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS, UH, AROUND 14 BUSINESS DAYS AGO.
I WENT, LET ME, LET ME LOOK AT THE, UH, THE EMAIL REAL QUICK, WHEN THEY FINALLY GOT ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO DO TO, TO, UM, TO DO THAT WAS MAY 24TH WAS THE LAST, UM, UH, THE LAST EMAIL THAT WAS SENT THAT HAD ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY NEED IT TO FILE IT, BUT HE, AFTER THE ELECTION, ABSOLUTELY BECAUSE, UH, HE, HE CONTRIBUTED THOSE FUNDS FROM HIS OWN FUNDS, UH, AND HE WAS NOT
[01:25:01]
AWARE OF ANY, AND HE DIDN'T HAVE, IN FACT, NOT ONLY WASN'T AWARE, HE DIDN'T HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE THOSE NAMES, BUT I TOLD HIM THAT IF THAT, THAT IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO DO SO OUT OF THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE, EVEN THOUGH THE CITY CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE IT.AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, LIKE MY NAME WAS LISTED PUBLICLY AS THE DONOR OF THAT $30,000 IN THREE DIFFERENT PIECES.
SO THAT IS EVEN SAVED, WANTS TO BOUNCE, YOU KNOW, UH, INVENTORY.
UH, I HAD, UH, I HAD THOUGHT THAT WE WERE FOLLOWING THE RULES BECAUSE MY, YOU KNOW, MY, MY NAME IS DISCLOSED WITH THE MASS OF MONEY.
AND, UM, ERIC HAD MENTIONED, HEY, YOU KNOW, JUST PUT ALL THE NAMES IN THE PUBLIC DATABASE TOO, CAUSE THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO.
AND, UH, EVERYBODY ON THAT LIST HAD ALREADY DONATED TO SAY BOSTON NOW, ANYWAYS, IT WAS KIND OF LIKE, LET'S JUST UPDATE THE AMOUNTS.
UM, SO THAT WAS THE INTENTION WAS TO GO BACK AND KIND OF MADE SURE, HEY, WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING SURE WE'RE FOLLOWING ANY RULES OR ANY ISSUES THAT ANYBODY WOULD HAVE.
LET'S MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT EVERYTHING.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND MR. SWINDLER.
I APOLOGIZE IF I MISSED YOUR, UM, RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION.
DID YOU DONATE ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY TO THE GO GO FUND ME CAMPAIGN? UM, TO, TO MY GUESTS DO THE GOFUND MAY NOT, NOT THE AMOUNT THAT YOU GAVE TO, UM, SAVE AUSTIN NOW TO THE GOFUND MAYBE THAT IS NAMED SPECIFICALLY IN, IN THE COMPLAINT.
I WOULD, UH, I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THE SPREADSHEET.
I THINK I MAY HAVE DONE LIKE THE INITIAL, I'M SORRY, WHAT, UH, MR. SPANGLER, YOUR AUDIO CUT OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UM, AND I THINK YOU'RE MUTED NOW.
UM, UM, I, UM, I, UH, IT'LL BE IN A SPREADSHEET AND I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THAT, BUT, UH, THERE'S TYPICALLY YOU HAVE TO MAKE LIKE A, UH, INITIAL DONATION NOT GOING TO, IF THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS, THERE WAS, THIS WAS BACK IN MARCH, SO, UM, BUT I'VE GOT A RECORD OF EVERYTHING.
I'M SORRY, YOUR, YOUR AUDIO HAD CUT OFF MR. SWINGLEY.
SO I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR RESPONSE.
SO DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THE GO FUND, ME CAMPAIGN THAT IS NAMED SPECIFICALLY IN THIS COMPLAINT? I BELIEVE SO.
I JUST DON'T KNOW THE AMOUNT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
UM, MY NEXT QUESTION AND I, AND I DON'T KNOW THIS, THIS IS PROBABLY MORE OF A LEGAL QUESTION CHAIR.
I DON'T KNOW WHOM TO ASK THIS.
UH, BUT THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS COMPLAINT BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH DEFINITIONS, RIGHT? MR. UM, OPL ELLA, UM, MADE A CASE AGAIN FOR DISMISSAL, DECIDING THAT THIS DOES NOT, THAT THE CODES ARE RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE AND SAYING THAT SINCE NO FUNDS WERE EXPENDED FOR THIS, BECAUSE GO FUND ME IS FREE OF CHARGE.
AND I THOUGHT IT WAS CLEAR AT THAT POINT FOR ME IN MY MIND ABOUT THE CODE AND, AND WHETHER THIS, WHETHER THERE WASN'T A VIOLATION.
HOWEVER, I'M NOW WONDERING SINCE MR. SO LET ME JUST MAKE IT MORE GENERIC.
DOES A DONATION TO THE GO FUND ME TO START IT.
DOES THAT COUNT AS AN EXPENDITURE? IF IT DOES, THEN THIS IS DEFINITELY, IT FITS THE DEFINITION OF DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I HAVE EXPERTISE IN ANSWERING.
AND I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION HAS THAT EXPERTISE.
UM, AND I'M BEING VERY, VERY PICKY ABOUT THIS AND BEING VERY PRECISE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE AND THE DEFINITION READS DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE MEANS AN EXPENDITURE, WHICH IS SPENDING OF FUNDS.
IT DOESN'T SAY WHETHER YOU PUT IT IN AFTER OR WHETHER YOU HAD TO BUY SOMETHING TO START THAT CAMPAIGN, RIGHT.
GOFUND ME IS FREE TO START UP.
BUT MR. SWINDLER JUST MENTIONED THAT HE BELIEVES THAT HE HAD TO, HE HAD TO, I GUESS, PRIME THE PUMP, I GUESS, IN A WAY, RIGHT.
[01:30:01]
OFF WITH A, AN AMOUNT.IT IS FOR A ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION OR FOR EXPRESS ADVOCACY.
SO THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT DEFINITION THAT I NEED TO UNDERSTAND FOR, TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THIS, UM, ON THIS COMPLAINT, I WOULD ADD, JUST ASK YOU TO, UM, I JUST VERIFY WITH, TO GET FROM ME.
YOU CAN GOOGLE THIS, BUT, UH, THERE'S NO, UH, NO REQUIREMENT WHATSOEVER FOR THE, UH, YOU KNOW, ORGANIZER OF THE GOFUNDME TO DONATE TO IT.
SO MY DONATION WAS JUST THAT A DONATION ALONG WITH ANYONE ELSE'S.
SO MY INITIAL DONATION WAS NOT LIKE REQUIRED BY THE FUNDING, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
THANK YOU FOR, FOR CLARIFYING THAT IT DOES CLARIFY HALF OF HALF OF THE QUESTION FOR ME THE OTHER HALF IS, DOES YOUR DONATION COUNT AS AN EXPENDITURE SINCE YOU WERE THE PERSON WHO STARTED THAT THE GOFUNDME CAMPAIGN, CORRECT.
IT WAS UNDER YOUR, IT WAS UNDER YOUR NAME OR TIED TO YOU AS, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.
THE GO FUND ME WAS CREATED BY ME.
UH, DEFINITELY A CAUSE THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE AND, AND DONATE TO AS WELL.
SO MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT OF ORDER THAT, THAT THE QUESTION HAS TO THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE QUESTION FOR THE RESPONDENT.
THAT'S WHY I WAS, I WAS ABOUT TO GO FORWARD AND YOU SAW, I CAN'T SHARE ANYMORE.
I BELIEVE SHARING HAS BEEN DISABLED.
UH, BUT I DO HAVE IT UP ON, ON, ON MY SCREEN IF, IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE SECTION.
SO THE ENTIRE, UH, BOARD, UH, OR COMMISSION CAN THE, THE PARTICULAR SECTION WHERE THE DEFINITION IS THERE WE GO.
UH, DIRECT EXPENDITURE MEANS AN EXPENDITURE FOR LECTURING ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION, OR FOR EXPRESS ADVOCACY AND, UH, ANY DONATIONS THAT HE MADE TO HIMSELF FOR, BECAUSE THOSE FUNDS CAME DIRECTLY BACK TO HIS, HIS BANK ACCOUNT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER HE KNEW THAT OR NOT WAS NOT FOR ANY EXPRESS ADVOCACY.
AND IT WAS NOT FOR AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION, THE, THE GOFUNDME PAGE WAS FREE OF CHARGE.
THERE WAS NO, NO, NO CHARGER IS NO CHARGE TO PEOPLE WHO POST THOSE CAMPAIGNS.
UH, AND, AND HE NEVER EXPENDED A DIME FOR, UH, ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS OR EXPRESS ADVOCACY FOR ANY ISSUE.
UM, JUST BECAUSE HE DONATED TO A GOFUNDME PAGE THAT HE OWNED, WHICH IS HIS OWN MONEY ANYWAY, OR HE DONATED, SO SAY BOSTON NOW, AND IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL, UM, DOES NOT MAKE THAT EXPRESS THAT A DONATION FOR ELECTION COMMUNICATION, UH, OR, UH, UH, FOR EXPRESS ADVOCACY.
THAT'S OUR, I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND ACTUALLY I HAVE, UM, UH, ANOTHER RELATED QUESTION, WHICH IS, UM, DO YOU, UH, IN EITHER COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT OR THE RESPONDENT CAN ANSWER, BUT DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR POSSESSION A COPY OF, UH, BECAUSE I THINK THE COMPLAINANT HAD REPRESENTED THAT THE GO FUND ME IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO PAGES AND AVAILABLE.
YOU CAN'T READ, UM, WHAT THE GOFUNDME LANDING PAGE SAID.
UM, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF, I GET THE DESCRIPTION AND KIND OF THE CALL TO ACTION THAT WAS IN THE GOFUNDME WEBSITE, UM, THAT WAS TELLING, UH, PRESUMABLY PROSPECTIVE DONORS, WHAT THIS WAS ABOUT, UM, WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO DONATE THINGS LIKE THAT.
WAS IT, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT? UH, I THINK, I THINK JOE MAY, UM, I DELETED IT SHORTLY AFTER, YOU KNOW, I DONATED THE MONEY TO SAVE US NOW BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO RAISE ADDITIONAL FUNDS, BUT, UM, I THINK JOE MIGHT HAVE, I THINK THERE'S A SCREENSHOT.
I'LL PITCH IT TO THE COMPLAINANT.
DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THIS THAT I MISSED SOMEWHERE? NO.
MR. CHAIR, I, SO I D UH, REGRETTABLY DID NOT TAKE A SCREENSHOT OF THE LANDING PAGE WHEN IT WAS OPEN, BUT I DO HAVE A SCREENSHOT, UM, OF IT SAYING THE FUNDRAISER WAS DEACTIVATED THAT IT HAD RAISED ITS $30,000 GOAL.
UM, BUT EVEN IF YOU STILL GOOGLE MR. SPANGLER'S NAME WITH THE INFORMATION, IT'LL STILL PULL UP AND SAY LIKE IN A DESCRIPTION LINE THAT, UM, QUOTE OVER $10,000 OF MY OWN MONEY HAS BEEN DONATED.
I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SPANGLER WROTE THAT AGAIN.
IT'S A 4 0 4, BUT THAT STILL APPEARS TO THIS DAY ON GOOGLE.
AND SO, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING, UM, JUST A
[01:35:01]
QUICK YES OR NO FROM COMPLAINANT OR COUNSEL AND QUICKEST OR NO FROM RESPONDENT.DO EITHER OF YOU HAVE IN YOUR POSSESSION, A COPY OF WHAT A PROSPECTIVE DONOR WOULD HAVE SEEN HAD THEY VISITED THE GOFUNDME PAGE? YES OR NO? NO, SIR.
UH, COUNSEL NOT, AND I BELIEVE MR. SWINDLER DOES NOT CAUSE HE HAD, WELL, WE DON'T HAVE IT.
GO AHEAD, MR. SWINDLER, UM, WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE PEOPLE WHO DONATED TO THE GO-FUND ME WERE EXPECTING THAT MONEY TO BE SPENT ON BILLBOARDS? UM, YES.
THAT WAS THE INTENTION ON THE FUNDING MISSOURI.
AND WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE IN THEIR EYES, A DIRECT EXPENDITURE WHEN THE BILLBOARDS WERE PUT UP? UM, I THINK IT WAS A SUPPORT OF MY EFFORT, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, RAISE AWARENESS FOR PROPERTIES.
DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WERE GIVING MONEY THAT WOULD BECOME YOUR OWN PERSONAL PROPERTY? NOT SURE EXACTLY.
WHAT WHAT'D YOU MEAN BY, BY THAT QUESTION? LIKE, I THINK THE LAWYER SAID THAT THE PROCEEDS FROM A GOFUNDME CAMPAIGN BECOME THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE PERSON RUNNING THE CAMPAIGN.
DO YOU THINK THAT WAS THE EXPECTATION OF THE DONORS? YEAH.
I MEAN, IF, UH, IF YOU DONATE TO A GO FUND, ME OF WHICH I'VE DONE MULTIPLE TIMES, LIKE THE MONEY GOES TO WHOEVER'S RAISING IT.
SO, I MEAN, BRUCE DEPOSITED DIRECTLY INTO MY CHECKING ACCOUNT FROM, FROM GOFUNDME, BUT THEY HAD THE EXPECTATION THAT THAT MONEY WAS GOING TO BE USED FOR BILLBOARDS FOR PROPERTY.
I WANT TO, IF I CAN ANSWER FOR THE EXPECTATION OF THE, OF THE DONORS, IT DISCLOSES THAT ON THE GOFUNDME WEBSITE THAT, UH, SPECIFICALLY FOR ANYONE TO BE ABLE TO SEE, UH, THAT IT CAN BE THAT, THAT, THAT IT BECOMES THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE, UH, OF THE, UH, FUNDRAISER AND IT CAN BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OR, OR NO PURPOSE THAT WAS DISCLOSED AT ALL.
AND SO THEY, THEY WARN DONORS OR THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO HAVE THOSE FUNDS USED FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE THAT THEY WERE DISCLOSED AND HE INTENDED TO, TO PUT BILLBOARDS UP, BUT HE FIGURED OUT THAT HE COULDN'T LEGALLY DO THAT.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT THE MONEY WAS USED FOR THE PURPOSE, THE PURPOSE THAT THE DONORS INTENDED.
UM, ACTUALLY, NO, THE PURPOSE WAS FOR ME TO, TO GET THE BILLBOARDS ARE GOING TO THE CONTRACT WITH THE BILLBOARD COMPANIES.
WE WERE TOLD THAT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT CAUSE I'M NOT A PAC.
SO I GAMBLE THE MONEY TO SAVE US AN OUTBACK.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY DID THEIR OWN BILLBOARDS.
THEY GAVE THAT MONEY TO SAY BOSTON NOW PACK.
THEY COULD MAKE BILLBOARDS WHERE THEY COULD CHOOSE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, UH, TO, TO PROMOTE THAT, THAT CAUSE, UH, THEY WERE AN UNDER NO OBLIGATION UNDER STATE LAW OR EVEN THE AUSTIN CITY CODE TO, UH, TAKE ANY SPECIFIC ACTION WITH REGARD TO THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS.
CHURCH IS HAVING SOME CONNECTION DIFFICULTIES, CELESTE, JUST HOLD ON A SEC.
HOW ABOUT A FIVE MINUTE BREAK THERE? WANT ME TO JUST GO AHEAD AND CALL ON FOLKS? HE TOUCHED ME.
UM, UM, I'M ABOUT TO, HE SHOULD HAVE THE COLLIN NUMBER WHEN I'M ABOUT TO TEXT IT TO HIM AS WELL FOR THE SAKE OF TIME.
IS, DO YOU MIND IF WE CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION? UH, NO, WE NEED TO WAIT IT TIME FOR HUMANA EXPERIAN BRAKE SECRETARY
[01:40:01]
LAURA, IF YOU WANT TO CALL A RECESS BECAUSE YOU'RE NEXT IN LINE IS PRESIDING OFFICER.YOU CAN, UM, PAULA FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE EVERYBODY A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
SO WE WILL RESUME PRECISELY AT 9 23.
UH, SO I BELIEVE, UH, LYNN, ARE WE GOOD WITH, IF LUIS IS, IS, IS IT AUDIO CONNECTED? SHOULD WE CONTINUE? I'M GOOD.
AS LONG AS WE HAVE CONFIRMED THAT EVERYONE IS BACK.
UH, WHEN ARE YOU THERE? MS. STANTON? STANTON.
I MEAN THE TREADMILL DESK, LIKE ME, DEBORAH, YOU'LL BE SO MUCH HAPPIER.
UM, WHO WAS NEXT IN LINE FOR QUESTIONING? OH, UH, COMMISSIONER ANTENNA.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. SWINDLER.
UM, I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE GOFUNDME PAGE, UM, PLATFORM IS PRETTY USED, BUT THEY DO CHARGE A 1.9% IN A 30 CENT, UH, PER DONATION FEE TO PAY THAT FEE.
SO THE GUN, THE GOFUNDME PAGE IS TYPICALLY PRETTY EASY.
THE PLATFORM IS PRETTY EASY, BUT THERE IS A FEE FOR USING IT AT A 1.9%, I BELIEVE IN 30 CENT PER USER, PER DONATION.
HOW WAS THAT PAID FOR IT? THE DONOR THAT'S DEDUCTED FROM THE DONATIONS AS OPPOSED TO THE DONORS AS A, UH, AS A CREDIT CARD PROCESSING FEE.
SO A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE DONORS PAID FOR THAT.
THERE WAS NOBODY THAT JUST SAID, NO, I ONLY WANT TO MAKE THIS DONATION AND NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE FEE.
IS THAT, HAS THAT BEEN VERIFIED? YES.
I THINK THE WAY THAT IT WORKS IS LIKE YOU GET CHARGED LIKE A FEE WHEN YOU DO YOUR DONATION, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A HAND SHIPPING AND HANDLING FEE ALMOST IT'S OPTIONAL.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, HAS IT BEEN VERIFIED THAT EVERYBODY TOOK THE OPTION THAT THEY WANTED TO PAY TO COVER THAT FEE OR IS THAT KNOWN FOR SURE THAT SOMEBODY DIDN'T OPT OUT BECAUSE, UM, THEY DO HAVE THE OPTION TO SAY, NO, I DON'T WANT TO PAY THE FEE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE DONATION OF X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS, I GUESS.
I GUESS A QUESTION MR. SWINDLER IS, DID YOU PAY GO FUND ME AT ANY POINT, UH, FOR FEES? UM, NOW, NOW I NEVER, I NEVER PAID THE GO FUND ME THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
I JUST WASN'T THE RECIPIENT OF FUNDS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT GO FUND ME PAGE RECEIVED, TOOK THOSE FUNDS.
SO LET'S JUST SAY YOU WERE THE NUMBER, WHATEVER THE FINAL.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE FINAL NUMBER WAS THAT WAS DONATED THE EXACT AMOUNT? EXACTLY.
SO 30, EXACTLY $30,000 IS DONATED IN YOU THAT RECEIVED EXACTLY $30,000, NOTHING.
AND DONATED THAT MONEY TO SAVE LAST YEAR.
AND I'M SORRY IF I MISSED THIS AND I KNOW, UM, THIS QUESTION WAS ASKED, BUT YOU DID MAKE A DONATION AND, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE I HEARD HOW MUCH YOU MADE YET OR THAT KIND OF IT'S ON THE SPREADSHEET THAT MAYBE YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO SHARE IN THIS CALL, I GUESS.
UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO JUST PULL THAT OUT.
I AM SO CONFUSED AS TO WHY MY CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT MATTERS WELL, BUT I'M HAPPY TO, I AGREE WITH MR. SWINDLER.
I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANCE OF IT, BUT, UM, UH, HE DOESN'T HAVE THE SPREADSHEET IN FRONT OF HIM, BUT I, I DO, UH, I ONLY SEE A THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WAS, UH, UH, IN THERE FROM AN AUTO SWINDLER IT'S PUBLIC.
AND THAT'S ALL BEEN GIVEN TO SAVE AUSTIN, DONATED MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO SAVE BOSTON NOW.
SO I CAN REMEMBER, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH I DID TO MY OWN GO FUND ME, BUT IT'S ALL THE WAY WITH A SPREADSHEET.
AND THEN COMMISSIONER STANDARD, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR
[01:45:01]
MR CASINO.UM, AND I'LL ASK EVERYONE TO FORGIVE ME IF THESE ARE ROOKIE QUESTIONS, CAUSE I AM ADMITTEDLY A ROOKIE.
UM, BUT IF I UNDERSTAND, RIGHT, YOUR COMPLAINT IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE US A DESCRIPTION OF THE EVIDENCE YOU INTEND TO PRODUCE, UM, TO, TO PROVE YOUR ALLEGATION, UM, FOR YOUR SECOND AND THIRD COMPLAINTS, THEY, THEY ALL, THEY BOTH RELATE TO DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES.
UM, IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE NOT NOTED IN YOUR COMPLAINT OF A, HAVE ANY DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES MADE BY MR. SWINGER OR ANYONE ELSE RELATED TO THIS COMPLAINT? UH, NO, SIR.
AND THE, THE FIRST PART OF YOUR, YOUR FIRST OF YOUR THREE COMPLAINTS IS RELATED TO POLITICAL ADVERTISING, ELECTIONEERING, COMMUNICATIONS, AND EXPRESS ADVOCACY.
IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU INTEND TO, UH, OFFER TO THIS COMMITTEE IF WE HAVE A FINAL HEARING OF A BLIP OF POLITICAL ADVERTISING, ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATIONS, OR EXPRESS ADVOCACY BY MR. SWINDLER? YES, SIR.
UH, I HAVE A SCREENSHOT, UH, WHICH, UH, DETAILS THAT HE'S THE ORGANIZER OF IT, AS WELL AS, UM, THAT, UH, THE $30,000 HAD BEEN RAISED.
UM, AND I ALSO HAVE A SCREENSHOT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT WAS POST, UM, NOT THE LANDING PAGE AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
UM, I ALSO HAVE A SCREENSHOT, UM, RELATED TO, UM, WHAT IT, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW, WHICH IS A 4 0 4, BUT THEY'RE STILL JUST IN THE DESCRIPTION, A MENTION OF SOMEBODY WHO'S SPENDING $10,000 OF THEIR OWN MONEY AND PRINTING VINYL FOR BLANK.
AND I WILL, I WILL PRESENT BOTH OF THOSE SCREENSHOTS AS WELL, BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, THOSE, ARE THERE EVIDENCE STATEMENTS ABOUT A FUTURE INTENT, BUT THEY'RE NOT EVIDENCE ABOUT ANY PAYMENTS FOR ANY ACTUAL PAYMENTS FOR POLITICAL ADVERTISING ELECTION YEAR IN COMMUNICATIONS OR EXPRESS ADVOCACY IS SPENT AS IN THE PAST TENSE.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD SHOW A PAST EXPENDITURE, UH, OF WHAT, WELL, I MEAN, IT SAYS, I, I MEAN THE DESCRIPTION THAT STILL IS THERE, IF YOU GOOGLE, IT SAYS THAT I HAVE SPENT $10,000 OF MY OWN MONEY CREATING ARTWORK AND PRINTING VINYL.
SO, AND IT'S RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, THIS FUNDRAISER, THAT'S STILL THERE BECAUSE OF WHATEVER GOOGLE ERROR AND THAT WE'LL PRESENT THAT AS WELL.
SO AN EXPENDITURE OF, AND I PROBABLY YOUR, YOUR, UH, EVERYBODY ELSE IS LOUDER THAN YOU.
UM, IT'S SOMETHING ABOUT PRINTING VINYL? UH, YES, SIR.
THERE'S, I MEAN, UM, THE, THE QUOTE THAT IS STILL THERE THAT YOU CAN SEE BECAUSE OF GOOGLE, DIDN'T COMPLETELY ERASE IT AND SORRY, MY LAPTOP'S KIND OF LOW ON THE COMPUTER.
IF YOU CAN'T HEAR MY MICROPHONE, MIGHT'VE BEEN COVERED A LITTLE.
UM, BUT IT SAYS THAT I HAVE SPENT $10,000 OF MY OWN MONEY CREATING ARTWORK AND PRINTING VINYL FOR THEN IT CUTS OUT, BUT SOMEBODY SPENT $10,000 ON SOMETHING.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS MR. SPANGLER IN PARTICULAR, BUT SINCE HE WAS THE ORGANIZER OF THE FUNDRAISER, AND SINCE, YOU KNOW, THE DESCRIPTION HAD BEEN PRESUMABLY WRITTEN BY HIM AS HE ORGANIZED THE FUNDRAISER, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS IN THERE SOMEWHERE.
IT WAS, IT JUST, THAT'S JUST THE DESCRIPTION OF GIFT FROM ME.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, AND I'LL, I'LL JUST VERIFY WHAT I'VE ALREADY VERIFIED, NUMEROUS CONCEPTS.
THIS IS CALLED THE MONEY WAS SPENT BY ME ALL THE MONEY IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THE PACK ONCE INVADED TO, OR DONATED TO SAVE US TO NOW.
UM, YOU CAN VERIFY THAT LET'S SAY IT COST A MINIMAL IF YOU WANT TO.
UM, THEY WERE THE ONLY ONES WHO SPENT ANY MONEY JUST TO BE CLEAR.
SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT? YEAH, BRIAN, I SAW COMMISSIONER STANTON'S HAND.
UM, MR.
ME FOR ME, I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF.
I'M JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE THE DEFINITION OF EXPENDITURE.
AND SO FOR ME, IF MY LOGIC THINKING HERE, IF MR. SWINDLER HAD CONTRIBUTED TO THE GOFUND ME, THAT HIS MONEY THAT HE HAD EXPENDED SPENT, RIGHT.
MONEY FROM HIM TO THIS, UH, TO THE, SO THAT, THAT'S WHY I KEEP ASKING THAT QUESTION.
UM, AND WHAT IS, WHAT WAS THE GOAL MR. SWINDLER OF THE GO FUND ME? I
[01:50:01]
THINK I'VE HEARD IT ALLEGED BY MR CASINO, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT I'VE ACTUALLY HEARD IT FROM YOU.WHAT WAS THE GOAL OF THAT? GOFUND ME, THE, UH, THE GOAL OF THE GO FUND ME WAS TO DO TWO THINGS.
ONE RAISE AWARENESS, UH, THE, WE HAD AN UPCOMING ELECTION, YOU KNOW, VIA LIKE, HEY, THIS IS A GOOD REASON TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
ME, WENT TO, YOU KNOW, FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND WHOEVER.
UM, AND THEN TO, TO RAISE MONEY, UH, TO, TO CREATE, YOU KNOW, ADVERTISING THE, UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT WAS GOING TO BE WILD POSTER CAMPAIGN OR BILLBOARDS OR WHATEVER IT WAS.
UM, SO THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS OF RAISING THAT MONEY, I WAS TOLD, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T JUST GO BUY THESE BILLBOARDS BECAUSE THIS IS A VOTE FOR PROP B.
YOU SHOULD, UH, MAKE SURE YOU FOLLOW THE RULES WITH A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE.
UM, I THOUGHT I WENT TO GREAT LENGTH, 50 THAT COORDINATED EVERYTHING WITH SAVE AUSTIN NOW DONATED ALL THE MONEY TO SAY BOSTON NOW HAVE THEM, UM, YOU KNOW, TAKE IT FROM THERE.
SO I'M JUST, UH, I GUESS I'M STILL A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED.
WHY, UM, UH, I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO YOUR RELATIONSHIP OF SAVE AUSTIN AL BUYING BILLBOARDS, YOU KNOW, WITH THE MONEY DONATED TO THEM.
LIKE I CLEARLY DIDN'T CONTRACT FOR IT AND GO MAKE SURE THAT'S THERE.
LIKE I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T BUY ANY AWARDS.
UH, AND I WANT TO CLARIFY, I'M, I'M NOT INTERESTED JUST BECAUSE OF THE COMPLAINT.
I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT FOCUSED ON THE COMPLAINT AND THE COMPLAINT.
ISN'T WHAT YOU DID WITH THE MONEY AFTERWARDS, WHEN YOU FOUND OUT RIGHT.
WHAT YOU DONATED, THAT THOSE THE $30,000 TO SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, THE, I BELIEVE THE COMPLAINT IS AGAINST THE GOFUND ME AND THE PROCESS IN WHICH THAT WAS, UH, THAT, THAT IT VIOLATED DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE CODE.
AND SO, AND THE, AND IT COMES BACK TO THE OTHER DEFINITION THAT I'M TRYING TO, UM, RECONCILE FOR MYSELF.
AND THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF EXPRESS ADVOCACY, BECAUSE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE GOFUNDME PAGE IS EXACTLY THAT IT WAS FOR EXPRESS ADVOCATES, BUT, BUT I WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOU WHAT THE INTENTION OR THE GOAL OF THAT GOFUND ME WAS.
AND, AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT THE TWO GOALS YOU SAID, RAISE MONEY, UM, RAISE MONEY TO CREATE ADVERTISING.
WAS THIS ADVERTISING IN SUPPORT OF RAISING AWARENESS ABOUT ANY ELECTION? HEY, THERE'S AN ELECTION COMING UP.
THE ISSUES THAT ARE AT PLAY OR WAS IT, WAS IT TARGETED FOR A SPECIFIC, UM, MOTIVE AS INTO, TO SAY VOTE AGAINST OR FOR A PARTICULAR BALLOT MEASURE? IS IT, DOES MY QUESTION MAKE SENSE? I'M SORRY.
I WAS A BIT LONG-WINDED MR. SWINDLER, YOUR SECOND GOAL WAS TO RAISE THE MONEY TO CREATE ADVERTISING.
WHAT WAS THE MESSAGE OF THAT ADVERTISING? WASN'T IT JUST GENERAL, HEY, IN ELECTIONS COMING UP, THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE REASON WE DONATED THE MONEY TO SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, PAC WAS BECAUSE IT WAS POLITICAL ADVERTISING.
IT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR VOTING A SPECIFIC WAY IN A SPECIFIC ELECTION FOR THAT REASON WE'VE DONE IT AT ALL THE MONEY, SAVE US AN OUTBACK.
SPECIFICALLY ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, COMMISSIONER STANTON.
UM, I, I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR HERE THAT THERE, THERE WERE NO FUNDS EXPENDED BY MR. SWINDLER IN EXPRESS ADVOCACY.
THERE WERE NO FUNDS THAT WERE EXPENDED BY MR. SWINDLER TO MAKE A DIRECT EXPENDITURE, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD PLANNED TO DO SO, BECAUSE HE, HE REALIZED THAT HE COULDN'T DO SO WITHOUT CREATING A PACK.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY HE CHOSE TO THEN DONATE THOSE FUNDS, INCLUDING FUNDS THAT HE DONATED TO HIMSELF, NOT KNOWING THAT, HOW THAT, HOW THAT WORKED.
AND AT NO POINT, DID HE CROSS THAT $500 THRESHOLD AND AN EXPENDITURE FOR EXPRESS EFFICACY OR AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION OR REGARD? YES, I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M NOT CLEAR, MR. OPLS, UM, IS WE GO BACK TO THE DEFINITION OF EXPENDITURE AND, YOU KNOW, THERE IS NO GUIDANCE, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, SOME CODE KIND OF ASSUMES, ASSUMES, UM, A COMMON
[01:55:01]
DEFINITION OF EXPENDITURE, RIGHT? THERE'S DEFINITION OF DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE, RIGHT.AND IN THE DEFINITION IT SAYS EXPENDITURE WITHOUT, WITHOUT EXPLICITLY DEFINING WHAT DO WE MEAN BY EXPENDITURE, RIGHT.
AM I, AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS, IS DONATING TO A GO FUND, ME CAMPAIGN THAT IS FREE OF CHARGE TO START UP, RIGHT.
THAT I'M NOT ARGUING IS DONATING TO THAT.
GO FUND ME PAGE, EVEN THOUGH YOU STARTED IT WITH THE GOAL OF EXPRESS ADVOCACY, IS, DOES THAT COUNT AS DOES THAT COUNT OR CONTRIBUTION COUNT AS AN EXPENDITURE ON YOUR PART? UH, YOUR, THE PERSON WHO MAKES THAT THE DEFINITION OF EXPENDITURE IS IN YOUR CITY CODE, AND I WILL SHARE THAT WITH YOU RIGHT NOW.
SO UNDER TWO DASH TWO DASH TWO, UNDER DEFINITIONS, IT STATES EXPENDITURE MEANS A PAYMENT OF MONEY OR OTHER THING OF VALUE, INCLUDING AN AGREEMENT MADE OR OTHER OBLIGATION INCURRED WHETHER LEGALLY ENFORCEMENT OR NOT TO MAKE A PAYMENT.
HE NEVER MADE A PAYMENT TO GO FUND ME TO ADVERTISE, TO HAVE EXPRESS ADVOCACY, TO DO WHAT, WHATEVER HE, HE NEVER MADE A PAYMENT OF MONEY OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE TO ANYONE OTHER THAN SAVE AUSTIN NOW PACK, WHICH IS WHAT HE MADE THE EXPENDITURE TO AND SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, PAC THEN REPORTED THAT ON THEIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT, YOUR AUSTIN CITY CODE, DOESN'T INCUR AN OBLIGATION ON THE DONOR TO MAKE A DISCLOSURE TO, TO FILE THEIR OWN REPORT MAKES THAT, THAT, THAT OBLIGATION ON THE RECIPIENT.
HOW, AND, UM, I JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION CHAIR, IF I MAY CONTINUE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE, UM, W I UNDERSTAND THAT NEITHER PARTY HAS A SCREENSHOT OR EVIDENCE SHOWING THE GOFUNDME PAGE AS IT EXISTED AT ONE TIME.
UM, ONE THING I DO SEE IN THE, IN THE COMPLAINT IS THE, THE, UH, GOFUND ME LINK.
AND IN THAT, IN THE NAME OF THE LINK, IT, YOU KNOW, HDPS, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, GO FUND ME SLASH AFTER THAT IS REINSTATE AUSTIN, CAMPING BAIN AND SAVE OUR CITY LISTS.
WHAT MR. SWINDLER WOULD YOU AGREE THAT, THAT A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD, WOULD EXPECT THAT TO MEAN THAT THAT IS DEFINITELY ADVOCATING, THAT IS EXPRESS ADVOCACY ADVOCATING FOR A PARTICULAR STANCE.
AND I THINK YOU, YOU HAVE ALREADY, UM, CLARIFIED THAT BEFORE THAT YES.
YOU WERE INTENDING TO RAISE FUNDS TO CREATE ADVERTISING FOR A PARTICULAR, UH, FOR A PARTICULAR DIRECTION.
I, IF I DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CALL, I APOLOGIZE, BUT YEAH, FIRST OF ALL, CLEAR, DIRECT VOTE, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, YES, ON-PROPERTY WAS VERY DIRECTLY TO THE MESSAGE AND VERY DIRECTLY THE MESSAGE EVERYONE HAD DONE IT IN TO THE GUEST ON AND WAS SUPPORTIVE FOR THAT REASON, JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR THE REASON THAT IT WAS POLITICAL MESSAGING.
WE DONATED ALL THE MONEY TO SAY BOSTON OUT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW THE BULLS, I GUESS I'M UNCLEAR.
AND I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
IT WAS, IT WAS FOR PROPERTY, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KALE, AND THEN COMMISSIONER.
WHAT I SEE IS THAT MR. SWINDLER GOT ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT SOMETHING GOING ON IN OUR CITY AND WANTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT.
AND WHEN HE LEARNED WHAT THE POLITICAL RULES AROUND THAT WERE, WHEN S AS HE WAS RAISING MONEY, HE DECIDED HE WISELY, IN MY OPINION, DECIDED TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES AND JUST DONATED IT TO SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, IN MY EXPERIENCE, I HAVE AN MBA.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANY EXPENDITURE HAVING, HAVING TAKEN PLACE FROM THE GOFUND ME TOWARD ANY GOODS OR SERVICES.
AND, UM, SO I, MY ONLY CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ON SAY BOSTON NOWS AND THEY COULD HAVE REPORTED SOME OF THESE DONORS FASTER
[02:00:01]
OR THAT KIND OF THING, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING REALLY NEFARIOUS GOING ON ON MR. SWINDLERS PART.THE OTHER THING YOU KNOW, OF CONCERN OBVIOUSLY, IS THAT PEOPLE WILL LEARN POLITICOS WILL LEARN, HEY, YOU KNOW, UM, I DON'T WANT THEM TO SEE THIS AS A, AS A WAY TO, UH, RAISE FUNDS SORT OF IN PARALLEL WITH A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE.
BUT THAT SAID, I STILL DON'T SEE ANYTHING REALLY.
UM, LIKE I SAID, NEFARIOUS GOING ON WITH WHAT MR. SWINDLER DID.
HE WANTED TO RAISE MONEY THROUGH GOFUND ME.
HE LEARNED THE RULES AND HE SWITCHED DIRECTION.
I'D LIKE TO CIRCLE BACK TO WHAT MR. CASINOS SAID THE LAST TIME HE SPOKE JUST FOR SOME CLARIFICATION, IT SOUNDED TO ME LIKE WHAT HE WAS SAYING IS THAT SOMEONE APPARENTLY MR. SWINDLER OR THE GO FUND ME PAGE OR WHATEVER, SOMEBODY SAID THAT THEY SPENT $10,000 FOR ARTISTIC DESIGN, I GUESS, FOR BILLBOARDS AND FOR VINYL, I GUESS, FOR BILLBOARDS.
AND SO WHO MADE THAT $10,000 EXPENDITURE AND WAS THE, IT WAS THE CLAIM I MADE THE EXPENDITURE, NOT REALLY WHAT HAPPENED.
I THINK I DO THAT PRETTY EASILY.
I JUST WORDED MY, GO FUND ME THAT WAY IN ORDER TO KIND OF LIKE CREATE HYPE OR MOMENTUM, SO TO SPEAK, UM, JUST TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY SPEND $10,000 NOT SPEND ANY MONEY DIRECTLY FOR BILLBOARDS PERIOD.
UM, DONATED ALL THE MONEY TO SAY BOSTON ALPAC.
I ASSUMED THAT I WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, BASED UPON, UH, OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, UH, THAT, THAT ALSO, YOU KNOW, WORK AND LIVE DOWNTOWN.
AND THEY'VE BEEN, UH, YOU KNOW, VERY PASSIONATE IN THIS SUBJECT AS WELL.
I ASSUMED THAT I WOULD HAVE VERY, UH, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATE SUPPORT OF THIS AND I DID GET THAT, BUT I DIDN'T, WHEN I, WHEN I WROTE IT IN THE GO FUND ME, HEY, I SPENT $10,000.
THAT WAS MORE SO JUST TO, HEY, LIKE, IT'D BE EASIER TO RAISE 15 OR 20 IF PEOPLE THINK WE'RE HALFWAY THERE.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS JUST MORE OF A MARKETING SENTENCE, BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY SPEND TIME ON IT.
UH, COMMISSIONER 11TH, I SAW YOUR HAND.
I, I, FOR ONE WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO OUR 10 O'CLOCK I'M, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT IN ITS ENTIRETY, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT GIVE US REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO EXPLAIN MY REASONS FOR THAT.
UH, IF WE WANT TO DELIBERATE THAT BEFORE WE VOTE, UH, THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
IS THERE A SECOND CHAIR? I, UH, THIS IS A PROCEDURAL QUESTION, THEN I'M HAPPY TO TAKE YOUR CODE.
UM, I I'M ASKING THAT THAT MOTION CAN BE RESTATED BECAUSE I CAN'T, I CAN'T VOTE ON IT THE WAY IT'S THE WAY IT'S WORDED, BECAUSE I THINK MR. COMMISSIONER, YOU ADDED YOUR COMMISSIONER LOVE AS YOU ADDED YOUR RATIONALE FOR IT AS WELL.
AND I WANT, I WANT TO VOTE ON THE MOTION WITHOUT RATIONALE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH, GO AHEAD.
I WAS ONLY STATING THE RATIONALE OF THAT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION OCCURRED BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO, BUT I'M HAPPY TO, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO SAY, I'M, I'M MOVED TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT.
WELL, I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY A PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE WAY TO FRAME THAT MOTION.
UM, AND THOSE ARE, THAT'S KIND OF THE IT'S BEAR TRACKS VERY CLOSELY TO THE LANGUAGE WE USE IN MOTIONS LIKE THIS.
WE SAY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE CITY CODE SAYS IS THAT YOU CAN DISMISS IT IF THERE ARE NOT REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT VIOLATION OCCURRED.
SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS AN APPROPRIATELY PHRASED MOTION.
UM, AND STILL WAITING ON A SECOND IF, UM, OKAY.
UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STANTON.
UM, IF, UH, IF COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, GO AHEAD, MAKE SURE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, JUST CRAB, BLAB, BLAB, LIKE CHARLIE BROWN'S TEACHER.
UM, I THINK THIS IS SIMPLY A WAY TO CIRCUMVENT THE INTENDED RULES TO
[02:05:01]
DISCLOSE DONORS FOR, UM, CAMPAIGN.THIS IS A DONATION FOR CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES.
THEY DONATED THE MONEY AND WENT TO SAVE AUSTIN.
UM, AND IN THE MEANTIME, THE, I THINK MAY 24TH, THEY DISCLOSED THE GO-FUND NEW DONORS, WHICH WAS WELL AFTER THE ELECTION.
SO THOSE THAT DON'T DONATE, IT WERE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.
WE HAVE THESE CAMPAIGN FINANCE RULES SO THAT THE DONORS ARE DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC IN A TIMELY MANNER.
AND THIS WAS A WAY BY HAVING A GOFUNDME CAMPAIGN.
AND THEN LATER JUST SAYING THAT, UM, I JUST DON'T BUY THAT, THAT NO, THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
SO I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION.
I SAW YOUR HAND AND THE COMMISSIONER'S TENT.
SO I, I HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS UP, OBVIOUSLY I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF MY OWN MOTION.
THAT WOULD BE WEIRD IF I DID OTHERWISE.
UM, AND COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.
AND THE MAIN REASON I DO IS THAT WHAT MR. SWINDLER DID IS PRECISELY WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT SOMEONE TO DO.
I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER KALE, I BELIEVE WHO SAID, UM, HE GOT EXCITED ABOUT AN ISSUE IN OUR CITY.
HE STARTED TO TAKE ACTION TO SPEAK.
UM, WHEN HE REALIZED THAT THERE WERE RULES AGAINST DOING IT IN THE WAY THAT HE WANTED TO DO IT, HE CHANGED HIS COURSE AND, UM, AND CORRECTED THAT.
THAT'S WHAT WE WANT PEOPLE TO DO.
UM, WE HAVE A FAIRLY BYZANTINE CAMPAIGN FINANCE, UH, CODE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S AVOIDABLE, UM, BUT HE DID EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
AND TO HAUL HIM BEFORE THIS BOARD HAS A GREAT CHILLING EFFECT ON PEOPLE, ENGAGING IN POLITICAL SPEECH, WE WANT MORE ENGAGEMENT AND NOT LESS.
AND ASIDE FROM ALL OF THAT, THE REALITY IS THERE WERE NOT DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES, THAT THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE WERE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES MADE.
THAT DEFINITION IS A VERY IMPORTANT ONE AND A DONATION TO GO FUND ME DOES NOT MEET THAT DEFINITION.
UM, AND THERE'S, THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF THE, UH, OF ACTUAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING BEING DONE BY MR. SWINDLER.
HE TOOK THE MONEY AND GAVE IT TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
UM, SO EVEN IF WE THINK THAT MR SWINDLER HAD A NEFARIOUS PURPOSE, WHICH THERE'S INTENT IS NOT AN ELEMENT OF A VIOLATION OF THESE, UH, STATUTES, BUT EVEN IF WE THINK HE HAD AN NEFARIOUS PURPOSE, IF NO DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES WERE MADE, THEN NO VIOLATION OCCURRED.
AND IF, IF THE COUNCIL OR LEGISLATURE OR SOMEONE WANTS TO AMEND THE CODE TO CHANGE THAT, WELL, THAT'S A, THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR A DIFFERENT DAY.
UM, BUT I THINK THIS HAS A GREAT CHILLING EFFECT ON PEOPLE LIKE MR. SWINDLER, WHO ARE NOT POLITICAL PROFESSIONALS WHO SAY, I WANT TO GET INVOLVED, AND I WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN MY CITY.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL, THIS'LL BOOMERANG TO BOTH SIDES OF ISSUES LIKE THIS.
UM, IF WE, IF WE COUNTENANCE THIS SORT OF A COMPLAINT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, I WILL BE VOTING FOR THE MOTION.
I AM GOING TO VERY BRIEFLY, UM, UH, MOVE.
SO IN THE INTEREST OF OUR 10 O'CLOCK DEADLINE AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO AFFIRMATIVELY MOVE TO GO PAST 10 O'CLOCK, UM, UH, JUST IN THE INTEREST OF MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T ACCIDENTALLY RUN A FOUL OF OUR OWN RULES AND ABRUPTLY TURN AT 10 O'CLOCK, UM, I'M GONNA, UH, VERY RESPECTFULLY MOVE TO TABLE THE MOTION TEMPORARILY, UM, JUST SO THAT WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT AND THEN COME BACK TO THE MOTION.
HE'LL PROPOSE THAT TABLE AND MR. MR. CHAIRMAN, BUT WITH THAT, I DO NOT OPPOSE TABLING FOR PURPOSES OF THAT VOTE.
THEN, UM, I WILL, UH, MOVE TO TEMPORARILY TABLE THE MOTION.
UM, I I'D APPRECIATE A SECOND, UH, QUICKLY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER LEVINS.
UH, THEN I, I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW IF THAT SECOND ONE.
BUT LET'S HAVE A QUICK ROLL CALL.
UM, I'M NOT SURE MY ROBERT'S RULES IS SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THIS HOUSE, BUT WE'LL DO A QUICK ROLL CALL VOTE.
UM, SO I WILL CALL YOUR NAMES AS THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA.
I CAN PULL UP MY COPY OF THE AGENDA HERE IS, UM, SO PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF.
I WILL SAY YOUR NAME, UH, VOTE.
UM, AND THEN I WILL REPEAT YOUR VOTE BACK TO YOU TO CONFIRM IT.
VICE-CHAIR WILL HURRY IS ABSENT SECRETARY
[02:10:01]
LEARNER.UH, COULD YOU SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME? I DON'T KNOW.
COMMISSIONER DANBURG COMMISSIONER DANBURG VOTES.
YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE KILL VOTES.
COMMISSIONER LAURIE IS ABSENT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S AYE.
COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK, COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK VOTES.
AND I, UH, IN COMMISSIONER, WITHIN THE UK,
SO THAT MOTION IS TEMPORARILY TABLED.
UM, I'M GOING TO MAKE A PRIVILEGED MOTION THAT WE GO PAST 10 O'CLOCK.
IS THERE A SECOND? THAT WAS A RACE.
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER CARROLL ONE.
SO THAT ASSUMING THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE ROLL CALL AND DISCUSSION.
WELL WE'RE NOW WE'RE VOTING ON A NEW MOTION, SO ROBERT'S, UH, WOULD ROLL IN HIS GRAVE IF WE DIDN'T DO THIS.
SO THAT WAS AN I FROM SECRETARY LEARNERS.
ON GOING BACK, COMMISSIONER DANBURG COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
COMMISSIONER KALE, COMMISSIONER, KALE VOTES.
COMMISSIONER LAHREN IS ABSENT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S AYE, MR. LEVIN'S VOTES.
OR I AM COMMISSIONER AND A YUCA.
SO THAT WAS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 EYES, ONE NAME, TWO ABSENT THAT PREVAILS.
THEN I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S TO REINTRODUCE THIS MOTION.
UM, SO I RE-INTRODUCE MY MOTION THAT HAS BEEN TABLED TO, UH, DISMISS THE COMPLAINT IN ITS ENTIRETY BECAUSE THERE ARE NOT REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
UH, SECOND COMMISSIONER STANDS IN SECONDS AGAIN, BACK ON THE MOTION.
THANK YOU FOR BEARING WITH ME AND PREPARING WITH MR. ROBERTS.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION, COMMISSIONER STANTON? UH, YES.
I, I WANT TO, UM, SUPPORT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S STANCE, UM, OF THE MOTION.
AND I WANT TO, UM, SUPPORT AND ALSO SUPPORT, UH, BOTH PARTIES IN THIS COMPLAINT HERE.
UH, MR. CASINO FOR, UM, ALSO HIS PASSION IN BRINGING FORTH WHEN HE FEELS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION.
SO MR. CASINO, I HOPE THAT YOU ARE NOT DISCOURAGED BY DOING WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS RIGHT.
UM, AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT, UM, UH, MR. UH, MR. SWINDLER, I APPLAUD YOU FOR YOUR, UM, FOR YOUR MOTIVATION AND YOUR PASSION AND, AND GETTING INVOLVED AS WELL.
I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF, I GUESS, REMIND OUR COMMISSION AND LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK.
MY PERSPECTIVE IS MY CHARGE AS A COMMISSIONER ON THIS COMMISSION IS NOT TO PASS JUDGMENT OR MAKE JUDGMENT AS TO AN INDIVIDUAL'S INTENT WHEN THEY MAKE A COMPLAINT OR WHEN THEY ARE RESPONDING, UH, WHETHER THEY HAVE NEFARIOUS INTENT OR NOT.
UM, MY CHARGE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS TO DECIDE A COMPLAINT BASED JUST FACTUALLY BASED ON ONE.
IF IT FALLS, SINCE IT FALLS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION, HERE ARE THE RULES.
AND DOES IT MEAN, UH, THE DEFINITION OF, YOU KNOW, OF THE CHARGE THAT'S ALLEGED HERE? AND SO LIKE, COMMISSIONER, LEVIN'S MY VOTE.
WHEREAS I, I SAW THE, THE PASSION ON, AND I'M NOT HERE TO DOUBT REALLY PEOPLE.
I THINK I ALSO AGREE, I FORGET WHICH COMMISSIONER WHO SAID, I THINK IT WAS GREENBERG WHO SAID THAT, UM, SHE BELIEVES THAT THIS IS JUST A KIND OF A WAY TO CIRCUMVENT IT.
UM, I ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GREENBERG THAT THAT DEFINITELY COULD BE A CONSEQUENCE.
IT'S A REASONABLE CONSEQUENCE.
AND, UM, I SHARE YOUR CONCERNS WITH THAT, BUT I, I AM TAKING MY CHARGE AS COMMISSIONER ON THIS COMMISSION, VERY LITERALLY AS
[02:15:01]
CARE AS THE ALLEGED VIOLATION, HERE'S THE CODE WE GOT TO, THE DEFINITION OF THE CODE IS THERE.AND FOR ME, ONCE I GOT CLARITY ON THE DEFINITION OF EXPENDITURE.
SO I THANK YOU, MR. OPA, FOR THAT, THEN IT BECAME CLEAR TO ME FROM MY PERSPECTIVE THAT IT DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE AND ON THOSE GROUNDS, UM, I WILL BE VOTING, UM, TO DISMISS THIS COMPLAINT, BUT AGAIN, I WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR BOTH PARTIES AND THIS AND STICKING IT THROUGH AND DOING WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS THE RIGHT THING, REGARDLESS OF WHICH SIDE YOU FALL ON.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STANTON.
UM, AND I'LL BRIEFLY OFFER A COMMENT THAT, UH, ON, ON THE QUESTION OF INTENTION, THAT'S SOMETHING WE USUALLY, IF WE FIND THAT THERE IS A VIOLATION, WHEN WE GET TO THE SANCTIONS, LIKE WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES THAT'S WHEN WE USUALLY DO INTENTION, UH, QUESTIONS, UM, UNLESS THE CODE SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT A VIOLATION HAS TO OCCUR WITH A SPECIFIC KIND OF INTENTION, THEY HAD TO HAVE DONE IT KNOWINGLY OR INTENTIONALLY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT, UH, IT'S AN ASTUTE OBSERVATION.
AND ONE THAT I APPRECIATE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AT THIS STAGE, UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I HAVE SOME THOUGHTS I WANT TO SHARE, BUT I WANT TO GIVE DEFERENCE TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FIRST.
COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK, AND THEN SECRETARY WONDER, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE SECRETARY.
LEARNER'S GOT SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO SAY BEFORE WE COME BEFORE I, UH, GIVE SOME THOUGHTS WITH MY OWN AND THEN MAYBE PROCEED TO A VOTE.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS.
I MEAN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WONDER IS THAT I THINK THE QUESTION THERE, THERE ARE LOTS OF KINDS OF EXPENDITURES THAT NEEDS TO BE REPORTED, UM, IN CAMPAIGN FINANCE.
BUT I, ONE OF THE THINGS I DO WONDER IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE SAVE AUSTIN NOW, THE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
AND I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, MR. SPAN, WHERE FOR, IF HE MADE A DONATION TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS DISCLOSED AND THEN SAY, BOSTON NOW MADE THE EXPENDITURE FOR THE BILLBOARD.
I DON'T WANT TO SET A PRECEDENT THAT THIS IS A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO RAISE MONEY AND THEN GIVE IT OVER AND THEN HIDE.
AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS AS YOU, MR. SPANGLER, I'M JUST SAYING LIKE WE DON'T, WE DO, YOU HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT KIND OF PRECEDENT THAT IT BECOMES AN AVENUE OF LIKE, OKAY, NOW WE CAN GET KIND OF AROUND, UM, DISCLOSURE RULES AT THE SAME TIME.
I MEAN, THE ENTITY THAT PAID FOR THE, THE BILLBOARD ULTIMATELY WAS SAFE BOSTON NOW.
UM, AND THEY NEED TO DISCLOSE THEIR DONORS.
SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO EXACTLY WHAT I'M LOOKING AT, MR. SPRINGER FOR THAT'S.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS THAT WE NEED TO GO TO A HEARING SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER, OR IF IT MEANS IT'S DISMISSIBLE THAT'S.
SO THIS DOES SAY, I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE.
UM, SO MY, I AM, I AM STRUGGLING.
I WILL BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND TRANSPARENT BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND WE TRY OUR BEST AND WE STRUGGLED WITH THIS IN OTHER COMPLAINTS IN THE PAST, UH, THERE ARE VERY RECENT PAST COMMISSIONERS.
WE TRY TO GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE, UH, NON-PROFESSIONAL COMPLAINANT, RIGHT? UM, THE COMPLAINANT THAT SAYS THEY SEE SOMETHING WRONG AND TRY TO, AND THEY TRY TO BACK IT UP.
UM, AND WHERE I STRUGGLE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COMPLAINANT HAS REPRESENTED, UM, THINGS THAT COULD AMOUNT TO VIOLATIONS OF CODE.
UM, AND I THINK REASONABLY COULD BE VIOLATIONS OF CODE, WHICH SORT OF THAT IS OUR TASK RIGHT NOW, WHETHER NOT THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED.
I THINK WHAT IS IMPLIED IN THAT THOUGH, IS THAT THE RESPONDENT COMMITTED THOSE VIOLATIONS.
UM, AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S QUITE ENOUGH TO GO ON.
IT IS, IT IS A GENUINE STRUGGLE BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THIS COULD, THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES TO THIS KIND OF DECISION THAT GO IN BOTH DIRECTIONS ON
[02:20:01]
THE ONE HAND, A CHILLING EFFECT, UH, FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE JUST GETTING ENTHUSIASTICALLY INVOLVED IN POLITICS, SOMETHING THAT I WISH MORE PEOPLE WOULD DO.UM, AND THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU DO HAVE THE PRECEDENT THAT HAS SAID LIKE, WELL, IF I JUST, UH, BUNDLE MY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS IN A GO FUND ME AND SAY, OOPS, SORRY, AND THEN SEND IT TO A PACK THEN IT'S OKAY.
AGAIN, NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE, BUT YOU KNOW, MORE SOPHISTICATED PARTICIPANTS IN OUR POLITICAL PROCESS CAN TAKE A CUE FROM WHAT WE DO RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO I, I DO THINK THAT THE, I WILL LIKELY BE VOTING FOR THE MOTION.
AND I JUST WANT TO KIND OF CLEAR AND ON THE RECORD THAT SOMETHING THAT THE COMPLAINANT SAID IN THE COURSE OF THE Q AND A, AND IN THE COURSE OF HIS PRESENTATION, THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT SPECIFICALLY THE GOOGLE RESULT THAT SHOWS UP AND SAYS, I PERSONALLY SPENT THIS MUCH MONEY ON ARTWORK AND VINYLS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHO THE FIRST PERSON I IS IN THAT STATEMENT, THAT WAS NEVER REALLY A HUNDRED PERCENT CLEAR BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE FULL COPY OF THAT STATEMENT.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT UNLESS THE ARTWORK AND VINYLS PRESUME, AND I'M READING TOO MUCH INTO THIS, WHICH IS WHY I HAVE TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
UM, BUT IF, IF IT'S THE CASE THAT SOMEONE WAS PRODUCING ARTWORK AND VINYLS IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION B, UM, THAT, THAT KIND OF STUFF AMOUNTS TO AN UNKIND, WHAT WE CALL DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES IN OUR CITY CODE, BUT AN IN KIND CONTRIBUTION TO, UH, THE PROP B EFFORT.
UM, BUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEANS THAT THE RESPONDENT, WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEANS THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT THE RESPONDENT SITTING BEFORE US RIGHT NOW, UH, COMMITTED VIOLATIONS.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT QUITE MEETS THAT ADMITTEDLY LOW THRESHOLD.
UM, SO I'M, I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE MOTION AS WELL, BUT COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK, GO AHEAD.
AND THERE'S MORE YEARS THAN ANY OF YOUR OLD, UH, HERE IS MY 2 CENT.
HE COLLECTED THE MONEY FROM GO ME BY THE RULES.
HE GAVE THE MONEY TO SAVE US THE NOW IN GOOD FAITH, SAY BOSTON NOW REPORTS IT AND I'D SENT HER, WE'VE GOT THEM COMING UP.
WE'LL FIND OUT LATER WE CAN ALSO TAP INTO THEM BECAUSE THEY RECEIVED THE MONEY.
I'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD A FEW TIMES.
COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK COMMISSIONER OR SECRETARY LERNER? NOPE.
UH, OH, YOU HAVE SECRETARY LINE.
AND SO THE QUESTION IS, SO TWO COMPLAINANTS, WHETHER THEY WOULD, HE WOULD THEN MONITOR THE DISCLOSURES OF A SAVE AUSTIN NOW, OR SO W NOW'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO ASK THE PARTIES DIRECT QUESTIONS.
I THINK WE CAN MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO PARTIES MOVING FORWARD.
UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, NEITHER HERE NOR THERE, HONESTLY.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, SINCE WE ARE AT 10 O'CLOCK AND WE DO HAVE OTHER THINGS TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION SPECIFICALLY ON THE COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER STANTON? YES.
I ALSO WANT TO ECHO YOUR STRUGGLE AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT AND, AND BEING, UH, VULNERABLE.
UM, IT WAS A STRUGGLE FOR ME TOO.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STOOD OUT FOR ME WAS THAT GOOGLE QUOTE AS WELL.
UM, AND MR. SWINDLER DID ADMIT THAT HE, HE WROTE THAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS NO LONGER A QUESTION, BUT HE DID PROVIDE A RESPONSE NOW, AND IT IS A REASONABLE WHETHER I BELIEVE IT OR NOT IS NOT THE QUESTION IS FOR ME, IT WAS MORE, HE PROVIDED A REASONABLE RESPONSE.
I CAN UNDERSTAND THE LOGIC AND PRIMING THE PUMP AND, AND STARTING THAT BY STAYING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S BEEN A, IT'S BEEN A HARD ONE THAT I GO BACK AGAIN TO WHAT IS THE QUESTION THAT I AM BEING ASKED HERE IN DETERMINING, UH, THIS COMPLAINT? SO I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO ECHO YOUR, YOUR STRUGGLE AND THE DIFFICULTY IN THIS COMPLAINT.
WELL, I, I APPRECIATE THAT COMMISSIONER STANTON
[02:25:02]
JUST REALLY QUICK.UM, BUT JUST A QUESTION OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, BECAUSE I THINK I MADE A MISS THIS AND IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO ME.
UM, SO THE RESPONDENT, UH, CONFIRMED THAT IT WAS THE AUTHOR OF THE LITTLE, THE GOOGLE STATEMENT, UM, THAT, THAT WAS PART OF THE DESCRIPTION THAT YOU'D WRITTEN AS PART OF THE GO FUND ME.
HE SAID THAT HE DID, BUT HE, BUT HE DIDN'T, BUT IT WASN'T TRUTHFUL.
HE WAS DOING IT AS A MARKETING PLOY, CORRECT.
TO, TO GARNER SUPPORT FOR THE CAUSE.
NO, NO, IT, IT, HERE'S, HERE'S, HERE'S WHY I ASKED THAT AND WHY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF, IF THAT'S THE CASE, UM, THEN WE, UH, IT MAKES IT TOUGHER THAN WE'RE GETTING, IT MAKES IT TOUGHER FOR ME.
BUT I THINK, UM, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, IN THE INTEREST OF EXPEDIENCY, UM, I WILL, UH, I'LL DO THE FOLLOWING BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE, OR NO, ACTUALLY LET'S DO THE BOAT AND THEN I'LL ADD SOME COMMENTS AFTER THE BOAT.
SO PARTIES STICK AROUND SECRETARY LEARNER, GO AHEAD.
HEY, IF THERE'S THIS MUCH QUESTION THERE, IT'S NOT A PROBLEM TO TAKE IT TO A FINAL HEARING WHERE WE CAN HAVE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE.
THAT, AND THAT'S THE STRUGGLE FOR ME TOO, BECAUSE IT'S, IT IS A LOW THRESHOLD.
IT REALLY IS REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
UM, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T NEED LIKE ROCK SOLID PROOF AT THIS STAGE.
UM, AND PARTIES IN COMPLAINANTS FILE COMPLAINTS, PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT SOMETHING WRONG HAPPENED.
AND THE FINAL HEARING PROCESSES IS SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OF AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCOVERY.
I APOLOGIZE IF I SEEM LIKE I'M WAFFLING, UM, IT IS AN INCREDIBLY CLOSE CALL FOR ME.
UM, I, I THINK I'VE, I THINK I'VE MADE UP MY MIND THAT I PERSONALLY WILL VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION, BUT I RESPECT EVERYONE'S VOTE AND OPINION AND PARTICIPATION.
UM, AND TAKE, TAKE NO UMBRAGE AGAINST ANYONE WHO DOESN'T VOTE LIKE I DO.
SO, UM, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, UH, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR A FINAL WORD.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE'LL GO TO A VOTE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
OH, CALL NAMES AS THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA AND PLEASE DON'T MEET YOURSELF.
I'LL REPEAT YOUR VOTE BACK TO YOU TO CONFIRM CHAIR.
SO BROWN VOTES, NO VICE CHAIR OR HEARD HE IS ABSENT.
I THINK I'M NOT GIVING IT A CHANCE TO ACTUALLY KNOW SECRETARY LEARNER VOTES.
NO COMMISSIONER KALE COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER LAURIE IS ABSENT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S AYE.
I AM ACTUALLY CHANGING MY VOTE TO A NO COMMISSIONER.
NO COMMISSIONER 10, 10, A YUCA.
NO, THERE BEING 1, 2, 3, 4 EYES, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, NAYS, TWO ABSENT THE MOTION FAILS.
SO WITH THAT, WE ARE ABLE TO ENTERTAIN ANOTHER MOTION COMMISSIONERS AND I AM HAPPY TO TAKE IT FROM WHOEVER IS THE C SECRETARY COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
I BELIEVE THERE'S REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION MAY HAVE OCCURRED.
IS THERE A SECOND? IS THAT TENANT UK? OKAY.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
CAN WE TALK ABOUT THAT OR, YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT.
UH, NEXT, IF THERE'S SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAT WE WANT TO REQUEST AS A CONDITION.
ALL I COULD SAY IS THIS IS JUST THE INVERSE OF MY MOTION.
SO ALL OF THE COMMENTS MADE EITHER IN SUPPORT OF, OR IN OPPOSITION TO MY MOTION, JUST
[02:30:01]
APPLY THE OPPOSITE HERE IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE TO A VOTE ON THIS MOTION.OKAY, THEN I'M GOING TO DO THE SAME THING THAT I JUST DID AND READ YOURSELF, PLEASE.
UH, GIVE IT TIME TO REGISTER THAT IT'S UN-MUTED AND CLEARLY STATE SAY YOUR VOTE.
SO I'LL GO IN THE ORDER THAT IT APPEARS ON THE AGENDA HERE.
VICE-CHAIR OF HEARNE IS ABSENT.
SECRETARY LERNER, SECRETARY LERNER VOTES.
COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER, GREENBERG VOTES.
LAURIE IS ABSENT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S NO, WE SHOULDN'T ELEVEN'S VOTES.
NO COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK VOTES.
YES, THAT IS OH 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 PAST SIX.
UM, IT HAS A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION AND IS PASSED.
SO WITH THAT, UM, WE NOW CAN DISCUSS SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAT WE, THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
UM, AND I THINK, UH, WHAT WE'VE TRADITIONALLY DONE AT THIS STAGE, UM, IS, UH, SOLICIT INPUT FROM THE PARTIES.
UM, WHAT WE MIGHT DO THOUGH, BECAUSE IT IS SO LATE IS, UH, HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.
IF THERE'S EVIDENCE THAT YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, YOU WANT TO SEE IN A FINAL HEARING, WE CAN DISCUSS IT AND HAVE A SEPARATE MOTION THAT THIS IS EVIDENCE WE DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE, BUT THEN OTHERWISE WE CAN ADMONISH THE PARTIES THAT, UH, THEY WORK WITH OUR COUNSEL, UM, LYNN CARTER, WHO'S REPRESENTING THE COMMISSION ON THIS TO DISCUSS WHAT EVIDENCE IS AGREEABLE BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
AND IF THERE'S SIGNIFICANT DISAGREEMENT, WE CAN TAKE THAT UP AT A FURTHER MEETING, BUT, UH, SEE COMMISSIONER DANBURG.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. CASINO TO BRING US THAT, UH, GOOGLE PAGE AND ANY SCREENSHOTS THAT HE HAS.
UH, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, THE SITE AUSTIN NOW REPORTS THAT REPORT THE INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE GOFUNDME PAGE.
SO I GUESS THAT'S FROM, UH, MR. SQUIB SWINDLER AND HIS, UH, HIS ATTORNEY.
UM, THOSE ARE THE MAIN THINGS I'D LIKE TO STICK WITH.
LIKE A MISSION OR A GREENBERG.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW ON THE INDIVIDUAL DONORS, INCLUDING WHATEVER WAS PROVIDED, THAT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT.
AND THEN LATER, WHAT WAS SUFFICIENT ALONG WITH THE DATES THAT THAT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.
UM, I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE A GOFUNDME PAGE.
I BELIEVE MR. SWINDLER HAS ONE UP NOW, THE ENTIRETY OF WHAT'S ON THE PAGE, INCLUDING WHERE IT SAYS THE MONEY GOES.
SO I, I THINK TO THAT END WHERE I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA SUGGEST, UM, IS IF IT IS POSSIBLE, UH, TO, I THINK MORE INFORMATION ABOUT GOFUNDME GENERALLY WOULD BE USEFUL, UM, HOW THE FEES ARE COLLECTED AND HOW THE FEES ARE PAID TO GO FUND ME'S ONE QUESTION THAT'S WORTH EXPLORING.
UM, BUT I THINK WHAT I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA ASK, UH, RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL TO TRY TO DO IS TO FIND A CACHE VERSION OR SORT OF LIKE A, UH, A, BECAUSE NOTHING ON THE INTERNET IS NEVER AND THINGS LAST FOREVER.
AND CLEARLY THERE IS SOME VERSION OF THAT GOFUNDME PAGE WITH THE FULL DESCRIPTION THAT EXISTS.
OTHERWISE, GOOGLE WOULDN'T HAVE A KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, REVIEW OF A LINK THAT NO LONGER GOES ANYWHERE.
UM, SO IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, UH, TO RETRIEVE, UM, THE KIND OF FULL GOFUNDME NEW PAGE, UM, AND IF IT'S NOT POSSIBLE, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
AND I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO.
UM, BUT TO RETRIEVE A COPY OF THE GOFUNDME PAGE AS IT EXISTED, UM, AT THE TIME OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OR AT THE TIME WHEN IT WAS LIVE IN ACCEPTING DONATIONS.
[02:35:01]
SO, AND THEN, AND I THINK THAT WOULD KIND OF HELP, UH, WITH, WITH WHAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.I JUST THINK IT MIGHT NOT BE POSSIBLE TO GET THAT ONE, BUT YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT.
THEY SAY YOU PUT IT ON THE INTERNET, IT'S THERE FOREVER.
UM, BUT THERE IS ANOTHER GOFUNDME PAGE THAT'S ACTIVE.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT MY, A GO FUND? ME THAT WAS TO GO TOWARDS, UM, UH, COMMUNITY FIRST VILLAGE.
I DON'T SEE ANYWHERE ON IT WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE MONEY GOES TO YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY.
THAT IS A, UM, THAT IS A GOFUNDME THAT IS DEPOSITED DIRECTLY WITH MOBILE LOAVES AND FISHES.
YOU CAN SELECT, UM, LIKE NON-PROFITS.
SO AFTER PROP B PASSED, I SET UP A HELP.
THE HOMELESS GET HOUSING ARE FUNDING RAISED TO THINK ABOUT $11,000.
UM, BUT YOU CAN CONTACT MOBILE LOAVES AND FISHES TO VERIFY THAT IF YOU WANT, I HAVE NO ACCESS TO THOSE FUNDS.
I, I SIMPLY WAS THE CREATOR OF THE GO FUND ME.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS EVIDENCE AND A FINAL HEARING? AND THEN I THINK WE CAN, UM, I'LL ASK WHEN, UH, ABOUT THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE, BUT I WANT TO LEAVE THE FLOOR OPEN FOR, UH, COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER SECRETARY OF LEARNER.
I MEAN THE, OBVIOUSLY THE SPREADSHEET, I'M SORRY.
I MISSED THAT, BUT ALSO THE, THE SAVE AUSTIN NOWS, FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
I THINK, I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT WAS REQUESTED IS THE YEAH.
UH, THE LIST OF DONORS AS IT WAS SENT TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, AND THEN STEVE AUSTIN, THAT WAS REPORTS WHATEVER'S FOR OFFERED DURING THE SESSION.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? I'M SORRY.
I WASN'T CLEAR ABOUT WHAT YOU WANTED.
UH, SO, UH, JUST A QUICK FRIENDLY REMINDER, RESPECTFUL TO PARTIES.
UM, UH, APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION QUESTION.
I THINK SHE WAS REFERRING TO, UM, UH, WHAT MR. CASINO WAS REFERRING TO IN SCREENSHOTS THAT HE HAD OBTAINED.
UM, BUT I'LL, I'LL REMIND PARTIES THAT, UM, UNLESS WE'RE, UH, AT A PHASE OF A PROCEEDING WHERE WE'RE ASKING YOU QUESTIONS THAT IT'S, UM, OUR REPORTER TO SPEAK, UM, UNLESS WE DIRECT QUESTIONS TO YOU, BUT I APPRECIATE IT.
I KNOW THAT IT WAS WELL-INTENTIONED UM, SEVERAL, UH, COMMISSIONER STANTON.
I HAVE, UH, A QUESTION ABOUT PROCEDURE.
SO THIS COMPLAINT ALLEGES THREE VIOLATIONS.
ONE OF WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A DATE OF ALLEGED VIOLATION.
PROCEDURALLY, ARE WE VOTING TO GO TO FINAL HEARING ON ONLY TWO OF THEM? CAN WE VOTE TO GO TO A HEARING ON ALL THREE OF THEM? IF ONE OF THEM DOES NOT HAVE A DATE AND THAT DOES NOT, AND THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF OUR OWN CODE.
UM, SO I WILL, UH, ANSWER THIS AS QUICKLY AS I CAN, AGAIN, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME.
UM, SO THAT IS, SO WE'VE ALREADY VOTED, UH, TO PROCEED TO A FINAL THEORY, UH, BECAUSE THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED.
I THINK AT THE FINAL HEARING, WE CAN DISCUSS AGAIN, IF RESPONDED IS SO INCLINED TO RAISE THE ARGUMENT AGAIN, THAT THAT VIOLATION WAS IMPROPERLY, UH, ENTERED ON THE FORM OR NOT PROPERLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMISSION, BECAUSE IT VIOLATED OUR BYLAWS, WHICH REQUIRE THAT THERE BE A TIMESTAMP, SO TO SPEAK THAT THERE'D BE A DATE OF WHEN THAT VIOLATION OCCURRED.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, UH, IT IS FAIR GAME FOR RESPONDENTS TO RAISE THAT ARGUMENT AGAIN, IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
UM, BUT THE MOTION THAT PREVAILED WAS TO GO TO A FINAL HEARING BECAUSE A VIOLATION OCCURRED AND AT THE FINAL HEARING, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, UH, DECIDE THAT, YEAH, THIS ACTUALLY, ISN'T A REALLY GREAT, UH, GROUNDS TO DETERMINE THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION.
SO WE'LL GET RID OF THIS ONE OR THAT ONE.
UM, BUT YEAH, OF COURSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVIDENCE.
UM, THE LAST THING THAT I THINK I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING IS JUST ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, UM, LIKE, UH, IF IT'S NOT TOO TERRIBLY LONG, I KNOW THESE CAN BE LONG, BUT THE TERMS OF SERVICE FOR A GO FUND ME, UM, OR AT LEAST MAYBE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE TERMS OF SERVICE THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO US.
UM, IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE TERMS OF SERVICE AGREEMENT, WHEN YOU PUT IT IN A PDF IS A HUNDRED PAGES LONG, UM, THAT MIGHT BE EXCESSIVE.
[02:40:01]
MAYBE JUST TO MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO IDENTIFY RELEVANT PARTS OF THE TERMS AND SERVICE AGREEMENT AS TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE POINT WAS RAISED THAT IT WAS PERSONAL PROPERTY OF MR. SWINDLER.UM, AND, UH, THAT THAT'S PART OF THE TERMS OF SERVICE IS THAT IT IS THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE PERSON WHO SETS UP THE DONATION OR WHO IS THE RECIPIENT DESIGNATED IN THE FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN.
UM, AND THAT WOULD BE USEFUL TO HAVE THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE TERMS OF SERVICE GROUP.
AND I THINK, UM, SO ANY COMMISSIONER AT AMBER, GO AHEAD.
JUST A BRIEF REMINDER THAT, OF COURSE THE BURDEN IS ON THE COMPLAINANT, BUT I WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE, NOT JUST TO THIS COMPLAINANT, BUT TO FUTURE ONES.
I BELIEVE MR. SWINDLER DID ALL THAT HE COULD FIGURE OUT TO DO, BUT WE DO AS MS. GREENBERG MENTIONED, WE DO HAVE PEOPLE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO WOULD TRY TO USE THIS CHANNEL.
AND SO COMPLAINANTS LIKE MR. CASINO ARE DOING ALL OF US A FAVOR BY HOLDING PEOPLE TO ACCOUNT AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT IS NO REFLECTION WHATSOEVER ON MR. SWINDLER, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY A REFLECTION ON SOME THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN WITH MUCH WORSE INTENT.
UM, SO A REMINDER THAT WE'RE, UH, I WANT TO KIND OF GIVE ONE MORE CALL FOR ANY EVIDENCE.
THE COMMISSIONERS THINK IS, UH, RELEVANT OR IMPORTANT TO REQUEST TO THE PARTIES.
NOW, COMMISSIONER TENDER, YUKO.
UM, I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS MENTIONED THE GO FUND ME ALREADY, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO OBTAIN A RECEIPT FROM THE GO FUND ME PAGE BASICALLY TO SAYING HERE'S HOW MUCH YOU RECEIVED AND, UM, THIS IS HOW MUCH, UM, WE'RE GIVING YOU DUE TO THE FEE.
AND THAT WORKING FOR MR. UH, SWINDLER DID PROVIDE SURE.
UM, NO, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S, THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN FIT INTO THIS REQUEST.
I'M GOING TO READ WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR.
UM, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE WE MIGHT WANT.
WE HAVE SCREENSHOTS FROM MR. CASINO WHERE YOU HAVE TO SAVE US AND NOW CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT.
WE HAVE A COPY OF THE GOFUNDME PAGE.
IF IT'S RETRIEVABLE, WE HAVE THE INFO PROVIDED TO SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, THE SPREADSHEET OF DONORS, WE HAVE, UH, ANY RELEVANT TERMS OF SERVICE PROVISIONS, OR IF IT'S NOT TOO LONG, THE TERMS OF SERVICE AGREEMENT ITSELF FOR GO FUND ME, AND THEN WE HAVE A RECEIPT, UH, FOR THE GOFUNDME TRANSACTION.
UM, SO THAT IS, UH, AND TO CLARIFY THAT ONE, UH, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY, ARE YOU REFERRING TO KIND OF THE, SORT OF LIKE THE DEPOSIT RECEIPT, UM, WHERE GO FUND ME SAYS, HERE'S THE MONEY YOU RAISED HERE? IT IS FOR YOU, LIKE, YOU'RE THAT ONE'S OKAY.
SO I'LL CALL IT THE GO-FUND ME DEPOSIT RECEIPT.
THIS WAS, UM, WAS A SCREENSHOT MENTIONED FOR THE QUOTE FROM GOOGLE WHERE IT STATES I HAVE SPENT $10,000 OF MY OWN MONEY ON WHAT'S.
I THINK IT WAS ENCOMPASSED IN THE SCREENSHOTS THAT MR. CASINO HAS.
I'D LIKE TO CALL THAT OUT SPECIFICALLY.
IS THERE ANY, ANYTHING ELSE COMMISSIONERS? SO I THINK THE LAST THING THAT I'LL SAY ARE, UH, LYNN CARTER, YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON, WHICH MEANS YOU HAVE SOMETHING FOR ME, UH, WITH, WITH ON YES.
A COUPLE OF ITEMS. UH, ONE IS THAT, UH, THE PARTIES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE A GIVEN, GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK TO REQUEST, UM, WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE IF THEY WANT THAT.
UH, TWO AS THAT THE COMMISSION WILL NEED TO VOTE TONIGHT OR AT A FUTURE MEETING ON WHAT EVIDENCE TO REQUEST.
UM, FOR THE NEW COMMISSIONERS AND FOR PARTIES THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION BEFORE LYNN IS MY REFEREE.
AND, UM, I ALWAYS APPRECIATE HER JUMPING IN.
UM, SO, UH, WITH THAT, I WILL, UH, QUICKLY GO FIRST TO THE COMPLAINANT.
UM, IF YOU WERE STILL WITH US.
[02:45:01]
THERE YOU ARE.UM, SO ANY, SO I'LL POSE TO YOU THE QUESTION, UM, BASICALLY WHAT LYNN CARTER JUST MENTIONED, UM, WHAT EVIDENCE WERE WITNESSES WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE AT A FINAL HEARING? UM, AND THEN IF IT'S A VENABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE SOME STUFF FROM GOFUND ME, UM, SOME RECEIPTS, UM, AND IF THAT'S POSSIBLE AND IF IT'S MINIMAL, UM, MAYBE SOME BANK STATEMENTS PROVING, UM, YOU KNOW, W UH, WHAT MR. SPANGLER SPENT OR DOES IT OKAY.
IT'S PUBLICLY AVAILABLE THROUGH THE STATE HAS ALREADY, RIGHT.
SO WE UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE WANTING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE, YEAH, I THINK AS I'VE BEEN REPORTED AS MY QUESTION AND REPORTED BACK IN APRIL, UH, SO LET'S SAY APRIL, AS I'VE STATED, NUMEROUS TIMES, LET'S DIRECT, UH, COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS, UM, TO COMMISSIONERS AND TRY NOT TO HAVE A TALK BETWEEN THE PARTIES, IF YOU, IF YOU FEEL A NEED TO JUMP IN AT KIND OF ASK FIRST, UH, IS ALL I'M REALLY ASKING.
SO, UM, WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU, IT MIGHT BE AN ASPIRIN IT'S NOT ALREADY AVAILABLE.
SO, UM, SO MR. CASINO HAD MENTIONED BANK STATEMENTS, UH, TO KIND OF FURTHER, UH, GROUP UP.
UM, WHAT'S BEING CLAIMED ABOUT, UH, THE AMOUNTS THAT CAME FROM GOFUNDME AND THE MONTHS THAT WENT TO, UM, THE SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT WOULD CLARIFY IT AND PRETTY MUCH SUM UP WHAT THAT WOULD BE THE MOST DEFINITIVE AND PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, EASIEST RESULT IN THOSE CENTRALIZED PLACE WHERE WE COULD FIND THAT.
AND IF THAT'S AMENABLE, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD APPRECIATE.
UM, TO TALK TO MY CLIENT, BUT AS A GROUND ROLL, WE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE WILLING TO DISCLOSE HIS PERSONAL FINANCES OF THEMSELVES.
SO WE'LL, UH, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE'S CLEAR A TIT, UH, YOU KNOW, HIS, HIS FAMILY EXPENSES ARE OFF LIMITS THAT ANYTHING WOULD BE READ REDACTED IF INDEED HE CHOOSES TO DO THAT.
I WOULD NEVER ASK FOR ANYTHING DEEPLY PERSONAL.
UM, AND NOW, UH, RESPONDENT, IS THERE, UM, ANYTHING THAT YOU SPECIFICALLY WANT TO REQUEST IN TERMS OF WITNESSES OR EVIDENCE, OR ARE THERE ANY SPECIFIC KIND OF CLAIRE, ARE THERE ANY CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT WHAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED SO FAR? YOU HEARD YOU KIND OF DISCUSS BANK STATEMENTS AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS LIMITED AND REDACTED ONLY TO THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY RELEVANT, BUT I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE KIND OF FULL OPPORTUNITY TO, AND I CAN RUN THROUGH WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED SO FAR.
AGAIN, IF YOU'D LIKE, I TOOK NOTES NO ADDITIONAL TIME NEEDED ON MY BATH.
NO, NOTHING ASKED FOR WHATSOEVER.
LET ME JUST DO ANOTHER CALL, I GUESS.
WE MADE OUR DISCLOSURE EARLIER.
AND SO, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE BETS AT, YEAH.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK FOR ANY OTHER EVIDENCE FROM THE COMPLAINANT.
OR, OR IF THERE WERE ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF IDENTIFIED AS THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PRODUCED.
UH, POTENTIALLY, UM, IF, UH, SO FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE, UH, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE, UH, RECEIPTS OF THE DEPOSITS FROM THE GO FUND ME, I THINK, I THINK, UH, I'M KIND OF BEATING A DEAD HORSE AT THIS POINT, BUT WHATEVER'S POSSIBLE TO GET, WE WILL.
I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THIS IS NOT ME ON JOE TO GO DIG UP ALL THIS INFO.
I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG.
I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M SPENDING MY 11TH HOUR ON THE SUBJECT, BUT IS THIS NOT UNDER THAT IT'S APPROVED BY? I ACTUALLY DID SOMETHING WRONG BEFORE I GO SPEND MORE HOURS OF ERIC AND MYSELF TO, TO, TO, I DON'T KNOW.
I WOULD ASSUME A CERTAIN WELL, SO THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT, UH, UH, COMPLAINANT AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT ARE COMPLAINANT IN ANY COMPLAINT SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO.
UM, IF YOU, IF YOU KIND OF IMAGINE A LAWSUIT, RIGHT.
UM, YOU WOULD, UH, SUE LIKE SAY YOU GOT IN AN ACCIDENT WITH AN 18 WHEELER.
YOU SEE THE COMPANY WITH THE 18 WHEELER SAYING LIKE THIS GUY, I THINK HE WAS TEXTING, BUT I NEED CELL PHONE RECORDS.
AND I THINK HE WAS ASLEEP LIKE, UH, YOU'RE HAD ZERO SLEEP AND I'M GOING TO NEED LIKE, LOGS THINGS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO.
SO I THINK THESE ARE THINGS, UM, UNLESS, UH, MR. CASINO DOES HAVE ACCESS TO, UM, SOME OF THESE THINGS, UH, THEN, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHY
[02:50:01]
WE'RE HERE AND HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.I WILL, I'D LIKE TO CHIME IN ON THIS A LITTLE BIT.
BECAUSE MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU, YOU MAKE AN ANALOGY TO, UH, TO WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING.
IF I COME IN WITH AN ALLEGATION, AS THIN AS THIS, I'M NOT GETTING MET INFORMATION, UM, THIS IS, UH, THIS IS A BLANK CHECK TO POLITICAL OPPONENTS TO SNOOP AROUND IN BANK STATEMENTS.
AND I, AND I, MR. CASINO, I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT YOU DON'T WANT ALL OF HIS PERSONAL EXPENSES, UM, BUT RESPECTFUL, YOU DON'T, YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO KNOW WHAT BANK HE USES.
YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO KNOW THE ROUTING NUMBER.
YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO KNOW ANYTHING EXCEPT WHETHER HE GAVE, UH, A DONATION THAT CAME FROM, UH, MONEY COLLECTED THROUGH GOFUND MADE TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
UM, SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE ONLY THING THAT MR SWINDLER SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE IS EVIDENCE OF THAT.
UM, WHETHER IT'S A, YOU KNOW, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS DONE BY WIRE TRANSFER OR AN MOWER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT COULD BE.
UM, THAT'S THE ONLY THING HE SHOULD HAVE TO SHOW.
AND THEN IF THERE'S ANY, THIS IS ANOTHER REASON WHY THIS IS I SO STRENUOUSLY OBJECT.
I KNOW I LOST THE VOTE, BUT TO PROCEEDING ON THIS, THERE'S NOTHING TO INDICATE THAT A DIRECT EXPENDITURE WAS MADE.
BUT SINCE WE'RE GOING TO A FINAL HEARING, I THINK WE SHOULD REQUIRE MR. SWINGER TO PROVIDE ANY RECEIPTS OF DIRECT EXPENDITURE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES THAT HE MADE, UM, WHICH PRESUMABLY IS GOING TO BE NOTHING.
UM, BUT GIVING, OPENING THIS UP TO, TO LET SOMEBODY FISH AROUND IN THEIR POLITICAL OPPONENTS, UH, FINANCIAL LIFE IS A CAN OF WORMS. I DON'T THINK THIS COMMISSION WANTS TO GET INTO, AND I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE VERY LIMITED TO THE VERY TARGETED THINGS THAT HE'S ALLEGED, WHICH DON'T EVEN AMOUNT TO VIOLATIONS OF THE CODE.
WELL, I, I DO THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO KIND OF TAKE THE BANK STATEMENTS OFF OF THE LIST OF EVIDENCE.
I THINK THAT'S PERFECTLY FAIR.
IF WE HAVE LIKE AN EMAIL FROM GOFUNDME THAT SAYS, HERE'S THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU RAISED AND HERE'S, WHAT'S GETTING DEPOSITED.
AND WE HAVE, UH, OTHER CONFIRMATION OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THAT AMOUNT TO SAY BOSTON NOW, UM, THAT'S ALREADY PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
AND IT HAS BEEN FOR MONTHS, LIKE MY ESSAY BY SOME OBSERVATIONS WERE, WERE AVAILABLE TWO MONTHS AGO.
SO, SO THE THINGS LIKE THE AMENDED COMPLAINT ARE NOT THAT MANY COMPLAINT, I'M SORRY, THE AMENDED, UM, FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE THAT HAS, UH, THE INDIVIDUAL DONORS THAT I THINK WE DID.
WE NOT DETERMINE THAT THAT WAS NOT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE YET, OR IT'S GOING TO BE.
AND I THINK ERIC'S STANDING HERE THAT WASN'T EVEN REQUIRED.
WE JUST DID THAT AS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT, LIKE, BECAUSE I ENDED UP, YOU KNOW, SPENDING FIVE HOURS IN THE LAST CALL, BUT WE DECIDED, HEY, LET'S GO AHEAD.
AND BEFORE WE, SINCE WE DIDN'T GET TO MY SECTION, WE WERE LIKE, HEY, LIKE, LET'S GO AHEAD.
AND, YOU KNOW, CINDY'S NAMES JUST SO THAT CASE, THEY WANT THEM, THEY CAN HAVE THEM.
YOU KNOW, THEY, WEREN'T THE ONES WHO MADE THE DONATION TO SAVE US.
NOW WE DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHETHER IT COULD BE REALLY NEEDED TO SUPPOSE THAT ARE JUST TRYING TO KIND OF GO ABOVE AND BEYOND TO HOPEFULLY THE GOAL IS TO, TO ENSURE THAT WE DIDN'T, UM, HAVE TO CONTINUE TO US.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT THAT'S PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION, THAT REALLY IS THE BURDEN OF THE COMPLAINANT TO, TO PROVIDE.
I MEAN, WE, IF THE COMPLAINANT CAN'T OBTAIN IT, I'M SURE THAT SOMEWHERE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DOWNLOAD THIS SONG ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE OR, YOU KNOW, OR THE, THE ETHICS COMMISSION WEBSITE, BUT I HAVE TO AGREE, YOU KNOW, SAME THING WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE GOFUNDME PAGE.
I MEAN, ALL OF THAT'S PUBLIC IT'S OUT THERE AT THE, MY PRESENTATION WAS COLLECTED FROM THE WEBSITE, RIGHT? SO THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS REALLY ON THE COMPLAINANT.
AND SO I HAVE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE EXPENDED A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME, EFFORT, AND MONEY DEFENDING AGAINST THE COMPLAINT.
I, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK AND SEE IF THERE IS SOMETHING RELEVANT, BUT YEAH.
AND I WANT TO, LET ME, I WANT TO BACK UP AND JUST SAY THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS KIND OF, PART OF THE HEARING IS HAVING AN OPEN DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON TO ASK THE PARTIES, TO BRING TO A FINAL HEARING.
UM, AND SO THIS OPEN DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M HOPING FOR, LIKE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHO SHOULD PRODUCE WHAT, UM, UH, I HAVE NO PERSONAL STAKE IN WHO PRODUCES WHAT I THINK YOU RAISED A VERY GOOD POINT ABOUT THE BURDEN BEING ON THE COMPLAINANT.
SO ANYTHING THAT THE COMPLAINANT CAN
[02:55:01]
GET ON THEIR OWN AND BRING, THEN THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT.I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT.
UM, SO THE ONE THING THAT I WILL, UH, POINTING OUT IS THAT THE COMPLAINANT, UM, WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO, I THINK, A RECEIPT, UM, SOME KIND OF EMAIL CONFIRMATION FROM GOFUND ME THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS COLLECTED AND DEPOSITED, UM, OR TRANSMITTED TO MR. SPANGLER.
SO THAT IS THE THING THAT I THINK THE RESPONDENT WOULD HAVE TO SHOW, UM, OR HAVE TO PROVIDE SINCE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PHYSICALLY MR. CASINO DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE RESPONDENT'S EMAIL.
UM, I THINK THAT THE COMPLAINANT IS SOPHISTICATED ENOUGH TO FIND THE, UH, APPROPRIATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS.
I THINK THAT, UM, THE SPECIFIC SPREADSHEET OF DONORS THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE, THAT THE RESPONDENT DOES NOT HAVE, OR THE COMPLAINANT, EXCUSE ME, DOES NOT HAVE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE FAIR TO ASK RESPONDENTS, TO PRODUCE SCREENSHOTS, COMPLAINANT, UM, CACHE COPY OF THE GOFUNDME PAGE.
I THINK I, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO RESPECTFULLY ASK BOTH PARTIES TO TRY TO FIND IT IF THEY CAN.
UM, BECAUSE I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GO ABOUT FINDING A CACHE VERSION OF THE, UH, GO FUND ME PAGE AS IT EXISTED.
IT MAY REQUIRE THAT THE PERSON WHO SET UP THE GOFUNDME PAGE ASK CO-FUNDING FOR THAT.
AND IF GOFUNDME IS STILL HAVE THAT LIKE CALL CUSTOMER SERVICE, OR I DON'T KNOW HOW GO FUND ME WORKS.
SO JUST A GOOD FAITH EFFORT ON THE PART OF BOTH PARTIES, UM, TO TRY TO FIND THAT.
AND THEN LASTLY, IT TURNS A SERVICE AGREEMENT.
I THINK, UH, MR. CASINO, AS THE COMPLAINANT SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SORTING THROUGH THAT, TO FIND WHAT HE THINKS ARE THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS.
UM, AND THEN RESPONDENT IS ALWAYS AS WELCOME TO POINT OUT THOSE PROVISIONS THAT THINK THAT THEY MIGHT THINK WORK IN THEIR PAPER.
IS THAT ALL, DOES THAT ALL SOUND GOOD? SOUNDS FINE TO ME.
I WANT TO TRY AND I TRY MY BEST TO BE FIRST DEFERENTIAL TO THE PARTIES TO SAY THEIR PEACE AND DEFERENTIAL TO COMMISSIONERS, TO ASK ALL THE QUESTIONS THEY WANT AND SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT.
UM, I KNOW IT TAKES A LONG TIME, BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS HOW WE GET TO FAIR PROCESS RESULTS.
SO WITH THAT, THE MOTION THAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY, JUST IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I ALSO LIKE LETTING COMMISSIONERS MAKE THE MOTIONS THEMSELVES.
I DON'T LIKE RUNNING THE SHOW, BUT THE MOTION I'M GOING TO MAKE IS KIND OF WHAT I DESCRIBED THAT COMPLAINANT PROVIDE THE SCREENSHOTS THAT YOU DESCRIBED, THE FINANCIAL, THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS THAT ARE RELEVANT, RIGHT? YEAH.
UH, RELEVANT TERMS OF SERVICE AGREEMENTS ON THE GOFUNDME PAGE THAT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT, UH, TO HIS COMPLAINT.
AND THEN FOR HIM TO MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT, TO FIND A CACHE OR A HISTORICAL COPY OF THE GOFUNDME PAGES THAT EXISTED WHILE IT WAS LIVE AND RECEIVING DONATIONS.
AND THEN THE SECOND PART FOR RESPONDENT TO PROVIDE THE SPREADSHEET, THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE DONORS THAT WAS GIVEN TO, UM, SAVE AUSTIN NOW, AS IT WAS GIVEN TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, AND THEN ANY KIND OF RECEIPT, UH, OR EMAIL CONFIRMATION FROM GOFUND ME SAYING THAT THIS IS THE AMOUNT WE WERE GIVING TO YOU, UH, AS A RESULT OF YOUR FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
LEVIN'S SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER.
LEVIN'S WE'LL DO A QUICK ROLL CALL.
SAME AS WE'VE BEEN DOING ALL NIGHT LONG.
I WILL SAY YOUR NAME, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF.
I'LL CONFIRM YOUR BOAT BACK TO YOU.
BICESTER HURRIES ABSENT SECRETARY LEARNER, SECRETARY LERNER VOTES.
COMMISSIONER DANBURG COMMISSIONER DANEBURG VOTES.
COMMISSIONER GREENBURG, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, ROLL TAG, COMMISSIONER, KALE COMMISSIONER, KALE VOTES.
COMMISSIONER NOVARI IS ABSENT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S AYE, MR. LEVIN'S VOTES HIGH COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
OR ION COMMISSIONER TO YUCA VOTES.
UM, UH, I CANNOT THANK YOU GUYS ENOUGH FOR YOUR PATIENTS, NOT JUST IN THIS HEARING, BUT IN THE LAST HEARING.
UM, AND, UH, APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH US AND LOOKING FORWARD TO, UH, TO SEEING YOU SOON.
UM, THANK YOU AGAIN, CHAIRMAN YOUR RULES REQUIRE YOU TO SET
[03:00:01]
A DATE FOR PRODUCTION AND I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.WELL, THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME ABOUT THE RULES.
UM, LET US SEE THE NORMAL, HOW ABOUT THIS? THE NORMAL PRODUCTION DATE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, IN SETTING THE, IN THE MOTION FOR THE FINAL HEARING, THERE ALSO SHOULD HAVE BEEN LIKE UPDATES THAT I BELIEVE WHEN CARTER ARE YOU AROUND MY REFEREE? YEAH, I'M AROUND.
I MEAN, THE DATE IS USUALLY SET IN THE FINAL HEARING NOTICE, BUT IT IS THE COMMISSION CAN ALWAYS VOTE TO SET DEADLINES FOR PRODUCTION AS WELL AS, UM, PRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS.
I MEAN, TYPICALLY WE ASKED FOR THE PRODUCTION AT LEAST TWO DAYS BEFORE THE, FOR EXHIBITS, THE EXHIBITS WE ASKED FOR ONE, ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING, THE PARTIES CAN ALWAYS AGREE TO EXTEND THAT TIME OR POSTPONE A MOTION.
UM, SO, UM, AND, AND I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR TO THE PARTIES AS WELL, THAT, YOU KNOW, WHILE IN THE PAST, THE WAY WE'VE TREATED THOSE PRODUCTION DEADLINES, UM, AS, UH, AS KIND OF REQUESTS, I I'M ACTUALLY STRUGGLING TO RECALL, UM, SETTING DEADLINES IN MOTIONS ON THE PART OF THE WHOLE COMMISSION WITH ONE NOTABLE EXCEPTION EARLIER THIS YEAR.
UM, BECAUSE IF, IF THOSE DEADLINES, IF THE DEADLINE IN THE NOTICE OF THE FINAL HEARING, ISN'T COMPLIED WITH IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GONNA, UH, HOW MUCH WEIGHT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT ON THAT EVIDENCE, RIGHT? LIKE YOU CAN STILL, THERE'S NO BAR ON, UM, OFFERING UP EVIDENCE AS LONG AS YOU MAKE THE EFFORT TO PRODUCE IT BY THAT TIME.
AND YOU DON'T LIKE SHOW UP AT THE HEARING WITH, BY THE WAY, I DIDN'T TELL YOU WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT I'VE GOT, UH, 70 PAGES OF DOCUMENTS THAT COMPLETELY PROVED MY CASE.
UM, SO, UH, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SET A DEADLINE PRODUCTION DEADLINE IN THIS MEETING, IN THIS HEARING ON THIS, UH, SPECIFIC COMPLAINT, IF THAT'S OKAY.
IF YOU PREFER IT A HARD AND FAST DEADLINE FOR THE COMMISSIONER SAID WITH LESS FLEXIBILITY, WE CAN DO THAT.
BUT I THINK, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD DEVIATE FROM OUR PRACTICE.
I'M I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT LAST.
WHY ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE DON'T NEED TO SET A DEADLINE? WE DON'T HISTORICALLY SET AT THAT LINE, UM, BECAUSE THE FINAL HEARING NOTICE THAT WILL GO TO THE PARTIES, UM, WHEN, WHEN A FINAL HEARING IS SET, WHICH WILL, UH, WHICH IS TYPICALLY THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, SO IF YOU HAVE A MEETING IN JULY, IT WOULD LIKELY BE SET FOR THAT MEETING IN JULY, UNLESS THERE WERE SCHEDULING CONFLICTS OR IN AUGUST.
THE NOTICE THAT GOES OUT, THE LETTER THAT GOES TO THE PARTIES HAS IN THERE, UM, KIND OF A PRODUCTION DEADLINE, AND THE WAY WE'VE TREATED IT IN THE PAST IS PLEASE PRODUCE EVIDENCE BY THE STATE.
UM, AND THEN IF EVIDENCE COMES LIKE LITTLE BIT LATER THROUGH NO FAULT OF THE PARTIES, WE GIVE APPROPRIATE WAY TO THAT EVIDENCE OF THE WAY TO, AS WE HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT.
UM, SO THAT IS HOW WE DON'T HAVE TO SET A DATE RIGHT NOW FOR PRODUCTION BY EMOTION COMMISSIONER, DAN BURKE.
I THINK AT THIS POINT WE HAVE GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE GOOD FAITH COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDED.
UM, SO SOME OF OUR HORROR STORIES FROM THE PAST DO NOT APPLY TO THESE GUYS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
THEY, I THINK, I THINK THEY'RE DOING THEIR BEST, RIGHT? SURE.
I MEAN, IF, YOU KNOW, IF THE NEED ARISES AT A FUTURE MEETING, IF WE SET A FINAL HEARING AND THERE'S SOME HUGE, UH, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE UPTURNING OF THE APPLE CARD AND THERE'S NO EVIDENCE, UM, THEN WE EVALUATED AS IT HAPPENS.
UM, AND THAT'S IN SETTING THE FINAL HEARINGS, TYPICALLY A CHAIR DECISION THAT I CRIED AT TO, UH, IN COURT, IN COORDINATION AND WITH THE COOPERATION OF BOTH PARTIES.
UM, SO I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT COOPERATION AND THAT GOOD FAITH EFFORT.
AND WITH THAT, I WILL EXCUSE THE PARTIES, THANK THEM PROFUSELY FOR THEIR PATIENTS AND FOR BEING HERE AND FOR PARTICIPATING.
[03:05:01]
TO GAIN HOPE HEARING.UM, HERE'S WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY BEFORE WE GET INTO THE FINAL HEARING.
UM, FIRST I'M GOING TO CONFIRM THAT OUR PARTIES ARE HERE.
WE HAVE COMPLAINANT, MARK LITTLEFIELD.
ARE YOU WITH, YEAH, I MIGHT GIVE HIM A SECOND SINCE WE'RE TAKING A HARD, HARD TURN FROM ONE COMPLAINT TO ANOTHER.
I'M TRYING TO BE, UH, I REALLY DO TRY TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY, BUT, UM, EFFICIENCY AND, UH, DELIBERATIVE PROCESS ARE NOT, UM, THERE, I SEE MR. LITTLEFIELD, CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO, SIR.
AND I SEE COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT, MS. DAVIDSON.
HELLO, I THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR PATIENCE THIS EVENING AND WAITING TO TURN AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR POSTS TO YOUR PATIENTS AND THE MAIN MEETING AS WELL.
OH, I ALSO SEE, UM, I THINK, UH, MR. GOBER, ARE YOU, UH, REPRESENTING THE RESPONDENT AS WELL? I AM.
WELL WELCOME MR. GILBERT, UH, TO THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.
I APOLOGIZE THAT YOUR FIRST INTRODUCTION WAS A SPELLMAN, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER DANBURG I SEE YOUR HAND UP, UM, MS. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M HAVING A PHYSICAL ISSUE AND I NEED TO ASK TO BE EXCUSED.
UH, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND WE WILL SEE YOU NEXT TIME.
UM, MAYBE WE SHOULD TAKE A VOTE ON THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE, CAUSE THAT MIGHT ONLY TAKE TWO MINUTES RATHER THAN WAITING.
WELL, SO I, I THINK WE HAVE THE POLICIES THINK THINGS TAKE LESS TIME THAN THEY DO.
UM, SO I THINK SINCE WE HAVE THE PARTIES HERE, AND SINCE I THINK THE PARTIES HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT VERY RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, I THINK IT'S IN OUR INTEREST TO KIND OF, YEAH.
TO TAKE CARE OF THIS BECAUSE IF THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IS INDEED A QUICK ONE, THEN I THINK, UM, WE CAN DISPOSE OF IT QUICKLY WITHOUT LETTING THE PARTIES WAITING LONGER.
UM, COMMISSIONER STANTON? UH, YES.
DO WE STILL HAVE QUORUM TO CONTINUE OR IS OKAY.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER STILL PRESENT 1, 2, 3, 4, UH, 5, 7, 7.
IS THAT RIGHT? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, FIX YOURSELF.
SO, UM, UM, I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO COUNT AGAIN.
SO WE, UM, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, UM, IS SO WE, OUR AGENDA IS TO HAVE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A FINAL HEARING.
AND BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE FINAL HEARING, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO AND LYNN CAN REFEREE ME IF THIS IS NOT AN ORDER OR STEVE, YOU CAN REFEREE ME IF THIS IS NOT AN ORDER SINCE YOUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL ON THIS MATTER, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE BOTH PARTIES THREE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN THE KIND OF MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENT BEFORE WE GO THROUGH WITH A FULL, FINAL HEARING, WHICH IS 10 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS ON BOTH SIDES.
UM, AND THEN A Q AND A PERIOD.
AND THEN, UH, OUR TYPICAL MOTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS SECTION IS THAT, UH, FIRST OUTSIDE COUNSEL IS THAT APPROPRIATE.
AND THEN TO COMMISSIONERS, IS THAT, UH, FINE WITH YOU? AND THEN I'D LIKE A NOD THE PARTIES IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THEM AS WELL.
SO I THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY APPROPRIATE.
AND I THINK THAT THE PARTIES HAVE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE TO THE COMMISSION.
[3. FINAL HEARING Discussion and possible action regarding the following: The complaint(s) filed on October 13, 2020 by Mark Littlefield against Save Austin Now, which allege violations of City Code Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance) Sections 2-2-23 (Political Committees) and 2-2-26 (Filing Campaign Finance Report Data) of Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance).]
WHICH, UH, COMPLAINANT OR COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT, WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST, UM, I'LL LET YOU RESPECTFULLY RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS KIND OF WHERE WE ARE.MR. LITTLEFIELD, FEEL FREE TO TAKE THE FLOOR FIRST AND GIVE US YOUR OVER.
UM, UH, EARLIER THIS WEEK WE, UH, BEGAN CONVERSATIONS, UH, AND, UH, UH, EARLIER THIS EVENING WE SIGNED A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN MYSELF AND SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW, I BELIEVE THAT, UH, THE AGREEMENT IS GOING TO BE EMAILED TO ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
UH, THE, UH, I'LL GIVE A QUICK ORAL
[03:10:01]
SUMMARY OF THE AGREEMENT, UM, EFFECTIVE, UH, JUNE 9TH TODAY, UH, SAVE AUSTIN.NOW WE'LL REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN ANY PETITION GATHERING EFFORTS.
NOW WE'LL BEGIN THE PROCESS OF WINDING DOWN AND TERMINATING AS AN ENTITY, UH, STARTING NOW THE GOAL OF TERMINATING BY OCTOBER, BUT NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31ST OF THIS YEAR, UH, SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW WE'LL FILE AS IRS FORM NINE 90 FOR THE 2020 TAX YEAR WITH THE IRS ON OR BEFORE OCTOBER 15TH OF THIS YEAR, UH, SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW WE'LL PROVIDE, UH, UH, ME THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO HAVE A HARD COPY OF THAT AGREEMENT, UH, OF THAT NINE 90 FORM.
UM, UH, SAY BOSTON NOW IS GOING TO, UH, MAKE DONATIONS OF $10,000, THE SALVATION ARMY, $10,000 TO CARITAS AND $10,000 TO MOBILE LOAVES AND FISHES ON OR BEFORE AUGUST 31ST OF THIS YEAR, UH, I WILL RELINQUISH THE RIGHT TO FILE ANY FUTURE COMPLAINTS AND OUR LAWSUIT AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW THAT INVOLVES THE ALLEGATIONS I MADE AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN NOW.
AND THE COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.
UM, UH, I AM, UH, I AM GOING TO WITHDRAW THE ETHICS COMPLAINT FOR CONSIDERATION, UH, AND OR REVIEW BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.
UM, THE CITY OF AUSTIN AT THE REVIEW COMMISSION WILL NOT ENGAGE IN ANY FINAL VOTE REGARDING THE ETHICS COMPLAINT, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FINAL VOTE, TO DISMISS AND OR MUTE TO THE ETHICS COMPLAINT.
AND NO REFERRAL WILL BE MADE TO, UH, UH, AN INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN ATTORNEY, TRAVIS COUNTY ATTORNEY, OR THE TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
UM, FIRST, WHAT DID I MISS HERE? OR WHAT DID I NOT STATE CORRECTLY THINK? NO, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SUMMARY OF KIND OF WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THE POINTS AND I BELIEVE MR. SHEET TESTS ON COPIES OF THIS AGREEMENT.
SORRY, I DIDN'T REALIZE I WAS MUTED.
UM, AND I THINK THAT, UH, LYNN HAS EMAILED TO ALL OF US TO OUR COMMISSION ACCOUNTS COPIES OF THAT AGREEMENT.
UM, I WOULD, UH, UH, I'M GONNA JUST IN THE INTEREST OF EFFICIENCY, WOULD IT BE OKAY WITH THE PARTIES TO HAVE THAT AGREEMENT KIND OF MADE AS PART OF LIKE OUR PUBLIC RECORD OF THE MEETINGS SORT OF ATTACHED TO THE MINUTES SO TO SPEAK, BUT SOMETIMES WE HAVE BACKGROUND MATERIALS FROM HEARINGS AND MEETINGS THAT ARE POSTED ALONG WITH, UM, I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE LYNN CAN SAY, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? AND I'LL STOP TALKING, BUT WOULD IT BE FAIR TO HAVE THIS BE KIND OF A PUBLIC RECORD FOR REVIEW? I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT AND WHERE WE CERTAINLY, UH, DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY KIND OF CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISION OR ANYTHING IN THAT.
SO, YEAH, YEAH, NO, I DIDN'T SEE ANY KIND OF, UM, UH, WHAT DO THEY CALL THEM? GAG CLAUSES OR, UM, YEAH.
UH, SO, SO WITH THAT, UM, I THINK, I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE'RE LEFT COMMISSIONERS.
UM, WE DO NOT HAVE A KIND OF CLEAR CUT PROCEDURE BY WHICH A COMPLAINANT WILL FORMALLY WITHDRAW COMPLAINTS.
WE ALSO DO NOT HAVE CLEAR CUT PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS OF THIS KIND.
I DO THINK THAT THERE IS A REAL INTEREST IN THE COMMISSION, UH, KIND OF RESOLVING COMPLAINTS BEFORE IT, THIS IS A COMPLAINT THAT HAS TAKEN EIGHT MONTHS.
UM, AND THIS IS, THIS IS A POSSIBLE RESOLUTION.
I THINK READING THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON OUR DISMISSING THIS CASE.
UM, IT, LET ME JUST KIND OF KICK IT TO THE PARTIES.
AM I CORRECT IN UNDERSTANDING THAT SORT OF CONTINGENCY CLAUSE OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT THEY'RE NOT THAT YEAH, THAT'D BE CORRECT.
SO BASICALLY THE CONTINGENT IS THE PROCESS ENDS NOW, AND THEN THE REST OF THE TERMS WOULD KICK IN FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS.
COMMISSIONER STANTON, GO AHEAD.
IS THERE NOT ANOTHER CLAUSE? NOT ONLY THE NOW OF DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT, BUT ALSO IN THE FUTURE, THE COMMISSION COULD NOT BRING FORTH ANY OTHER COMPLAINTS AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN NOW IN THE FUTURE.
DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? THAT THAT WAS ALSO A CLAUSE OF THE SETTLEMENT? WELL, SO HERE'S HOW I READ THIS.
UM, IT'S SO, UH, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE BOTTOM OF PAGE ONE CLAUSE 7.2?
[03:15:02]
OH, I, I WAS, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A SETTLEMENT CLAUSE.THAT THOUGHT THAT WAS A CLAUSE AS A PART OF THE SETTLEMENT AND I OKAY.
AND, AND HERE'S HOW, HERE'S HOW I READ IT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
SO IF THERE WERE A SUBSEQUENT COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN NOW UNDER DIFFERENT FACTS BY A DIFFERENT COMPLAINANT, I DON'T THINK THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REACHES THAT BECAUSE THE WAY I READ THIS CLAUSE, UM, THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS CONTINGENT ON THE ERC IS NOT ENGAGING IN A FINAL VOTE REGARDING THE COMPLAINT, MEANING THIS COMPLAINT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, WHERE ANY FUTURE COMPLAINT INVOLVING THE FACTS THAT GIVE RISE TO THIS COMPLAINT.
SO THAT WOULD BE, YOU SAY LIKE MR. LITTLEFIELD DIDN'T BRING THE SAME COMPLAINT AGAIN, BUT SOMEONE ELSE BROUGHT THE SAME COMPLAINT ALLEGING THE SAME TAX AND VIOLATIONS.
UM, SO THAT IS, AND THERE'S AN EXCEPTION THAT WE COULD DISMISS SUCH COMPLAINTS IF THEY DID COME UP.
AND WE, I AM ASSUMING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO KIND OF MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL JUST IN THE INTEREST OF, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING CHAIR, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, THAT THE ONLY OBLIGATION MADE ON THIS AGREEMENT IS MADE ON MARK LITTLE FIELD AND NOT BRINGING THIS COMPLAINT BACK OR ANOTHER COMPLAINT, THESE FACTS, OR THAT I DON'T GET SOMEONE ELSE TO DO THAT FOR ME.
UM, BUT THERE'S NO OTHER OBLIGATION MADE ON THIS COMMISSION BASED BECAUSE OF THIS AGREEMENT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND, AND I'M JUST GONNA, I SEE A COUPLE OF HANDS RAISED AND I WANT TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE, BUT I JUST WANT TO ASK IF THAT IS A CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THAT CLAUSE ON THE RESPONDENT'S PART AS THAT, IF THERE WERE A SEPARATE ALLEGATION ON SEPARATE FACTS, UH, FOR A SEPARATE VIOLATION AGAINST SAVE AUSTIN, NOW THAT THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS IS NOT FOR CLOTHES, IF FUTURE COMPLAINANT'S RAISING FUTURE COMPLAINANTS.
BASICALLY WHAT THAT'S INTENDED IS IT'S NOT KIND OF A, IT'S A DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE TO WHERE WE DON'T SETTLE THIS AND THEN COME BACK AND HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE SAME COMPLAINT OVER REALLY ARISING FROM THE SAME FACTS, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND ANOTHER VIOLATION BASED OFF OF DIFFERENT FACTS THAT A COMPLAINT BROUGHT THAT WOULD BE FAIR GAME.
TYPICALLY WE ARE NOT GOING TO RE LITIGATE THIS ISSUE AGAIN AFTER IT'S SETTLED.
I SEE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG AND COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
SO GO AHEAD, MR. GREENBERG, I'M GONNA UNMUTE THIS TIME.
UM, I'M REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS.
THIS IS SAYING THAT WE CAN'T TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS SAYING THAT THEY'RE NOT, UM, ADMITTING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE VIOLATION.
UM, I THINK THEY'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GIVE $30,000.
I UNDERSTAND YOU CAN RAISE THAT MUCH IN TWO OR THREE DAYS WITH A GOFUNDME CAMPAIGN COMPARED TO WHAT WAS RAISED IN THIS, WHAT THE, YOU KNOW, TWO PETITION DRIVES WHERE WE'RE DONE.
I MEAN, THIS IS ONLY ON THE FIRST ONE, UM, WITHOUT ANY DISCLOSURE OF WHO WAS PAYING FOR IT, I FEEL LIKE THE SETTLEMENT IS WRONG.
WE HAD A, A PREVIOUS SETTLEMENT OFFER THAT AT LEAST, UM, ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ALLEGATIONS.
I BELIEVE MAYBE I'M AND ACCEPTED A CERTAIN LETTER OF PENALTY.
AND WE SAID, NO, WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE HEARING.
UM, THIS IS LIKE TAKING IT COMPLETELY OUT OF OUR HANDS.
I KNOW IT'S 11:00 AM VERY APPEALING, BUT IT SEEMS WRONG TO ME.
UM, UH, YES, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT.
UM, YOU SAID EARLIER WE WOULD GET THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I WAS WONDERING WHEN WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
I KNOW WE SUMMARIZED THE SETTLEMENT, BUT I THOUGHT I MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
UH, I KIND OF INTENDED FOR THE THREE MINUTES TO HAPPEN CONCURRENTLY.
UM, BUT I WILL GIVE YOU SOME TIME RIGHT NOW.
I WILL TRY TO GO QUICKLY, BUT, UM, AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, I WILL BE FRANK AS FAR AS A LOT OF THE, THE TIME AND RESOURCES THAT ARE GOING INTO THIS TO EVEN ATTEND THESE HEARINGS AND BE HERE FOR FIVE HOURS, THE AMOUNT OF JUST
[03:20:01]
TIME AND MONEY BEING BURNED ON THIS IS JUST FRANKLY RIDICULOUS.I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL OF THE PARTIES, WHETHER IT'S IS THE COMPLAINANT OR THE RESPONDENT TO COME TO A RESOLUTION AT THIS POINT, I WOULD URGE THE COMMISSIONERS TO ASK THE QUESTION TO THEIR OUTSIDE, EITHER OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL OF WHAT IS WITHIN YOUR JURISDICTION TO DO WITH THIS PROCESS, BECAUSE YOU ARE VERY LIMITED IN WHAT CAN ACTUALLY COME OUT OF THIS VOTE TODAY.
AND I CAN, I THINK BASED OFF OF WHAT MR. LITTLEFIELD IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE, HE IS GOING TO GET THAT WITH THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
AND FRANKLY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BENEFIT GREATLY FROM GOING THROUGH THIS RALPH AS A FOE, AS OPPOSED TO JUST CONTINUING TO DRAG THIS OUT FURTHER AND FURTHER, WE HAVE TO KEEP SHOWING UP FOR HEARINGS WITH ULTIMATELY LEADING TO WHAT MAY BE ONLY A $500 FINE.
SO I THINK IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO PUT THIS BEHIND US.
AND I THINK MARK, EVEN MR. LITTLEFIELD SEES IT THAT WAY AS WELL.
UM, I WILL GIVE YOU MR. LITTLEFIELD, THE BRIEFEST OF COMMENTS.
I REALLY WANT TO LET THE COMMISSIONERS TALK ABOUT THIS.
UM, BECAUSE THIS, THIS IS NOT A NORMAL PROCESS.
WE WOULD HAVE A Q AND A AND 10 MINUTE PRESENTATION.
SO VERY BRIEFLY, MR. LITTLEFIELD, I WILL TAKE A COMMENT FROM YOU.
UM, I KNOW IT'S FRUSTRATING FOR ME.
I IMAGINE EQUALLY MORE FRUSTRATING FOR YOU ALL THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
WHAT I WANTED WAS FOR SAVE AUSTIN NOW TO STOP DOING THIS CHECK.
UH, ONE OF THEM TO SAY THAT I CAN DO IT AGAIN, CHECK, UM, UH, I WANT TO SEE THEIR DONORS CHECK.
UM, AND, UM, AND THERE'S ALREADY THOUSAND DOLLARS GOING TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SERVING PEOPLE, EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.
UH, AND WHAT ARE WE GIVING UP IN RETURN? WE'RE GIVING UP THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION, DECIDING WHICH LEVEL OF LETTERS THEY'RE GOING TO SEND.
NOW, UH, I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS THE BEST OUTCOME, UNLESS I, THIS IS THE RIGHT OUTCOME.
BUT, UH, I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A LOT THE LAST TWO DAYS.
UH, BUT WHETHER TO SIGN THIS OR NOT, UH, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON SOME OF THE DETAILS, SOME OF THE POINTS, UM, UH, I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS HAVE PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO THIS AND YOU'RE LOSING YOUR WIFE TO DO THIS, UH, TO MAKE A DECISION.
UM, I CAN TELL YOU WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS, BUT I DID SIGN IT, I THOUGHT TO SAY, OKAY, UH, THANK YOU.
AND WITH THAT, I'M JUST, UNLESS THERE ARE BURNING QUESTIONS FOR EITHER PARTY, UM, COMMISSIONERS, I'M GOING TO ENCOURAGE US TO JUST KIND OF KEEP IT AMONG US IN DISCUSSING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THIS AGREEMENT.
SO IF YOU'RE GREENBERG AND THEN SECRETARY LINER, WE'RE GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT THIS IS A VIOLATION THAT THIS IS NOT PERMITTED, THAT THIS IS NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE CITY CODE.
UM, THE, UH, NON, LIKE NOT OKAY WITH ME THAT IT'S LIKE BROKEN AGAIN.
YOU, YOU BROKE UP A LITTLE BIT, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, UH, YOUR AUDIO QUALITY, KIND OF, OKAY.
I'M NOT OKAY WITH SAYING THAT THIS IS AN ENGINE OF MOBILITY BY SAVE AUSTIN.
NOW IT'S NOT CONSIDERED SAFE BUBBLE OR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY.
THIS IS BASICALLY SAYING NOT ONLY CAN THE SAME PARTIES MAKE A NEW PACK AND DO THIS AGAIN THE NEXT TIME THEY WANT TO PETITION.
ANYONE ELSE CAN TOO, IT'S SAYING YOU DON'T NEED TO DISCLOSE WHO'S PAYING WHEN YOU ARE PREPARING FOR A BALLOT MEASURE WITH A PETITION.
THAT'S WHAT THIS IS SAYING, AND I'M NOT OKAY WITH IT.
UH, SECRETARY LERNER, AND THEN I SAW COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
WELL, I MEAN, I THINK WHAT'S NOT SITTING WELL IS THE FACT THAT IT'S LIKE, THEY'RE NOW PAYING MONEY TO AS CAUSE.
AND THEREFORE THE, I MEAN, I, I'M SORRY.
I DROPPED, I DROPPED OFF AND CAME BACK ON.
SO AM I TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR AGREEMENT TO DROP THE, UH, THE COMPLAINANTS AGREEMENT TO DROP THE WHOLE ACTION IS BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT IS WILLING TO CONTRIBUTE TO A CAUSE YOU THINK THERE WERE OTHER, THERE ARE OTHER PROVISIONS IN THAT AGREEMENT ABOUT, UM, SAY BOSTON NOW WINDING DOWN.
[03:25:01]
UM, UH, AND IN FACT, THAT RIGHT, RIGHT.YES, OF COURSE THE ELECTION ALREADY HAPPENED.
THEY GOT THE PETITION ON THE BALLOT, THE PA THE VOTE, WE ALL KNOW, UM, OF COURSE THEY'RE DONE WELL.
THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE MORE, I MEAN, I GUESS I JUST, I'M JUST FEEL LIKE AS IF THIS IS A VERY STRONG, I WOULD PREFER THAT THIS WAS JUST, WE HAVE MET, WE HAVE WORKED THINGS OUT.
WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THIS TO OUR OWN RESOLUTION.
NOW I FEEL LIKE IT'S, WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT RESOLUTION? LIKE, IF YOU, YOU CAN BRING SOMEONE TO A COMPLAINT AND THEN, THEN BE IN ORDER TO GET IT DISMISSED, THEY AGREE TO GIVE MONEY TO SOMETHING.
MAYBE I'M OVERSIMPLIFYING THIS, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT JUST SOUNDED LIKE TO ME.
AND I DON'T, I DON'T, I MEAN, SO WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE WHO CAN'T DO THAT? RIGHT? UM, THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION.
UH, SEE COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
YOU WERE NEXT IN LINE THEN COMMISSIONER.
FIRST QUESTION, MR. SHADES, THE SIGNATURES, UH, NOT ORIGINAL SIGNATURES.
IF WE SETTLED THIS, DO WE GET SIGNATURES, ACTUAL SIGNATURES? AND THE REASON I'M SO ADAMANT ABOUT THIS IS BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN 30 YEARS WORKING ON ELECTIONS AND SIGNATURES, ORIGINAL SIGNATURES.
THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT, NOT A SIGN SIGNATURES BACK, A ROBO PAN.
THAT'S ALL PETTY, BUT I'M PETTY.
WELL TODAY'S TECHNOLOGY SIGNATURE SIGNED WITH DOCUSIGN ARE CONSIDERED TO BE LEGAL SIGNATURES.
HOWEVER, IF IT WAS IMPORTANT TO HAVE WHAT WE CALL WET SIGNATURES, I'M SURE THE PROP, THE PARTIES COULD PROVIDE THOSE TOMORROW OR NEXT WEEK.
IF THAT, IF THAT WAS A REAL CONCERN FOR YOU, IT IS A CONCERN FOR ME.
WELL, UM, MY GUESS IS THAT THE PARTIES WOULD AGREE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT WELL, AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE OF MY 30 YEARS OF WORK IN ELECTIONS.
THAT'S IT COMMISSIONER, LEVIN'S THE, THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO MAKE OF IT.
UM, I SHARE SOME OF COMMISSIONER GREENBERG'S, UH, BEING TROUBLED BY THAT.
ALTHOUGH SHE AND I MAY BE TROUBLED FOR DIFFERENT REASONS, BUT THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.
I THINK THE POINT OF THIS IS WE ARE, WE HAVE LIMITED JURISDICTION.
AND IF MR. LITTLEFIELD DECIDES TO WITHDRAW HIS COMPLAINT FOR ANY REASON OR NO REASON AT ALL, IT TAKES IT OUT OF OUR HANDS.
WE ARE, WE ARE ESSENTIALLY, AND THIS WAS, UH, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY SITTING HERE AS JUDGES AND WE CAN ONLY HEAR AND DECIDE ON LIVE CASES AND CONTROVERSIES.
AND MR. LITTLEFIELD WITHDRAWS HIS COMPLAINT.
THERE IS NO LONGER ALIVE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE TWO AND WE HAVE NO POWER TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN SAY, OKAY, IT'S MISSED BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING HERE FOR US TO DECIDE.
UM, WE DON'T, WE DON'T GET TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER WE LIKE THE SETTLEMENT OR NOT, UM, THAT THE PARTIES GIVING US THEIR INFORMATION IS MORE INFORMATION THAN THEY WORK, RIGHT.
WE'RE REQUIRED TO GIVE US ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS COME.
AND MR. LITTLEFIELD SAYS, I HEREBY WITHDRAW MY COMPLAINT.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY ASSESSMENT OF WHAT OUR POWER IS AS THE COMMISSION, GIVEN THAT MR. LITTLEFIELD HAS SAID, HE'S GOING TO WITHDRAW HIS COMPLAINT NOW, WHETHER, WHETHER THAT'S ENFORCEABLE BETWEEN SAVE AUSTIN NOW AND MR. LITTLEFIELD, UM, YOU KNOW, BASED UPON WHAT THE CITY DOES OR WHAT WE DO OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT'S THAT ALSO IS NOT OUR CONCERN THAT'S FOR THEM TO FIGURE OUT, UH, SECRETARY LEARNER.
I MEAN, I THINK I AM, I'M INCLINED TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S.
I DO SEE THE POLICY PITFALLS IN THAT BECAUSE AN ETHICS VIOLATION IS AN ETHICS VIOLATION.
AND IF IT'S RAISED BY A COMPLAINANT, IT COULD BE IN THEORY, IT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE, THE, UM, THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO MAKE SOME KIND OF RULING ON, I SUPPOSE.
BUT OUR, OUR, OUR PROCESS NOW IS VERY, IS COMPLAINING DRIVEN.
IF THEY'RE GOING TO WITHDRAW, THEY SHOULD JUST WITHDRAW IT AND NOT GIVE US ANY REASONS WHY I WOULD, I WOULD NOT LIKE TO KNOW THAT IT WAS LINKED TO SOME OTHER DECISION.
IT SHOULD JUST BE, WE ARE WITHDRAWING AND
[03:30:01]
WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY PART OF ANY RATIONALE THERE.I ALSO SUPPORT COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S PERSPECTIVE THAT, UM, ONE, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, UH, BOTH PARTIES AND YOU'RE WORKING TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH A RESOLUTION.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE, THE WORK, UM, AND NOT THAT YOU HAVE TO, NOT THAT YOUR ANSWER, UM, MR. LITTLE FIELD AFFECTS MY, UM, STANCE ON THIS, BUT JUST MAYBE FOR MY EDIFICATION OR PEACE OF MIND.
UH, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU ARE, HAVE YOU SIGNED THE SETTLEMENT AND YOU WERE MOVING FORWARD, UM, WITHOUT DURESS THAT THIS IS, THIS IS OF YOUR OWN FREEWILL AND YOU ARE NOT, UH, MOTIVATED, YOU KNOW, BY ANYTHING NEFARIOUS, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU TRULY WANT, UM, THAT YOU WERE, AGAIN, IT DOESN'T HAVE EFFECT AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE DECISION, BUT I THINK FROM MY OWN PEACE OF MIND, I'D LOVE TO KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU REALLY WILLINGLY DID.
UH, YES, UH, COMMISSIONER STANTON.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE VERY WISE TO ALWAYS QUESTION MY MOTIVES.
UH, BUT, UM, UM, LIKE I SAID IS, UM, UH, I WANTED TO SAVE AUSTIN NOW, THE NONPROFITS TO NOT DO THIS ANYMORE.
UM, SOMEONE SAID EARLIER THAT, THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING, UH, THE ELECTION'S OVER, UH, IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE.
THERE WAS A NEW PETITION OUT THERE BY THE SAME GROUP.
AND WE'RE NOT SURE IF THEY'RE GOING TO USE A PACK OR USE A NONPROFIT IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THE PETITION SIGNATURES.
NOW, WITH THIS AGREEMENT, WE, WE KNOW THAT NOW THEY'RE GOING TO USE THE PACK.
THEY'RE NO LONGER GOING TO USE THE, UH, THE NONPROFIT.
THE NEXT TIME A NONPROFIT POPS UP THAT SAYS, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS AGAIN.
I'LL BE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU THE NEXT TIME I WON'T WAIT.
UH, HOPEFULLY IT WON'T TAKE EIGHT MONTHS EITHER.
UH, BUT NO, I DID THIS, UH, I AM UNCERTAIN IF I'M DOING THE RIGHT THING OR NOT, BUT I PROMISE YOU, I DID THIS WILLINGLY.
UM, I DO, I WANT TO ASK MR. LEVIN'S, DO YOU SEE ANY POLICY CONCERNS WITH A COMPLAINT BEING BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMISSION TAKING EIGHT MONTHS TO IT'S BEEN DRAGGED OUT FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND THEN BEING DROPPED BECAUSE THEY WERE ABLE TO SECURE THE $10,000 OUTSIDE AGREEMENT TO PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT? YEAH.
I MEAN, I, I, DESPITE WHAT I SAID BEFORE, I'M, I'M, UH, I'M A LITTLE BIT CON I'M JUST TROUBLED BY THE USE OF OUR COMMISSION, UM, IN SUCH A WAY, THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT, I, I SHARE YOUR CONCERN.
I THINK THAT THE, YOUR POLICY, UH, ISSUES ARE WELL TAKEN, BUT WE ARE NOT A POLICY MAKING BODY.
WE DON'T THE, IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO WEIGH IN ON THAT AND AMEND THE CODE, THAT'S CERTAINLY THERE, RIGHT? UM, WELL, PRESUMABLY IT'S THEIR RIGHT, BUT IT'S NOT OUR RIGHT.
WE ONLY GET TO DECIDE THE CASES THAT ARE BEFORE US AND MR. LITTLEFIELD TOOK THIS ONE OUT OF OUR DOCKET.
I'LL SAY WE'RE NOT A POLICY MAKING BODY, UNLESS WE ARE, UM, IN THE SENSE THAT WE'RE OFTEN CALLED TO LIKE GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL ON POLICY.
UM, AND, AND I THINK IT'S, UH, USEFUL TO HAVE A MIND TOWARDS, UH, I MEAN, THE QUESTION OF WHAT PRECEDENT THIS SETS IS THE QUESTION OF POLICY.
UM, I THINK, UH, THAT COULD BE JUST A JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY, UH, DISAGREEMENT, BUT, UM, THE, I I'M GOING TO, HERE'S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO.
I'M GOING TO LET ANYONE ELSE SAY WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY BEFORE I SAY MY NEXT THING COMMISSIONERS, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR ANY FINAL THOUGHTS.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WHEN THIS HAPPENS AGAIN, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COULD VERY WELL HAPPEN AGAIN.
AND WHAT KIND OF GUIDELINES 50,000 WILL WE HAVE TO DO? MAY I RESPOND TO THAT? I THINK IF WE DON'T LIKE THIS, WE, TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE ANY POLICYMAKING ABILITY, IT SAYS, THE CHAIRMAN SAID IT'S TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, IF WE WANT TO GO EITHER AS A BODY OR AS PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
[03:35:01]
WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF AUSTIN AND TELL HER CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY NEED TO AMEND THE CODE TO STOP THIS, THEN THAT'S CERTAINLY WITHIN ALL OF OUR RIGHTS, AT LEAST AS INDIVIDUALS, IF NOT AS A, AS A COMMISSION, UM, IF, IF WE DON'T LIKE THIS, WE CAN TRY TO GET THE CODE AMENDED, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO AMEND THE CODE BY SAYING, WE'RE GOING TO NOW START HEARING CASES THAT ARE NOT, NOT LIVE CONTROVERSIES.THERE'S NO COMPLAINANT PURSUING THIS RIGHT.
WHEN YOU SAY THIS, YOU MEAN WE DON'T LIKE THIS BEING DROPPED OUT OF OUR HANDS, OR DO YOU MEAN THERE IS NO POLICY THAT SAYS THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE A PACK WHEN YOU GATHER PETITION SIGNATURES FOR A BALLOT MEASURE? WHAT SHOULD WE BE TALKING ABOUT? WHICH THIS ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE, WELL, THE, THIS THAT I'M REFERRING TO HERE IS THIS, UH, A SETTLEMENT, REALLY ANY SETTLEMENT, WHETHER IT'S, WHETHER IT'S FOR PAYMENT OR NOT FOR PAYMENT.
CAUSE AGAIN, UH, MR. LITTLEFIELD, COULD'VE JUST COME IN AND SAID, I HEREBY WITHDRAW MY COMPLAINT TONIGHT.
AND THAT WOULD HAVE NO LEGAL DIFFERENCE THAN WHAT HE'S DONE BY SAYING HERE'S, HERE ARE THE TERMS UNDER WHICH I'VE AGREED TO WITHDRAW IT.
IF HE WITHDRAWS IT, HE WITHDRAWS IT.
AND IF WE DON'T LIKE THAT, HE CAN WITHDRAW IT.
THEN THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO CHANGE THE CODE TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT SAYS ONCE A IS MADE, THERE'S CERTAIN PARAMETERS AROUND WHEN AND IF IT CAN BE WITHDRAWN.
ANY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE I OFFER MINE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OF A DIFFERENT PHRASING FOR NUMBER EIGHT THAT SAID THAT THEY DID ACKNOWLEDGE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED? MR. LITTLEFIELD, THERE WAS NEVER, THAT WAS NEVER ON THE TABLE.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION OCCURRED? SO, UM, I'M GONNA PIGGYBACK JUST BRIEFLY.
UM, WHEN YOU SAY THAT WAS NEVER ON THE TABLE, IT WAS NEVER ON THE TABLE AS, UH, IT WAS NEVER DISCUSSED OR IT WAS NEVER ON THE TABLE AND DETERMINES THAT IT WAS A NOT NEGOTIABLE.
I DON'T THINK, UH, I THINK THAT THERE IS, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE, NITTY-GRITTY SURE YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFIC NEGOTIATIONS AND THE TERMS LIKE DRAFT DOCUMENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UH, THE, THAT IS, LET ME ACTUALLY JUST KIND OF CUT THAT OFF COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
I FEEL YOU ON THAT SPECIFIC CLAUSE OF THE AGREEMENT, UM, THE, IF THERE'S ANY PART OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT, UH, IS KIND OF THE MOST, UM, DEAL-BREAKER YEAH.
THE, THE THING THAT GIVES YOU THE MOST HEARTBURN IT'S THAT? UM, SO I'M JUST GONNA KIND OF GIVE MY COMMENTS REAL QUICK AND THEY'RE BRIEF COMMENTS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT, I, I TRY THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE AT 11:20 PM RIGHT NOW IS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT MY COMMENTS AND MY OPINIONS AND VIEWS ON A PARTICULAR COMPLAINT TO HAVE ANY KIND OF UNDUE WEIGHT.
UM, AND I DON'T WANT TO LIKE HAVE COMMISSIONERS, UM, YOU KNOW, BE UNDULY SWAYED.
I WANT THEM TO VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCES AND I DON'T WANT THEM TO BE, UH, TO TOO HARSHLY PERSUADED BY SOMETHING THAT I SAY, NOT THAT I'M THINKING I'M A GREAT PERSUADER, RIGHT.
UM, BUT WHERE I'M STRUGGLING IN THIS EXACT MOMENT IS, UM, IS THIS A, WE ARE, UH, WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE HOW WE'RE QUASI JUDICIAL BODY, RIGHT? UM, WE ARE NOT QUITE A COURT, BUT WE FIND GOOD ANALOGS IN COURT.
AND THE QUESTION THAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH TO KIND OF BREAK IT DOWN IN THE SIMPLEST TERMS, IS THIS A CRIMINAL CASE, OR IS THIS A CIVIL CASE, RIGHT? LIKE A, IS THIS KIND OF IS A BETTER ANALOG THAT THIS IS A CRIMINAL CASE WHERE WE ASK CITIZENS TO PROSECUTE QUOTE UNQUOTE, BECAUSE THE HARM IN A CRIMINAL CASE IS ON THE BODY POLITIC IT'S ON THE PEOPLE.
CAUSE IT'S THE PEOPLE VERSUS BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
UM, OR IS THIS A CIVIL SUIT? IS MR. LITTLEFIELD AGGRIEVED BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFIC INJURY INFLICTED UPON HIM.
UM, AND I THINK THIS IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE MIDDLE GROUND.
[03:40:01]
THIS IS KIND OF LIKE, UH, A GOOD CRIMINAL CASE ANALOG IN THE SENSE THAT THE HARM IN CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASES IS MORE OFTEN THAN NOT THE VOTERS AND THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT LIVE, UH, WITH THE RESULTS OF A VOTE.BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, UM, YOU KNOW, I FIND MYSELF VERY MUCH PERSUADED BY MR. BIOCHEMISTRY.
MISSIONER, LEVIN'S, UH, SORT OF POINT THAT THE, IT IS A COMPLAINANT WHO BRINGS A COMPLAINT AND THAT IS THE BASIS FOR US HAVING JURISDICTION OVER ANYTHING, UNLESS WE WANT TO HAVE OUR OWN COMPLAINT THAT WE INITIATE OURSELVES UNDER THE TERM, UNDER OUR CITY CODE PROVISIONS.
UM, AND, AND I, I AM, I AM STRUGGLING PERSONALLY, BUT SECRETARY LERNER, I SEE YOUR HAND.
AND I WANT TO KNOW IT MAY BE, WE DO HAVE TWO QUITTERS, THOSE TWO, A COURT OF LAW WHERE SOMEBODY CAN TOTALLY WASTE OUR TIME FOR EIGHT MONTHS TO EXTRACT, UH, SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT BY USING OUR PROCESS AND OUR SYSTEM, AND THEN HAVE SIDE DEALS AND THEN DROP IT.
AND CAUSE THEY GOT WHAT THEY WANT.
AND NOW ACCORD IS GOING TO BE LIKE GLAD TO REMOVE THINGS OFF THEIR DOCKET FOR, YOU KNOW, LIKE THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY HAPPY TO SEE PEOPLE JUST LIKE RESOLVE ON THEIR OWN.
WE, THIS, WHEN WE HAVE, THIS IS, TAKES THE PLACE OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD BE DOING.
I DON'T WANT THIS BODY TO BE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE COME AND WASTE OUR TIME BECAUSE THEY JUST WANT TO USE US TO GET SOME KIND OF OUTSIDE DEAL.
BUT, UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T STOP THAT.
I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY CANCEL, BUT I I'M, I'M NOT, I, I CAN'T POUR THROUGH THE, THE CODE AT THIS MOMENT TO SEE IF, WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS APPROPRIATE.
BUT, UM, I THINK, I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY, WE PROBABLY JUST NEED TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THIS CASE RIGHT NOW AND DEAL WITH THE LONGER TERM RAMIFICATIONS SEPARATELY.
UM, SO BRIEFLY I'M GOING TO INTERJECT, UH, CAUSE LYNN CARTER WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT, UH, IS INFORMED ME THAT THERE'S PRECEDENT FOR WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINTS.
AND I WANT TO HEAR WHAT SHE HAS TO SAY.
SO, AND IF YOU'RE WITH US, PLEASE, PLEASE EDUCATE US ON THE PRECEDENT OF WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINTS.
SO I'M NOT SURE, I'M PRETTY SURE COMMISSIONER'S MCCORMICK AND DANBURG RUN THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME.
BUT, UM, WE HAD 16 COMPLAINTS FILED BY, UH, BY FRED LEWIS, AGAINST REGISTERED LOBBYISTS WHO HAD DECLINED TO DISCLOSE THEIR, THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION PAID TO THEM.
AND, UH, THE LOBBYISTS AGREED TO DISCLOSE THEIR COMPENSATION.
FRED LEWIS ACCEPTED THAT AND UH, SHOWED UP AT THE MEETING AND SAID THAT HE WAS WITHDRAWING HIS COMPLAINT.
THE COMMISSION VOTED TO DISMISS THOSE 16 COMPLAINTS, UM, BECAUSE THE COMPLAINTS WERE WITHDRAWN.
UM, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE ONE OTHER POINT BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO DO THIS SINCE I REPRESENT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I'M NOT REPRESENTING THE COMMISSION WITH THIS STATEMENT, BUT I WILL JUST SAY THAT.
OF COURSE THE AGREEMENT IS BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND THE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION IS NOT JOINING THIS AGREEMENT.
IT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ENTER A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
ONLY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND COUNSEL WOULD HAVE AUTHORITY ON TO DO THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO ACTUALLY MOVE TO LIKE ADD THE CONVERSATION AND TAKE A VOTE.
I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS, SORRY, I'M SORRY.
I WAS WONDERING IF I COULD JUST RESPOND TO SOMETHING.
I THOUGHT SOMETHING WAS SAID ABOUT MERYL LEAR.
I JUST WANT TO CHIME IN, BECAUSE SOMETHING WAS SAID ABOUT ME PERSONALLY.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING IF IT'S APPROPRIATE.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE.
THE CHAIR IS CURRENTLY PRESENT.
WE'LL KNOW TO STOP, UH, COMMERCIAL ALERT.
YOU, YOU SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, YOU FELT BAD, YOU FELT LIKE, UM, THAT SOMEONE HAD USED THIS BODY FOR EIGHT FOR EIGHT MONTHS IN ORDER TO GET SOMETHING OUT OF THIS.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHY YOU FEEL THAT WAY, BUT JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT IS THAT THIS WAS NOT MY INTENT.
THE PHONE RANG TWO DAYS AGO, THE PHONE RANG IN TWO DAYS AGO WITH AN OFFER.
UH, AND SO I LISTENED TO THE OFFER.
THAT WAS NOT MY INTENT TO SIT HERE FOR EIGHT MONTHS AND ENDED UP WHERE WE ARE TONIGHT.
BUT TO ME, I HAD TWO OPTIONS, A LETTER OF REPRIMAND OF SOME LEVEL OR
[03:45:01]
THE THINGS THAT I REALLY WANTED THIS ORGANIZATION IS THAT A BUSINESS THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS ANYMORE.AND IT'S PROBABLY INAPPROPRIATE, DEEP AND SAY THIS, BUT I THROW OUT A DOLLAR AMOUNT AND SAY BOSTON NOW TRIPLED IT.
SO IT WASN'T THE ABOUT IT WASN'T EVEN ABOUT THE MONEY FOR ME, BUT I FIGURED AS LONG AS THE MONEY'S THERE BLESSED FOR IT.
SO I'M SORRY THAT YOU FEEL THAT WAY.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHY YOU DO, BUT I HOPE YOU'LL BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY TO YOU THAT WAS NOT INTENT TO SPEND EIGHT MONTHS TO GET HERE, BUT YOU SEE THE DOCTOR.
AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTERJECTIONS.
I JUST, IT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STARTED HAVING ENTITIES THAT WHEN WE HAVE RESPONDENTS WHO CAN THEN HAVE A COMPLAINT DISMISSED AND YES, IT'S A LOT LATE.
IT IS NOT, IT'S NOT OF THE MONETARY VALUE THAT THIS DONATION WILL BE, BUT HAVING A JUDGMENT AGAINST A BODY OF THE CITY OR AN ETHICS VIOLATION IS MEANINGFUL.
BUT IF YOU HAVE MONEY TO OTHERS, DON'T HAVE MONEY FOR THAT.
LIKE WE SEE AN EQUITY ISSUE ON THIS COMMISSION.
WE'VE JUST SEEN IT EARLIER TODAY.
UM, SO THAT IS MY CONCERN, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, I SAY ALL THOSE THINGS, IT'S, IT'S UP TO US TO, TO REMEDY WEAKNESSES IN OUR CODE.
UM, SO I, I'M NOT SURE THAT I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE THIS ONE CASE HIS BODY HAD DIFFERENT CAPABILITIES.
LYNN, LYNN, WE HAVE LOST CHAIRMAN SOBER ON, I AM HERE.
I CAN'T SAY I HAVE, WELL, I'VE DIALED IN, UM, UH, I'VE GOT BEEF WITH SPECTRUM APPARENTLY.
UM, AND I AM TRYING TO RESTORE MY INTERNET, UM, SO THAT I CAN, UM, SEE EVERYONE AND BE SEEN.
UM, BUT IN THE MEANTIME SECRETARY LEARNER, BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE PEOPLE RAISING THEIR HANDS, I AM GOING TO QUIETLY ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE PRESIDING UNTIL I'M ABLE TO RESTORE MY VIDEO CONNECTION.
I GUESS, PROCEDURALLY SPEAKING, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE, UH, UH, RE UH, WITHDRAW OF, OF A COMPLAINT.
I WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION FROM LYNN CARTER AS TO WHAT PROCEDURE WE NEED TO UNDERTAKE RIGHT NOW.
WELL, UH, STEVE SHEETS ON THIS, I THINK, UM, UNLESS HE, HE DOES, HE DIFFERS.
NO, NO, I'M, I'M WILLING TO TAKE IT ON, I THINK AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANT HAS INDICATED THAT HE WISHES TO WITHDRAW THE COMPLAINT THAT AT THIS POINT IT WOULD BE IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE A MOTION FOR THIS COMMISSION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANT HAS WITHDRAWN.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION COMMISSIONER STAND? YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE AS A COMMISSION DISMISS THIS COMPLAINT BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANT HAS WITHDRAWN THE COMPLAINT.
I HAVE A SECOND I'LL SECOND COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S OKAY.
IS ANY DISCUSSION AROUND THE MOTION? OKAY.
UH, WE, OUR CHAIR IS NO LONGER A CHAIR, SOBER.
BRIAN, ARE YOU ON THE PHONE STILL? I DON'T SEE YOU.
I AM ON THE PHONE AND I'LL BE ABLE TO UNMUTE MYSELF, UM, WHEN MY NAME IS CALLED UNDER PROTOCOL.
WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO GO DOWN AND ORDER.
UM, SECRETARY LEARNER, UNHAPPILY, I, UM, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG ABSTAIN, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.
I REALLY LEFT IT LIKE I RELUCTANTLY, UM, COMMISSIONER KALE, UH, AYE.
COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S MR. ANTENNA.
I THINK YOU SAID I, IT DIDN'T, YOU DIDN'T GIVE IT ENOUGH TIME, BUT YES, I, OKAY.
SO I THINK THAT'S ONE ABSTENTION AND THE REST EYES.
CAN I, UH, CAN I JUST OFFER SOME COMMENTS REALLY QUICK? MM, NO, NO, I
[03:50:01]
KNOW, I KNOW IT'S 10 SECONDS, 10 SECONDS.AND IT IS JUST TO SAY THAT I DO NOT LIKE THIS OUTCOME.
UM, BUT I THINK WE'RE KIND OF BOUND BY THE FACT THAT THE COMPLAINANT'S WITH DREW, UM, AND THAT WE'RE GOVERNED BY COMPLAINTS THAT ARE RAISED BY COMPLAINANTS, AND THIS MAY BE DIFFERENT UNDER A DIFFERENT CASE.
UM, BUT I THINK I WOULD IMPLORE THE COMMISSIONERS TO, UH, THOSE THAT ARE ON THE WORKING GROUP TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THIS KIND OF THING AS WE CONSIDER WHAT SORT OF CHANGES WE NEED TO MAKE TO OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE AND WHAT CHANGES WE'RE GOING TO PROPOSE TO CITY COUNCIL FOR SUBSTANTIVE COACHING, JUST BECAUSE, UH, THIS, I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN OPTIMAL OUTCOME, BUT I THINK IT'S KIND OF THE, THE ONE THAT WE'RE LEFT WITH.
AND I ALSO WANT TO JUST, I WANT TO THANK THE PARTIES FOR WORKING ON THIS.
I KNOW IT'S HARD TO REACH AN AGREEMENT PERIOD, SO I DON'T WANT TO DISCOUNT THE DIFFICULTY IN REACHING THE AGREEMENT.
AND I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR, FOR WORKING WITH US OVER THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS.
I WANT TO GIVE A HUGE THANK YOU TO, UH, MR. SHEATH OR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR WORKING WITH US OVER THE EIGHT MONTHS.
I WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS THEMSELVES, UM, FOR, UH, HAVING THE PATIENT TONIGHT AND OVER THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS ON THIS COMPLAINT.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE COMPLAINT THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE DOING IS QUICKLY RESOLVING COMPLAINTS.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, I MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE GENEROUS MYSELF IN GRANTING CONTINUANCE AFTER CONTINUANCE UP TO CONTINUING.
UM, AND, UH, BUT, UH, I WOULD JUST FOR THE RECORD, WANT TO HAVE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A NORMAL COMPLAINT, NOT A NORMAL PROCESS, UM, AND THAT I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT WE'LL ADDRESS THIS KIND OF THING IN THE FUTURE.
UM, THANK YOU, CHAIR, MR. CHAIR, WE APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP AND ALL OF YOUR, UM, YOU RE WE KNOW THAT YOU CARE A LOT ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS COMMISSION.
I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO HAVE SORT OF AN AFTER-ACTION AS A COMMISSION, UM, ON THIS CASE.
UM, WHAT IS, SO MAY I JUST ASK, UM, CHAIR SILVERADO, DO YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO THE AGENDA AT THIS POINT? YES.
WE HAVE ANOTHER AGENDA ITEM UP AND I WILL BE ONLINE SOON.
SO I'LL BE ABLE TO START PRESIDING AGAIN SOON, BUT YOU WERE BOTH GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA, KENT.
CAN I, ARE WE ABLE TO SORT OF LIKE, HOLD, LIKE HOLD AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING AT SOME POINT WE'RE ALMOST AT MIDNIGHT.
UM, I, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA DEFER TO EITHER OUTSIDE COUNSEL LYNN, BECAUSE WHAT,
[03:55:21]
AND ACTUALLY IT'S GREEN, BUT IT'S OKAY.I WON'T BE THERE FOR A FEW MINUTES.
WE, UM, ARE GETTING DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO MIDNIGHT HERE.
I THINK THAT'S, WE'VE ASKED A LOT OF ALL OF US.
UM, SO I DON'T HAVE THE AGENDA IN FRONT OF ME NOW.
CAN WE, CAN WE HOLD, I GUESS I NEED TO ASK EVERYBODY IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED OR IF WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP OUR REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS AT A FUTURE MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE AND I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT MOTION IF THAT IS THE PROPER PROCESS.
WE'LL I MANAGE TO APPROVE AND SORRY.
YEAH, MY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE, AND MR. SHEETS, YOU MIGHT BE THE ONE TO ANSWER THIS ON AGENDA ITEM, NUMBER FOUR, IF WE POSTPONE THAT, DO WE RUN INTO PROBLEMS WITH THE TIMING OF IT, OF MAKING THE VOTE ON, ON THAT COMPLAINT? WELL, THAT IS A PROCEDURAL QUESTION THAT I WOULD RATHER DEFER TO LYNN, IF SHE'S WILLING TO ADDRESS THAT SHE HAS MORE EXPERIENCE WITH THIS PROCEDURES THAN I DO.
THERE AREN'T ANY DEADLINES THAT ARE GONNA BE PROBLEMATIC IN TERMS OF THAT.
UM, BUT I'M SURE MS. OVER TURF WOULD, UH, APPRECIATE AN UP OR DOWN VOTE AND SHE STILL BE ON THE CALL AND SHE STAYED ON FOR A LONG TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY CAN HEAR OKAY.
IF YOU ARE THERE THEN I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU WERE STILL THERE.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THE REINS AGAIN.
[4. REVIEW OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Discussion and possible action regarding the following: The initial determination that the Commission lacks jurisdiction over: A complaint filed by Olivia Overturf on May 17, 2021 against Mayor Pro Tem Natasha Harper-Madison, which complaint alleges violations of City Code Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance), Subsections (B) and (E ) of Section 2-2-1 (Declaration of Policy and Legislative Findings); Chapter 2-7 (Ethics and Financial Disclosure), Sections 2-7-62(B), 2-7-1(A), and 2-7-1(B)(1) and (B)(2); and which complaint also references Code Sections 2-1-44(A) and 2-1-48(A) and (C).]
I THINK, UM, WE CAN, SO WHEN WE TAKE UP A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION IN A SUBSEQUENT MEETING, UM, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE, UM, AN UP OR DOWN VOTE FROM THE COMMISSION.IT JUST REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.
UM, SO, UH, WHAT WE CAN DO IS HAVE A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO VERY QUICKLY RUN THROUGH THAT DETERMINATION, WHAT HAPPENED, WHY IT WAS MADE.
UM, AND THEN I WILL LEAVE IT TO COMMISSIONERS TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH IT, WHICH IS WHAT WE DO WITH THESE, UM, JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS NORMALLY.
SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO GIVE, UH, UH, AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT HAPPENED AND, UH, MORE OR LESS WHY IT HAPPENED.
SO, UH, THIS WAS A COMPLAINT FILED, UH, AGAINST MAYOR PRO TEM TO TASHA HARPER, MADISON ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO DASH TWO, SUBSECTIONS B AND E, UH, OF SECTION, UH, TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE.
AND THEN THERE WAS TWO DASH SEVEN VIOLATIONS.
AND I'M GOING TO SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATE WHAT THOSE WERE.
THEY WERE SECTIONS TWO DESKS
SO IN, UH, AT THE TIME, UH, NORMALLY IT IS THE CHAIR THAT WILL MAKE A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND HAS AT THAT POINT IN TIME, UM, THERE WAS A COMPLAINT FROM THE COMPLAINANT, UH, AGAINST ME AND A REQUEST TO RECUSE, I BELIEVE FROM THE ITEM.
UM, AND WHILE THERE WAS NO KIND OF CODE BASED OR LAW BASED RULES BASED REQUIREMENT THAT I RECUSED IN THE INTEREST OF FAIRNESS, I HAD ASKED, UH, SECRETARY LEARNER AS KIND OF THE NEXT RANKING OFFICER ELIGIBLE TO ACT ON THIS CASE TO, UH, MAKE THE DETERMINATION.
[04:00:01]
AND I'M HAPPY TO KIND OF SUMMARIZE THAT SHE HAD SUBSEQUENTLY INFORMED ME OF THE DECISION AND WHY SHE MADE IT.UM, AND SHE DID THAT WITH THE ADVICE OF OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL, MR. SHEETS.
UM, AND I CAN QUICKLY SUMMARIZE THAT IN THE INTEREST OF EVERYONE'S TIME.
SO, UH, THE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UM, IN REVIEWING WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION THAT JURISDICTION TOOK, UH, EACH ALLEGED VIOLATION SEPARATELY AND ASKED, DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THIS VIOLATION IN THIS ONE, IN THIS ONE BRIEFLY ON THE VIOLATION THAT WAS, UH, SORT OF THE REPEAT VIOLATION, UM, THAT WAS ALLEGING THE SAME VIOLATION ON THE SAME FACTS, UM, THAT, UH, MAYOR PRO TEM HARPER MADISON, UH, FORMERLY APPEARED BEFORE THE BODY TO ADVOCATE FOR HERSELF MORE OR LESS IN RESPONDING TO THE CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS, UM, THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DISPOSED OF BY THE COMMISSION AT OUR MAY MEETING.
UM, AND IT WAS, I THINK, DETERMINED THAT THE COMMISSION CAN'T REALLY HAVE JURISDICTION OVER ALREADY DEFEATED VIOLATIONS WHEN IT'S THE SAME FACTS ON THE SAME CODE.
UM, THERE'S, UH, UH, A LEGAL PRINCIPLE CALLED RES JUDICATA, WHICH IS A FANCY WAY OF SAYING THAT ONCE THERE IS A, UH, COMPLETE, THAT IS SORT OF ADJUDICATED AND FINALLY DECIDED ON THAT YOU CAN'T KIND OF SUBSEQUENTLY, UH, TRY AGAIN ON THE EXACT SAME FACTS IN THE EXACT SAME VIOLATION.
SO THAT WAS THAT SPECIFIC VIOLATION.
AND AS TO THE OTHERS, THOSE WERE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE ALLEGED UNDER PARTS OF CITY CODE THAT WERE, UH, UNDER HITTERS, SUCH AS LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS IN DECLARATIONS OF POLICY.
AND IT, I THINK IT WAS DETERMINED THAT IT WAS THAT THOSE WEREN'T QUITE THING, THEY WEREN'T THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT COULD BE VIOLATED.
UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF A DECLARATION OF POLICY IN OUR CITY CODE SAYS THAT THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE TRUST IN THEIR GOVERNMENT, UM, THAT'S NOT THE KIND OF THING THAT CAN BE, UH, KIND OF CONCRETELY VIOLATED IN THE SAME WAY THAT A REPORTING REQUIREMENT CAN BE VIOLATED OR, UM, THAT, UH, REQUIREMENT THAT THE, UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK, LIKE A REQUIREMENT THAT A BORDER COMMISSION MEMBER RECUSED THEMSELVES, THAT'S A KIND OF, THAT'S A BEHAVIOR OR AN ACTION THAT IS REGULATED AND CAN BE VIOLATED, BUT A DECLARATION OF POLICY THAT PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE TRUST IN THEIR GOVERNMENT, OR THEIR COUNSEL SHOULD OPERATE IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT MANNER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN SORT OF ADEQUATELY ADJUDICATE, BUT SOMETHING, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS FOR PEOPLE TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT COUNCIL OR THE APPROPRIATE CITY ACTOR OR OFFICIAL ISN'T LIVING UP TO THE POLICY OR THE INTENT OF A CODE.
UM, AND THOSE ARE THROUGH ELECTIONS THROUGH, UH, PETITIONS, THROUGH OTHER MECHANISMS, BUT THE, IT DIDN'T, IT WAS NOT THE KIND OF THING THAT THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION REALLY HAS JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE.
AND I THINK, UH, THAT KIND OF SUMMARIZES MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS SPECIFIC JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION.
I'VE GOT SOME MORE THINGS I WANT TO SAY ABOUT THIS, BUT I WANT TO PAUSE AND SEE IF OR OUTSIDE COUNSEL OR SECRETARY LEARNER HAS SOMETHING TO ADD TO IT, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE WORTH JUST SUMMARIZING WHAT WAS DONE AND WHY ANY, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM OUTSIDE COUNSELOR OR SECRETARY LEARNER.
AND I WANT TO CONTINUE WITH IT, STEVE YOU'RE ON MUTE RIGHT NOW.
AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, YOU, YOU VERY ACCURATELY, UM, SUMMARIZED THE, UH, THE THINKING AND THE, IN THE DETERMINATIONS AS TO, UH, JURISDICTION.
WELL, YEAH, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT.
I MEAN, I THINK WE ALL HERE, WELL, I CAN SPEAK FOR MYSELF.
UM, AND THE DISCUSSION THAT, UM, MS. OVERTURN, IF YOU WERE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL AND THE CHALLENGES THAT COME WITH THAT, UM, AND WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL, UM, OBSTACLES THERE.
UM, WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER THE, THE COMPLAINANT WITH THE LANGUAGE AND THE FACTS.
UM, SO THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON THAT WE FOUND THIS DID NOT MEET THE STANDARD.
[04:05:01]
TO KIND OF, UM, ECHO AS WELL IS THAT I, UM, I DON'T WANT EVER OUR ACTIONS TO BE VIEWED AS KIND OF CONDEMNATIONS OF ONE PARTY OR ANOTHER OUTSIDE OF, YOU KNOW, A SPECIFIC VIOLATION, RIGHT.IT'S NOT OUR PLACE TO JUDGE PARTIES, UM, OUTSIDE OF A SPECIFIC, UH, THE ONLY TIME WE'RE JUDGING PEOPLE ON THIS COMMISSION IS WHEN THEY ARE A RESPONDENT AND THERE IS AN ALLEGED VIOLATION AGAINST THEM, UH, IN WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET ACROSS IS THAT I, I DEEPLY RESPECT AND APPRECIATE WHAT MISS OVER TURF HAS DONE ON HER OWN WITHOUT HELP.
UM, AND THE, UH, COMPLAINT THAT WE HEARD LAST WEEK OR LAST WEEK TIME MEANS NOTHING TO ME RIGHT NOW LAST MONTH.
UM, IT WAS, UH, A COMPLAINT THAT WAS, THAT HAD INCLUDED WITH IT, I THINK EXHIBITS A THROUGH B, UM, AND IT WAS METICULOUSLY PREPARED AND FRANKLY, UM, BETTER THAN WHAT, WHAT PAID LAWYERS DO BEFORE THIS COMMISSION.
UM, AND I WANT TO, I WANT TO COMMEND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT REALLY TREMENDOUS EFFORT.
UM, AND I, I PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF WHAT ARTICLES ARE WRITTEN ABOUT ME, I HAVE NO HIGHER ASPIRATIONS.
THIS IS NOT MY LAUNCHING PAD TO DO SOMETHING ELSE.
UM, UH, I CARE MORE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMMISSION.
I CARE THAT THIS IS VIEWED AS A FAIR PROCESS THAT WE ACT IMPARTIALLY.
UM, AND I, I TAKE MY ACTIONS WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT HOW THE COMMISSION IS PERCEIVED IS ALMOST AS IMPORTANT AS THE ACTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION, UH, TAKES, BECAUSE IF, IF THIS IS SEEN AS AN UNFAIR PROCESS, THEN IT UNDERMINES OUR WORK.
UM, SO WHAT, WHAT I WANTED TO KIND OF LEAVE THE COMPLAINANT WITH, SINCE I BELIEVE SHE'S STILL WITH US, IS THAT I, I CAN, I THINK I CAN SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION IN SAYING THAT WE APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO THESE COMPLAINTS, THAT WE'RE NOT CLOSING THE DOOR, IF YOU HAVE FUTURE COMPLAINTS.
UM, AND, UH, SPECIFICALLY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET TO IT TONIGHT, BUT WE DO HAVE A WORKING GROUP WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO IMPROVE OUR PROCEDURES AND IMPROVE OUR SUBSTANTIVE CODE.
UM, AND I WANT TO INVITE THE COMPLAINANT IF SHE'S LISTENING STILL, UM, TO SUBMIT, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS TO US TO CONSIDER, UM, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BEST POSITIONED TO HELP US FIGURE OUT HOW TO IMPROVE THE SUBSTANTIVE CODE THAT WE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER, AND OUR OWN RULES OF PROCEDURE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PUT IN THE TIME TO ENGAGE IN THE PROCESS.
UM, AND SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT INVITATION, UH, IF, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED OR WILLING TO SUBMIT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WORKING GROUP TO CONSIDER, UH, THAT CAN BE DONE, UH, BY SENDING SOMETHING TO LYNN CARTER, OUR LIAISON AT THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
UM, I THINK THAT THE MEMBERS OF THAT WORKING GROUP WOULD REALLY WELCOME THAT KIND OF INPUT.
UM, SO I SEE COMMISSIONER STANTON, GO AHEAD, CHAIR, MAY I, MAY I PRESENT SOME COMMENTS OR, OR WAS THIS JUST FOR, I'M NOT CLEAR ON WHAT WE ARE DOING AT THIS POINT WITH THIS, I'M LOOKING ON THE AGENDA AND I SEE, I UNDERSTAND, UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INITIAL DETERMINATION THAT THE COMMISSIONER LACKS JURISDICTION OVER THIS COMPLAINT, THAT'S NEW COMPLAINT, CORRECT.
FILED BY MISS OVERTURN, CORRECT? BECAUSE THIS IS THE COMPLAINT ON MAY 17TH.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND OUR INITIAL DETERMINATION THAT IT LACKS JURISDICTION AND I OFFER THIS PERSPECTIVE NOWHERE ON THE FORM.
DOES IT SAY THAT DO NOT HEAR, UM, CASES WHERE THE CITY CODE OF THE SECTION TALKS ABOUT POLICY, OR WHAT IS IT, WHAT WAS THAT PARTICULAR, UH, LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS FINDINGS THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER TERM HERE? NO, NOWHERE DOES IT SAY THAT WHAT IT SAYS VERY CLEARLY IS THESE ARE THE CODES THAT ARE WITHIN JURISDICTION OF WHAT THIS COMMISSION HEARS.
AND IT STATES EXPLICITLY TWO DASH SEVEN, WHICH ALL OF THESE, OR NOT ALL, BUT AT LEAST TWO OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT MS. OVERTURN IN THIS MS. OVERTURNS COMPLAINT ARE WITHIN TWO DASH SEVEN.
SO I'M APPLYING THE SAME LOGIC THAT
[04:10:01]
I APPLIED AND OTHER COMPLAINTS WHERE I SAY, WE'RE NOT HERE TO JUDGE, YOU KNOW, A PERSON'S INTENT WHERE WE'RE HERE, JESSE, THIS SIDE, YOU KNOW, HA HAS THERE YOU, WE THINK THAT THERE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A VIOLATION OF A CODE THAT IS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.SO I'M APPLYING THE SAME LOGIC QUESTION FOR MYSELF AND THIS ONE, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAME TO THE DETERMINATION THAT THIS IS NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
UM, SO A COUPLE OF THINGS, I APPRECIATE THAT QUESTION IN THAT COMMENT.
I I'LL OFFER, UH, TWO OBSERVATIONS.
ONE IS THAT, UM, THIS, THIS PART OF THE PROCESS, THIS REVIEW OF AN INITIAL DETERMINATION, IT DOESN'T OPERATE UNDER THE SAME STANDARD AS A PRELIMINARY HEARING.
UM, SO THE QUESTION BEFORE THE COMMISSION IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION OCCURRED, IT'S WHETHER OR NOT THESE ARE THE KINDS OF ALLEGATIONS THAT ARE WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
UM, AND IT'S, UH, IT'S, UH, MAYBE A SUBTLE DISTINCTION.
UM, BUT IT'S NOT THE, THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER SOMETHING WRONG HAPPENED.
IT'S WHETHER IT'S, WHETHER WE CAN HEAR THIS KIND OF COMPLAINT.
WHAT I, I SHOULD HAVE CLARIFIED.
I WAS USING THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE PRECISE, UM, MEASURE THE MEASURING STICK THAT I HOLD MYSELF TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
SO IN THE, IN, IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARINGS OR, UM, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION IS, IS THERE A REASONABLE, DO WE THINK WITHIN REASON THAT A, UM, THAT AN OFFENSE, UH, VIOLATION OCCURRED, RIGHT? IT I'M HOLDING IT BY THAT PRECISE QUESTION IN THIS INITIAL DETERMINATION, A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER IT LACKS, WHETHER IT IS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION OR NOT.
DOES THE CODE, IS THE CODE LISTED WITHIN THE CODE THAT IS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION? YES.
IS THAT NOT THE QUESTION? THE EXACT QUESTION AT THIS POINT IS WHEN DETERMINING JURISDICTION
TWO, TWO DASH SEVEN DASH 62 B TWO DASH SEVEN DASH ONE TWO DASH SEVEN, A TWO DASH SEVEN DASH ONE B ONE AND B TWO.
AND I'M BEING VERY LITERAL IS THIS SECTION WITHIN JURISDICTION OF THE CODES THAT WE, AS THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE, THAT WEEK WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
AND I'M LOOKING ON THE CODES ON THE FORM, DOES IT NOT LIST TWO DASH SEVEN? I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M.
SO THE, SO THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS WITHIN JURORS, OUR JURISDICTION I'M SEEING YES.
SO MY QUESTION IS WHY THE DETERMINATION THAT IT LACKS THAT WE LACKED JURISDICTION OVER THIS.
SO HERE'S YOURS MAYBE, UH, A HELPFUL WAY TO FRAME IT.
UM, SO THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS A, IS THIS AN ALLEGATION THAT WE CAN ADJUDICATE? AND SO I'M GOING TO TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE.
SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER VIOLATIONS ALLEGED UNDER TWO DASH TWO, WHICH IS THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE PART OF CITY CODE.
AND THE COMPLAINTS SPECIFICALLY HIGHLIGHTED, I THINK TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE, LET'S SEE TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE E.
AND READING THAT IT IS, IT SAYS THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE JUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF ITS GOVERNMENT.
AND I THINK THE DIFFICULTY HERE AND, UH, AGAIN, UH, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR SECRETARY LERNER OUT OF TURN, SINCE THIS WAS HER DETERMINATION.
AND IF OUTSIDE COUNCIL HAS A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT TOO.
BUT THE QUESTION I THINK IS HOW DOES ONE GO ABOUT VIOLATING THIS, THAT THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE JUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF ITS COVENANT? IS THAT A THING THAT CAN BE VIOLATED BY A CITY OFFICIAL? AND IF SO, HOW? AND I THINK THAT THE CONCLUSION ON THIS AND THE OTHERS THAT ARE UNDER SIMILAR PROVISIONS OF CITY CODE, THINK THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS REACHED AND I'M INCLINED TO AGREE WITH IT, UM, IS THAT IT'S, THAT IT'S NOT THE KIND OF THING THAT CAN BE DISCREETLY VIOLATED.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, ONE COULD SAY THAT, UH,
[04:15:01]
YOU KNOW, UH, IF SOMEONE LET'S TAKE PROPERTY, RIGHT, AND THE CAMPING BAN, IF SOMEONE THAT, THAT WAS A HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE DECISION TO REPEAL THE CAMPING BAN IN THE FIRST PLACE.AND THEY DECIDED THAT THEY DIDN'T, THEY LACKED CONFIDENCE NOW IN THE INTEGRITY OF THE GOVERNMENT, THEY THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE BAD ACTORS THAT PLAY INFLUENCING THAT DECISION.
I MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH THEM, BUT THEY WOULD THEN BE A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT HAD THAT LAXY JUSTIFIED COMPETENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF ITS GOVERNMENT.
HOW DO WE ADJUDICATE THAT? IF SOMEONE BROUGHT A COMPLAINT SAYING THAT, UH, MAYOR ADLER VIOLATED TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE E BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY MORE CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF THEIR GOVERNMENT, BASED ON HIS ACTIONS, HOW ON, HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THAT? AND I THINK THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ON THIS COMPLAINT IN A SIMILAR VEIN IS KIND OF ASKING THE SAME QUESTION.
HOW, HOW DOES THE COMMISSION ADJUDICATE WHETHER OR NOT THE PUBLIC HAS JUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF ITS GOVERNMENT? AND I THINK AS OPPOSED TO OTHER PROVISIONS IN THIS CHAPTER, LIKE, YOU KNOW, SIMILARLY DEFINITIONS, WE DON'T HAVE JURISTS, LIKE SOMEONE CAN NOT ALLEGE THAT A DEFINITION IS NOT THE DEFINITION, RIGHT.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, SEPARATELY WE'VE MADE DETERMINATIONS BEFORE.
I KNOW IN A SEPARATE PRIOR CASE, I'VE MADE A DETERMINATION WHERE, UH, I THINK IT WAS MR. LITTLEFIELD, HE RAISED A COMPLAINT AND IT WAS UNDER, UM, TWO DASH, TWO DASH THREE, UH, CONFORMITY WITH TEXAS ELECTION CODE.
AND, UM, OR IT MAY HAVE BEEN A SEPARATE CODE.
BUT THE CODE THAT HE WAS ALLEGING WAS VIOLATED WAS SIMPLY SAYING THAT, UH, PEOPLE WHO ENGAGE IN CITY ELECTIONS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW.
AND THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION THAT WAS MADE IS THAT WE'RE NOT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT STATE LAW WAS VIOLATED, RIGHT? LIKE THAT WASN'T A VA THAT WAS NOT A KIND OF VIOLATION THAT WE COULD ADJUDICATE.
WE'RE NOT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THAT.
AND I THINK SIMILARLY, UM, IF WE'RE CONSIDERING A VIOLATION THAT'S ALLEGED UNDER TWO DASH TWO DASH ONE E AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE OTHERS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THIS COMPLAINT, UM, WE ARE NOT THE PLACE TO ADJUDICATE THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE PUBLIC HAS JUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF ITS GOVERNMENT.
IT'S NOT THE KIND OF THING WE CAN HANDLE.
UM, LIKE WE CAN'T HANDLE A CLAIM THAT ARISES UNDER STATE LAW.
WE CAN'T REALLY HANDLE A CLAIM THAT THERE'S NO COMPETENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF GOVERNMENT OR THAT, UM, THAT, UH, UH, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF ONE OF THE OTHER ONES THAT WAS ONE DAY WAS ALSO, DID WE LOSE CHAIR, SOBER ROOM? IT LOOKS LIKE WE DID.
I THINK THE INTERNET RESETS AT MIDNIGHT.
UM, I STUCK AROUND BECAUSE THE CHAIR TOLD ME YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS.
I KNOW I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO INTERJECT, BUT I JUST WATCHED TWO HEARINGS WHERE PEOPLE WERE INTERJECTING IN THE DELIBERATION, UH, BILL, DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, OBVIOUSLY? YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL? I AM STILL HERE.
UM, SO I'M SORRY THAT MY INTERNET IS UNRELIABLE.
IF, UM, LET ME JUST, I'M BACK TO MS. OVER TURF.
THIS IS HORRIBLE FOR YOU TO HAVE TO WAIT ALL THIS TIME.
IT'S REALLY, IT'S TROUBLESOME.
UM, I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
I, I, I SUSPECT THAT THIS IS A DISAPPOINTING OUTCOME FOR YOU.
UM, I THINK I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT PROCEDURE, BUT I
[04:20:01]
THINK IF YOU CAN TALK WITH SOME FOLKS ABOUT HOW TO PUT TOGETHER, IF YOU STILL FEEL COMMITTED TO, UM, THE, THE COMPLAINT, UM, AND YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO EXPLORE IF THERE'S A WAY TO PUT SOMETHING FORWARD.YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE ARE GROUPS IN TOWN THAT, UM, HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH THE COMMISSION.
UM, I KNOW YOU PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO THIS.
IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE THESE KINDS OF PROCEDURES.
IF YOU GUYS CAN HEAR ME, I'M SORRY.
CAN I JUST SAY, I DON'T APPRECIATE BEING TALKED DOWN TO, OR IN A CONDESCENDING TONE? I DID PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO IT.
I SAT THROUGH THIS WITH YOU GUYS.
I'VE SAT THROUGH THE OTHER TWO HEARINGS, WHICH WERE MEN, AND I FELT THAT THEY WERE TREATED WAY DIFFERENTLY THAN I WAS.
AND I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AND NO, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND ONE MORE SECOND FIGHTING THIS COMMISSION OVER A PHONE POLICY.
SO YOU GUYS HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THE CODE.
I'VE HEARD YOU AT EVERY SINGLE HEARING SAY THE SAME THING.
IF WE DON'T LIKE THE CODE, WE NEED TO CHANGE IT.
MY FIRST HEARING, I'M NOT HERE TO BE A GUINEA PIG.
NEITHER IS ONE OTHER CITIZEN THAT COMES UP HERE.
THOSE OTHER PEOPLE WITH LAWYERS, GOOD FOR THEM.
AND TO BE TOLD, I SHOULD FIND A GROUP THAT CAN HELP ME.
SO NO, YOU CANNOT TALK TO ME LIKE THAT.
AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THAT'S FINE.
BUT THE COMMISSION HAS A RIGHT TO VOTE ON THE JURISDICTION AND KNOW THAT.
I MEAN, THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.
I WAS TOLD THAT THE PERSON TO COME BACK, THAT'S WHAT I DID.
WELL, I JUST, WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WAS NO WAY TRYING TO BE CONDESCENDING.
I WAS MOSTLY BEING SYMPATHETIC THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND THEY'RE REPRESENTED.
AND WHEN YOU COME UP AND YOU'RE NOT, IT'S, IT'S A MUCH, IT'S MUCH HARDER THING.
THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY ALL I WAS TRYING TO SAY TO YOU.
UM, WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? WE HAVE CHAIR SOBER ON, SORRY.
UM, SO I'LL ALL I WANTED TO SAY WAS THAT IT'S IT.
I, I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A REFLECTION ON WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU AT THAT COUNCIL MEETING.
UM, I, I HAVE FEELINGS ABOUT HOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND COMMISSIONERS SHOULD COMPORT THEMSELVES.
UM, I WANT TO OFFER AN APOLOGY THAT THE LAST MEETING DID NOT GO AS SMOOTHLY OR IT'S CLEANLY AS IT SHOULD HAVE ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.
UM, AND I WANT TO, UH, JUST REITERATE AND I'M TRYING VERY HARD.
I, NOTHING THAT I'M, THAT WE'RE DOING IS, IS AN ATTEMPT TO BE CONDESCENDING OR DIMINISHING WHAT YOU'VE DONE AND WHAT YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH.
UM, AND, AND I JUST WANT TO REITERATE AGAIN THAT WE HAVE A WORKING GROUP WHERE WE ARE, UH, AND I THINK NOW THAT OUR DOCKET IS CLEARING UP, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TIME TO ACTUALLY ENGAGE WITH IT MORE.
WE HAVE A WORKING GROUP WHERE WE'RE CONSIDERING CHANGES TO OUR UNDERLYING CITY CODE AND THE WAY THAT WE DO BUSINESS AS A COMMISSION.
AND, AND I, IF YOU, IF YOU ARE NOT INCLINED TO, UH, OFFER SUGGESTIONS IN THAT FORUM, THEN YOU'RE WELL WITHIN YOUR RIGHTS TO SAY THAT YOU'RE DONE WITH THE COMMISSION, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAD AN OPEN INVITATION TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS, BECAUSE AGAIN, I FOUND THE COMPLAINT TO BE REALLY WELL DONE.
UM, AND, AND I THINK THAT YOUR INPUT COULD BE VALUABLE IN THAT ANYTHING, BUT IF YOU ARE, IF YOU'RE NOT INCLINED AND YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THAT, THEN I COMPLETELY RESPECT THAT AS WELL, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS A OPEN INVITATION.
UM, SO THAT WAS ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
AND AS FAR AS THE COMMISSION, WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A VOTE, IT IS, UM, IT IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S POWER TO HAVE A VOTE, UM, AND NOTHING.
UH, THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THIS ON THE AGENDA, UH, ON THE AGENDA, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME BECAUSE AGAIN, MY INTERNET, UM, BUT I BELIEVE IT SAYS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE FOLLOWING.
AND SO THE POSSIBLE ACTION MEANS WE CAN, OR DON'T HAVE TO TAKE FORMAL ACTION.
AND HISTORICALLY WHEN WE HAVE A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE THERE THERE'S BEEN KIND OF SUBSTANTIAL DISCUSSION.
I ACTUALLY DON'T RECALL A TIME
[04:25:01]
WHERE THERE'S BEEN ACTION ON THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION, BUT NOTHING FORECLOSES COMMISSIONERS, IF THEY'RE SO INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, TO EITHER AFFIRM THE DETERMINATION THAT WAS MADE OR TO OVERTURN IT, IN WHICH CASE WE WOULD PROCEED TO A FINAL, UH, PRELIMINARY HEARING.SO I WANT TO, I WANT TO OFFER THOSE COMMENTS, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF THE COMPLAINANT AND FOR THE CLARITY OF THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, THAT THIS IS A TIME IF YOU WERE SO INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION, OR IF THERE'S NOT A COMMISSIONER, UM, THAT BELIEVES THAT THERE'S FURTHER ACTION THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN, THEN THAT CAN, THAT'S SORT OF WHERE WE LEAVE THE AGENDA ITEM IN THE COMPLAINT.
SO I WILL PASS IT BACK TO YOU, UH, PRESIDING SECRETARY LERNER, THANKS FOR LETTING ME TALK BEFORE, CALL HIM BEFORE I CALL ON ANYBODY ELSE.
I GUESS I'M JUST, I JUST CURIOUS AS TO JUST GIVEN THE TIME WHAT OUR, WHAT OUR GOAL, WHAT OUR PROCESSES AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW, CHAIR SOVEREIGN.
SO I THINK, I THINK IT WOULD BE ASKING COMMISSIONERS IF THERE IS A FURTHER DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO BE HAD ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.
UH, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IF THERE'S, UH, ANY FURTHER ACTION THAT A COMMISSIONER WANTS TO TAKE IN THE FORM OF EMOTION.
UM, AND THEN IF NOT, THEN WE WOULD PROCEED TO A SUBSEQUENT AGENDA ITEM OR, UM, DISPOSE OF THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS AND KIND OF POSTPONE THEM, UH, TO A FUTURE HERE.
AND GIVEN THE TIME WE HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, OKAY.
SO IS THERE, SO COMMISSIONERS NOW, I'M GOING TO OPENING THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, CHAIRMAN STAN CHAIRMAN, SIR.
AND, AND ESPECIALLY WITH MISS OVERTURN, UM, I WANT TO SPEAK TO THE SYMPATHY THAT I HAVE AND THE EMPATHY I HAVE FOR YOUR OVERWHELMING PATIENTS AND, UM, HANGING ON HERE.
AND I ALSO WANT TO SPEAK, AND I TRY NOT TO PUT MY EMOTIONS INTO THIS WORK, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I, I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT OUR COMMISSION HAS THE CHARGE OF HEARING CASES, UH, WITHIN THE CONFINES OF CERTAIN CITY CODES.
AND WE TOLD THIS COMPLAINANT AT THE LAST MEETING, COME BACK, SHE COMES BACK, FILLS OUT THE FORM THAT IS IN COMPLIANT WITH WHAT WE PUT ON THE FORM.
AND WE'RE SAYING NOW THE QUESTION OF INITIAL JURORS, INITIAL DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION ISN'T IS THIS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION, BUT HOW THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO ADJUDICATE? THAT IS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING OF OUR CHARGES.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO FIGURE IT OUT? WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT OUR CHARGES TO OUR CHARGES, TO HEAR CASES THAT FALL WITHIN THAT ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THESE CERTAIN CODES, CITY CODES THAT'S LISTED IN THIS FORM OR COMPLAINT HER COMPLAINT LISTS CODES THAT ARE WITHIN THE LIST OF THOSE THAT ARE WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
AND NOW WE'RE COMING BACK AND SAYING, WELL, YES, BUT WE LOOKED AT IT AND I APOLOGIZE.
UM, SO, UH, CRAFTS WAS FORECAST IT, UM, UH, CHAIR, PRESIDING CHAIR, LEARNER.
I DON'T MEAN ANY DISRESPECT TO YOU, BUT WE'RE COMING BACK JUST ON AN OUTSIDE AND WE CAN CUT BACK ON SAYING, WELL, YES, YOU'VE MODIFIED, YOU HAVE BEEN PLATE.
YOU'VE SPENT ALL THIS TIME ON IT, BUT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR JOB, WE'RE GOING TO THROW THIS OUT AND SAY THAT IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
OH, I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT THAT IS, IS, IS OUR STANCE.
AND SO I DEFINITELY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY, YEAH, GO AHEAD.
DO, WHY DON'T YOU MAKE A MOTION THEN TO, UH, THE CHAIR, THE COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, I CAN, IT'S VERY EASY FOR ME TO SAY I WAS AT, I WAS OPERATING ON ADVICE AND COUNSEL AND I WASN'T AT THAT.
UM, SO, UM, ANYWAY, WHY DON'T YOU, UH, YOU'RE WELCOME TO MAKE A MOTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE COMMISSIONERS TO OVERTURN THAT, BUT YOUR IT'S IN YOUR RIGHT TO DO SO.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LEARNER.
I DON'T MEAN ANY DISRESPECT TO YOU.
I WOULD LIKE, I AM MAKING A MOTION TO OVERTURN THAT INITIAL DETERMINATION.
[04:30:01]
IS NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.WITH NO SECOND THEN THE MOTION DOES NOT ADVANCE.
UM, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? UM, I GUESS I JUST WANT TO SAY COMMISSIONER STAN.
I MEAN, I HAD EXACTLY THE SAME SENTIMENTS, RIGHT? SO IT'S, IT'S HARD.
I ALSO JUST THINK WHEN YOU'RE PUT IN A POSITION WHERE YOU HAVE TO MAKE AN INITIAL DETERMINATION ON B ON THE BEHALF OF A COMMISSION, WHERE THERE ARE WRITTEN ROLES, THERE ARE WRITTEN ARTICLES.
UM, YOU, YOU HAVE TO SEPARATE YOURSELF FROM THAT.
UM, BUT I, I THINK WE ALL FEEL IN THE SAME POSITION, SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT LEADS US, BUT IT IS A FRUSTRATION.
UM, I'M NOT SEEING ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR REQUESTS FOR DISCUSSION.
SO, UM, I GUESS WE CLOSE THE DISCUSSION AT THIS STAGE, UM, CHAIRMAN SOVEREIGN OR SORRY, COMMISSIONER LEVIN'S.
SO AT THIS POINT, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO UPHOLD THE, THE CHAIR'S DETERMINATION OR WITHOUT A VOTE? THE CHAIRS DETERMINATION IS UPHELD AS A MATTER OF BECAUSE THERE'S NO PROCESS.
UH, STEVE SHEETS, YOU WERE SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
I THINK THAT THE, THE INITIAL DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE, EITHER THE, THE CHAIR OR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE.
AND THEN THE, AT THAT POINT, THE COMMISSION HAS THE ABILITY TO OVERTURN THAT.
BUT IF THEY TAKE NO ACTION OR IF THEY DO NOT OVERTURN THE INITIAL DETERMINATION OF NO JURISDICTION, THEN THAT, THAT STANDS.
SO THERE IS NO NEED FOR A MOTION TO AFFIRM THE, THE DETERMINATION OF NO JURISDICTION.
I GUESS THAT CLOSES THIS DISCUSSION.
UH, SO I, UM, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THE REMAINDER OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A SEPARATE MOTION TO ADJOURN ANYMORE, BUT, UH, THAT IS, THAT IS MY MOTION.
UM, I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION.
THIS HAPPENED ON MY FIRST ONE.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? GREAT.
SEEING NO DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
SO ON THE MOTION TO ADJOURN, UM, S UH, CHAIRMAN SOVEREIGN.
UM, CAN I JUST MAKE A POINT OF BOARD, THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THE REMAINING ITEMS? SORRY TO POSTPONE THE REMAINING ITEMS. OKAY.
SO TO POST, PUT A MOTION ON THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THE REMAINING ITEMS CHAIR SOBER ON.
UH, I GUESS I'D SAY VICE CHAIR.
HURRY IS ABSENT AS SECRETARY LEARNER.
I, UM, I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE ROSTER IN FRONT OF ME, SO I'M JUST GOING TO CALL ON THOSE WHO I SEE.
UH, COMMISSIONER KALE, MR. LEVIN'S COMMISSIONER TENANT.
SO WITH UNANIMOUS SUPPORT, THE MOTION PASSES AT THIS POINT, SHARE SOBER ON WHAT IS OUR, WHAT'S OUR NEXT MOVE TO ADJOURN.
UH, YOU WOULD JUST SAY THAT IT'S ADJOURNED AND, UM, YOU WOULD, UH, STATE THE TIME THAT WE ARE ADJOURNING.
IT IS NOW 12:18 AM ON THURSDAY, JUNE 10TH.
AND WE ARE JOURNEYING THIS MEETING.
I HOPE EVERYONE GETS SOME SICK.
[04:35:19]
I HEAR YOU CALLING MY NAME.