Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:05]

ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE.

GOOD EVENING.

[CALL TO ORDER]

MY NAME IS LUIS OBERON.

I'M CHAIR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION.

I CALL THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION TO ORDER IT IS NOVEMBER 10TH, 2021.

AND THE TIME IS 6:11 PM.

AND WE ARE IN AUSTIN.

ENERGY'S NEW AND VERY PRETTY BUILDING, UH, THE AUSTIN ENERGY ASSEMBLY ROOM NUMBER 1, 1, 1, 1 AT 4 8 1 5 MILLER BOULEVARD, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78 73.

ALL MEMBERS ARE ATTENDING IN PERSON.

I'M GOING TO CALL THE ROLE.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE TURN ON YOUR MICROPHONE.

UH, SAY HERE ARE PRESENT AND YOURSELF.

I'D APPRECIATE IT.

UM, SO CHAIR, SO BRIAN IS PRESENT, UH, VICE CHAIR, KALE, IF NOT HERE, LET'S GO TO COMMISSIONER.

DANBURG PRESENT COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, COMMISSIONER, LARRY COMMISSIONER.

LEVIN'S HERE.

COMMISSIONER MCCORMICK.

I HEARD A PRESENT AND LET'S SEE COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. I'M HERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND A REMINDER REMINDER TO MEET YOURSELVES ONCE YOU'RE DONE, UM, CHECK FOR THE RED LIGHT.

OKAY.

NEXT UP WE HAVE THE CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.

UM, I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK SO WE CAN MOVE RIGHT INTO OUR AGENDA.

AND THE FIRST ITEM IS

[1.a. Review and evaluation of the dollar limits established in Chapter 2-2 (Campaign Finance) and consider making recommendations to the city council as to those limits.]

NEW BUSINESS, WHICH IS ONE A REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF THE DOLLAR LIMIT TO ESTABLISH IN TWO DASH TWO CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND TO CONSIDER MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO THOSE LIMITS AND ALL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE ARE JOINED BY COMMISSIONER STANTON JUST IN TIME TO SEE.

OKAY.

SO, UH, IN THE LAST MEETING, JUST TO KIND OF BRING EVERYONE UP TO SPEED, WHO WASN'T HERE.

UM, THIS WAS ON OUR AGENDA AND WE HAD DISCUSSED KIND OF HOW WE WOULD WANT TO CONDUCT THIS REVIEW CITY CODE EMPOWERS AND SPECIFICALLY CALLS ON THE COMMISSION TO REGULARLY REVIEW THE DOLLAR LIMITS OUTLINED IN TWO DASH TWO, THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE PART OF THE CITY CODE.

UM, AND SO WHAT WE HAD DECIDED AT THE LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS ONLY TWO WEEKS AGO, I'M REALIZING, UM, WAS THAT THE WORKING GROUP ON SANCTIONS PROCEDURES POWERS, THE, THE KITCHEN SINK WORKING GROUP IS I'M CALLING IT, UM, WOULD TAKE TIME AND WE NEED PRETTY REGULARLY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE MIGHT PRESENT AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING.

AND WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR THAT WORKING GROUP TO SPEND TIME THINKING AND LOOKING AT THIS SPECIFICALLY, BUT THEN ALSO INVITED OTHER COMMISSIONERS TO, YOU KNOW, AS A COURTESY, MAYBE GIVEN ADVANCED NOTICE, IF THEY THOUGHT A SPECIFIC DOLLAR LIMIT WOULD BE CHANGED, SHOULD BE CHANGED.

SO THAT COMMUNICATING THAT TO LYNN, IT COULD GET CIRCULATED TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION.

UM, DIDN'T GET ANY TAKERS, WHICH IS FINE.

UM, BUT I WANTED TO JUST OPEN THE FLOOR IF ANYONE HAS SPECIFIC COMMENTS, UM, SPECIFIC THOUGHTS ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ITEM.

AND I SEE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG'S.

SO GO AHEAD.

UM, THE ONE I THINK IS EASY TO CHANGE OR EASY TO JUSTIFY CHANGING IS THE $500 EXPENDITURE TRIGGER IN SECTION TWO DASH TWO DASH 32.

UM, THE WHOLE TWO DASH TWO IS HIGHLIGHTED COURTESY OF WHEN, BUT I JUST MADE A ONE PAGER AND PASSED IT AROUND.

THAT'S JUST TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 IN CASE THAT MAKES IT EASIER.

AND I DIDN'T KNOW, THERE WOULD BE SO MUCH PAPER PRINTED BY THE CITY.

ANYWAY, UM, THE $500 TRIGGER, IT BASICALLY IS PRETTY LONG, TWO WHOLE PAGES ON TWO DASH TWO DASH 32, BUT A SAYS A PERSON WHO MAKES ONE OR MORE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES IN A CITY ELECTION THAT IN THE AGGREGATE MEET OR EXCEED $500 SHELL REPORT.

AND THERE'S ALL WHAT NEEDS TO BE REPORTED, LIKE NAME, ADDRESS, UM, DATE AMOUNT, PURPOSE, AND SO FORTH.

UM, BUT PART C SAYS THE REPORT REQUIRED BY SUBSECTION A SHALL BE MADE AND IT GIVES THE RULES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION IT IS.

SO IF IT'S 60 DAYS, THEN THEY HAVE TO DO NOT LATER THAN THE FIFTH BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DATE OF THE EXPENDITURE, IF IT'S AFTER THE 60 DAYS.

BUT BEFORE THE NINTH DAY OF BEFORE THE ELECTION, THEY HAVE TO NOT LATER THAN THE SECOND BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE EXPENDITURE.

[00:05:01]

AND IF THE EXPENDITURES MADE ON THE NINTH DAY BEFORE THE ELECTION DATE OR AFTER THEN 5:00 PM BY THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY.

SO THIS IS ALL REALLY ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT EXPENDITURES THAT ARE OCCURRING SORT OF SHORTLY BEFORE THE ELECTION GET REPORTED.

ANY EXPENDITURE IS GOING TO GET REPORTED ANYWAY, BUT THESE PARTICULAR ONES ARE RIGHT BEFORE THE ELECTION AND THE TRIGGER OF $500 TO ME JUST SEEMS UNNECESSARILY WELL.

UM, YOU CAN'T DO MUCH WITH $500 IN AN ELECTION.

I LOOKED UP THE COSTS FOR POSTAGE FOR PRE SORTED POSTS ARE JUST LIKE 33 CENTS FOR THE SMALLER POSTCARD.

SO YOU COULD DO 1500 POSTAGE FOR 1500 POSTCARDS, BUT THAT DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE PRINTING THE POSTCARDS.

SO I JUST THINK $500 IS, IS, IS LOW.

UM, IT'LL BE REPORTS OF EXPENDITURES THAT REALLY AREN'T GOING TO AFFECT THE ELECTION OR THAT PEOPLE WOULD CARE ABOUT.

SO I AM PROPOSING THAT WE CHANGE THAT $1 LIMIT, WHICH IS MENTIONED LIKE THREE TIMES, I THINK WITHIN TWO DASH TWO DASH 32, UM, FROM $500 TO $2,000, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT IN THE WORKING GROUP, AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT YOU COULD MAYBE DO A FACEBOOK AD FOR UNDER $500, BUT THEN AGAIN, A FACEBOOK AD THAT YOU SPEND LESS THAN FIVE OR AROUND $500, ISN'T GOING TO BE SO IMPACTFUL THAT PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT EXPENDITURE BEFORE THEY VOTE.

GREAT.

WELL, THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

I'M GOING TO KEEP THE FLOOR OPEN IF ANYONE HAS FOLLOW UP COMMENTS ON IT.

UM, I HAVE THOUGHTS, BUT, UH, FOR, FOR NEW COMMISSIONERS AND FOR ANYONE WHO'S NEW TO WATCHING, I LIKE TO LEAVE THE FLOOR OPEN AS LONG AS POSSIBLE BEFORE I JUMP IN.

UM, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION.

YEAH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION AS TO WHETHER YOU'RE CONTEMPLATED, UM, THE AMOUNT TO WHICH YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE RAISED.

ARE WE TALKING A THOUSAND, 10,000? I THOUGHT 2000 SEEMS MORE REASONABLE.

I'M NOT WEDDED SPECIFICALLY TO THAT NUMBER, BUT, UM, EVEN 2000, I'M NOT SURE YOU COULD DO MUCH FOR AN ELECTION, BUT 500 REALLY TOO LOW BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR AGGREGATE EXPENDITURE.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

JUST THE QUESTION ACTUALLY.

SO IS YOUR CONCERN THAT IT'S UNDULY BURDENSOME ON CAMPAIGNS TO HAVE TO REPORT BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS GOING TO HIT THAT EVERY EXPENDITURE IS LIKELY TO HIT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT THERE.

IT'S, IT'S A BURDEN TO MAKE SURE TO FOLLOW THESE SUITE OF TECHNICAL RULES ABOUT THIS MANY DAYS, YOU GET THIS MANY DAYS AND THIS MANY DAYS YOU GET THAT MANY DAYS, BUT ALSO THE BURDEN ON US WHEN PEOPLE FILE LATE THAT, AND THEY COME END UP IN FRONT OF US WITH A VIOLATION BECAUSE THEY SPENT $600 AND DIDN'T REPORT IT AT THE RIGHT TIME.

SO ONE, UH, I'LL JUMP IN UNLESS SOMEONE'S GOTTA.

UM, SO ONE THOUGHT IS, UH, JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY, WHO IS REPORTING A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE? UM, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE CAMPAIGN, THE CAMPAIGN WOULD BE, UH, POTENTIALLY REQUIRED TO REPORT AN IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION FOR A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE DEPENDING ON WHAT IT WAS.

UM, BUT IT'S SOMEONE ELSE WHO MAKES A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE.

AND ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO KIND OF POINT TO YOU, IF YOU GO TO THE DEFINITION OF A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE IN TWO DASH TWO DASH 31, UM, IT IS AN EXPENDITURE FOR AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION OR FOR EXPRESS ADVOCACY, AS THOSE TERMS ARE DEFINED EARLIER IN THE ARTICLE.

UM, AND SPECIFICALLY IT'S INDEPENDENTLY OF A CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATES CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT COOPERATION, STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION OR CONSULTATION BETWEEN CANDIDATE OR CAMPAIGN OR THEIR COMMITTEE.

AND THEN THERE'S A DEFINITION OF ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION.

I SPECIFICALLY WANT IT TO HIGHLIGHT, WHICH IS A COMMUNICATION THAT COSTS, OR AS PART OF A SERIES OF COMMUNICATIONS THAT IN THE AGGREGATE COST $500 OR MORE.

AND IT GOES ON TO DEFINE THE REST OF THE CONDITIONS TO WHAT MEETS IN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION.

[00:10:01]

SO I BROUGHT THAT UP JUST TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THAT IF WE CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE REPORT, IT MIGHT BE WORTH CONSIDERING AT THE SAME TIME IN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION TRIGGER LIMIT ONLY BECAUSE WE'RE, WE CREATE A BIT OF A, IT'S NOT A GLARING CONFLICT OR DISPARITY, I DON'T THINK, BUT WE WOULD HAVE THINGS QUALIFYING AS ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS THAT DO NOT TRIGGER REPORTS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, UM, REMINDER FOR THE MICROPHONE.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S TRUE BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE TO FILE YOUR CAMPAIGN.

UM, UH, WHATEVER REPORTS SUBJECT TO THE STATE LAW, JUST NOT BUY THOSE CERTAIN DAYS THAT ARE IN THAT PARTICULAR TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 EVEN SAYS AT THE BOTTOM EDITORS OR AF INFORMATION REPORTED UNDER THIS SECTION BY A POLITICAL COMMITTEE OR PERSON SUBJECT TO SECTION 2 54 0.261 DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE EXCEEDING $100 OF THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE MUST ALSO BE REPORTED ON THE POLITICAL COMMITTEES, NEXT CAMPAIGN, FINANCE REPORT.

IT'S THIS TIMING THING.

THAT'S REALLY, UM, THE ISSUE IN THIS PARTICULAR SECTION OF THE CODE THAT AS I UNDERSTAND IT.

SURE.

WELL, SO THE, THE, THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO RAISE WAS SIMPLY THAT IF A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE IS DEFINED POSSIBLY AS AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION, THAT IS, UH, $500 OR MORE, UM, IF, IF AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION THAT IS COST $500 OR MORE CAN QUALIFY AS A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE, THEN WE, IF WE CHANGE THE THRESHOLD FOR A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE REPORT, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE POTENTIALLY ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS THAT DON'T TRIGGER THE REPORTING REQUIREMENT, RIGHT.

UH, BUT IN, IN THAT INSTANCE, THEN WE MIGHT CONSIDER CHANGING THE ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION ITSELF SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE LEGAL ELECTIONARY COMMUNICATION.

THAT IS LEGALLY SANCTIONED TO BE UNREPORTED.

IT'S STILL REPORTED IT'S ON THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS.

IT'S JUST NOT SUBJECT TO THESE EXTRA DATE REQUIREMENTS.

SO THAT THAT'S, IF A PERSON IS SUBJECT TO THAT STATE LAW REQUIREMENT, I DON'T HAVE THAT STATE LAW REQUIREMENT IN FRONT OF ME.

UM, WHAT WAS THAT ONE AGAIN? RIGHT.

SECTION 2 54 0.26, ONE OF THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT IT'S SPECIFICALLY IF IT'S A POLITICAL COMMITTEE OR A PERSON SUBJECT TO THAT SECTION.

AND SO THESE, THESE EXTRA DATES THAT ARE IN THE CITY CODE, AS I UNDERSTAND THEM, UH, APPLY TO A PERSON, DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A PERSON SUBJECT TO THAT PART OF STATE LAW, BUT A PERSON WHO MEETS THESE CRITERIA MAKES AN EXPENDITURE $500 OR MORE, THAT IS EITHER EXPRESS ADVOCACY OR AN ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION.

UM, WELL THEN WHY DON'T WE SEE WHETHER THERE'S INTEREST EVEN IN PURSUING THIS AND SEND THAT BACK TO THE WORKING GROUP TO CONSIDER THE RAMIFICATIONS? SURE.

UH, UH, FLOOR FLOOR IS OPEN THAT I SEE HANDS I'LL CALL ON YOU.

UM, IF ANYONE HAS THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, OPINIONS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR DOLLAR LIMIT, HAPPY TO TAKE THEM.

SURE.

YES.

ELEVEN'S AND THEN LARRY, I, I, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE POINT THAT YOU'RE RAISING AND NOT, AS OF NOW, I'M NOT SURE THAT I DO.

UM, SO IS YOUR POINT THAT RAISING THE $500 AMOUNT IN TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 A WOULD RESULT IN EXPENDITURES BETWEEN 500 AND WHATEVER THE NEW LIMIT THAT WOULD BE SET IS NOT BEING REPORTED AT ALL? UH, POTENTIALLY YES.

OKAY.

AND THEN THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT INCONSISTENCY

[00:15:01]

BETWEEN CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES OR LIKE, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN BEING UNDER STATE LAW WHAT'S TRIGGERED AND THEN WHAT'S TRIGGERED UNDER OUR CITY CODE.

SO NOT NECESSARILY A CONFLICT BETWEEN STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS AND CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS, BUT MORE SO THAT WE ARE DEFINING ELECTION AND COMMUNICATION AS SPECIFIC KINDS OF COMMUNICATIONS THAT ARE $500 OR MORE IN THERE, AND HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON IT.

AND THEN WE'RE SAYING THOSE DON'T HAVE TO BE REPORTED.

SO IF HYPOTHETICALLY, WE RAISED THE REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES UNDER TWO DASH TWO DASH 32 DO WITHOUT SIN.

THEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IN OUR CITY CODE ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS THAT COSTS $500.

SO SOMEONE SPENDS $500.

IT IS AN ELECTION YEAR IN COMMUNICATION UNDER THE LAW, AND THEY WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO REPORT IT TO ME.

IT'S, UH, AGAIN, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T WANT TO CALL IT A CRAZY CONFLICT OR INCONSISTENCY.

UM, JUST SOMETHING THAT SEEMS, UH, ODD AND DEPENDING ON THE OTHER PARTS OF OUR CITY CODE THAT TALK ABOUT ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS, AND I KNOW THEY EXIST, I JUST COULDN'T CITE THEM OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

UH, ALL THAT TO SAY, I RAISED IT AS SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER AS WE THINK ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC DOLLAR LIMIT, BECAUSE THEY'RE DOLLAR LIMITS THAT ARE INTIMATELY LINKED, WHERE THE TRUE A DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE AND WHAT IS IN ELECTRICAL AND ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION DEPEND ON EACH OTHER A LITTLE BIT, OR AT LEAST DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES DEPEND ON ELECTIONARY COMMUNICATION DEFINITION.

THERE COULD BE SOME QUIRKS THAT ARISE FROM SORT OF THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS AND DIFFERENT CATEGORIES IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, SHARED UP EXPENDITURES AND THEN ELECTION AND HEARING COMMUNICATION RELATED EXPENDITURES.

IF WE ARE NOT CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE AMEND OUR LIMITS AND WE MIGHT WANT TO AMEND MULTIPLE SECTIONS AT THE SAME TIME TO AVOID THOSE KINDS OF QUIRKS OR POTENTIAL INCONSISTENCIES EVEN.

RIGHT.

YES.

UM, AND, AND I THINK I'LL, UH, I'LL TAKE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG'S, UH, SUGGESTION AND KIND OF OPEN IT UP IF ANYONE HAS, UH, ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS, HAPPY TO KIND OF GET A READ OF THE ROOM, SO TO SPEAK.

UM, I THINK THIS IS THE KIND OF THING THAT THE WORKING GROUP COULD SPEND MORE TIME LOOKING AT, UH, FINDING CROSS REFERENCES OF WHERE ELSE ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS SHOW UP DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES SHOW UP.

UM, BUT HAPPY TO GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER LAURIE.

SO I HESITATE TO SORT OF WEIGH IN JUST BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ABSENT FOR AWHILE.

UM, BUT JUST A THOUGHT FOR THE WORKING GROUP TO MAYBE, UM, ONE FIND OUT HOW THEY CAME UP WITH THE $500.

YOU MIGHT ALREADY KNOW THIS, BUT WHAT THAT'S BASED ON, LIKE, IS IT TIED TO GDP OR LIKE, YOU KNOW, AVERAGE CAMPAIGN COSTS, THAT KIND OF THING, AND MAYBE USE SIMILAR, UM, YOU KNOW, CALCULATIONS.

THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO RECOMMEND IS TALKING TO THE EQUITY OFFICE BECAUSE I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO COST OF LIVING AND HOW IT AFFECTS, UM, ACCESS AND INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY IN AUSTIN, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO ACCESS TO OUR POLITICAL PROCESSES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING, YEAH, IT SOUNDS LIKE $500.

DOESN'T GET YOU A LOT.

BUT IF YOU START INCREASING LIMITS, THEN YOU KNOW, ARE WE HELPING CONTRIBUTE TO THE POLITICAL ACCESS OF THE HAVES VERSUS THE HAVE-NOTS? SO JUST A THOUGHT THAT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH THE EQUITY OFFICE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER IN ADDRESSING THESE LIMITS FROM A SOCIOECONOMIC AND ACCESS PERSPECTIVE.

YEAH.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

UM, SECRETARY LEARNER, YEAH, JUST GETTING BACK TO THE RATIONALE BEHIND THIS IS THIS, ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY, IS YOUR, IS YOUR MOTIVATION TO SIMPLIFY THE PROCEDURE? SO PEOPLE, BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE SLIP UP BECAUSE THEY JUST, DON'T, THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND LIMITS, AND IT'S ALMOST A MINIMUS YOU'RE IS YOU'RE WHAT I'M HEARING 500 AWAY.

SO IT IS, I MEAN, I THINK THE MOTIVATION OF THIS COMMISSION IS TO TRY TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T AS EXPERIENCED TO BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE THE ROLES.

IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING.

OKAY.

AND ALL OF THESE, ALL OF THESE, UM, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, LIKE ALL OF THE REGULATIONS HERE APPLY TO THE CAMPAIGN.

YES.

[00:20:01]

COMMISSIONER DANBURG, UH, TO SOME DEGREE IT APPLIES TO THE CAMPAIGN, BUT THIS IS WHEN PEOPLE CHOOSE TO NOT COLLABORATE WITH THE CAMPAIGN DIRECTLY.

NOW I JUST GIVE A CONTRIBUTION AND LET THE CAMPAIGN DECIDE HOW IT'S GOING TO BE USED.

UM, BUT CORRECT ME IF I WRITE THIS SOUNDS TO ME, AND IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I'VE LOOKED AT THE STATE ELECTION CODE, UM, IN THIS REGARD, BUT, UH, IT'S, IT'S WHAT WE USED TO CALL A TELEGRAM CONTRIBUTION, WHERE IF YOU WAITED UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE TO GIVE SOME SERIOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY, YOU LITERALLY, AT THAT POINT IN TIME HAD TO SEND A TELEGRAM, NOT JUST SEND BY LETTER.

IT WAS JUST IN THE FEW DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION.

SO THAT, THAT, THAT'S KIND OF, I THINK, WHERE WE'VE GOTTEN THE DATES, UM, FOR THINGS THAT JUST HAPPEN BEFORE, THERE'S AN, YOU KNOW, EARLY VOTING'S ALREADY STARTED IT'S BEFORE PEOPLE, IF IT IS OF SUCH A SIGNIFICANT NATURE THAT IT MIGHT INFLUENCE THE WAY SOMEONE VOTES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE JUST SICK AND TIRED OF THIS HUGE LOBBY GROUP OR THIS HUGE SPECIAL INTEREST OR WHATEVER.

UM, SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE SOURCE OF WHERE WE GOT THE DATES.

AND I THINK IT'S KIND OF THE SOURCE OF WHERE WE GOT THE $500.

I'M NOT SURE, BUT THAT'S KIND OF RINGING AROUND IN MY HEAD.

NO, I, THAT THAT'S INTERESTING HISTORY AND BACKGROUND.

AND I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES THE, JUST AS AN OBSERVER AND APPRECIATOR OF ELECTION AND ETHICS LAWS, THE, AS YOU GET CLOSER TO AN ELECTION, THAT'S WHERE YOU START TO SEE MORE, YOU SEE TIGHTER DEADLINES AND MORE STRICT DEADLINES IN REQUIREMENTS, PRECISELY BECAUSE AS THE CLOSER YOU GET TO AN ELECTION, THE MORE THE PUBLIC IS PAYING ATTENTION.

UH, THE MORE POTENTIALLY THERE, THERE MAY BE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A HUGE IMPACT AT THE LAST MINUTE WITH, YOU KNOW, HUMONGOUS AD BY FIVE DIFFERENT BILLBOARDS, YOU KNOW, RIGHT.

WHEN EARLY VOTING STARTS.

AND IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHERE THAT, WHERE ALL THAT COMES FROM.

UM, BUT RIGHT, RIGHT.

UH, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING THAT THE CANDIDATE BELIEVES IS UNTRUE ABOUT THEM, THEIR ABILITY TO RESPOND GETS TOUGHER AND TOUGHER.

I MEAN, THEY'VE PROBABLY SPENT ALMOST ALL THEIR MONEY BY THE TIME THEY'RE WINDING UP THE CAMPAIGN AND THEN BANG, THEY'RE ACCUSED OF, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING OUT OF THE BLUE.

SO THEY WANT TO KNOW WHO'S PAYING FOR THAT, BUT IF IT'S ONLY $500, RIGHT.

SO YEAH.

UH, I SAW COMMISSIONER STANTON AND THEN I'LL GO, SECRETARY LEARNER, COULD YOU REMIND US OF THE TIMELINE OR THE URGENCY FOR THIS PARTICULAR TASK OF EVALUATING AND THEY CAN RECOMMENDATIONS GREAT QUESTION.

UH, THE TIMELINE DEPENDS IN PART ON WHICH PROVISION WE'RE LOOKING AT.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE 2022 ELECTION CYCLE HAS BEGUN IN A SENSE, UH, IT'S ONE YEAR, UH, PRIOR TO ELECTION DAY THAT I BELIEVE A CANDIDATE CAN START MAKING EXPENDITURES, RIGHT? SO, UH, IN A SENSE WE ARE, WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF ELECTION SEASON.

AND SO WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE RULES WERE CHANGING AND HOW FAR IN A GAME WE ARE EVEN IN THE MIDDLE OF A GAME.

RIGHT? SO, UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SPECIFIC PROVISION TRIGGERS ANY TIME SOON, UH, I'M GOING TO QUICKLY DEFER TO LYNN CARTER, OUR TRUSTED LEGAL COUNSEL, GO AHEAD.

WELL, AND I WILL DISAVOW ANY EXPERTISE ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE, BUT JUST GOING BY THE THAT'S PARTICULAR PROVISION OF THE CODE IT'S SPECIFIC TO THE 60 DAYS PRIOR TO THE ELECTION.

SO THE ELECTION IN 2022 IS GOING TO BE, UM, NOVEMBER AROUND NOVEMBER 2ND.

AND, BUT YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL COUNCIL HAS TO VOTE ON THIS.

UM, SO, AND, AND THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR A BALLOT INITIATIVE THAT COULD COME UP IN MAY, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, THERE,

[00:25:01]

WE'RE NOT LIMITED TO JUST THE NOVEMBER 20, 22 ELECTION.

GREAT POINT.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMELINE FOR OUR PROCESS, IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THESE TWO DASH $2 LIMITS BASELINE RULE OF THUMB IS THE EARLIER THE BETTER, EVEN IF THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT DOESN'T TRIGGER IMMEDIATELY, OR WE'RE NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF OPERATING UNDER A SPECIFIC PROVISION, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE RULES MID GAME, SO TO SPEAK, UH, EVEN FOR THOSE THAT HAVEN'T QUITE COME INTO PLAY YET FOR OUR 20, 22 CYCLE, THE SOONER THE BETTER IF WE WANT THEM TO APPLY SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

YEAH, GO AHEAD.

I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF THE ASAP DEADLINE TIMELINE.

UM, LET ME ASK A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION THEN WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM KIND OF TIMEFRAME THAT WE SHOULD SHOOT FOR IN ADVANCE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION, UM, THE TIMELINE, BUT COUNCIL NEEDS, YOU KNOW, THE HAPPY PATH, WHAT IS THE MINIMUM LIKE AT LEAST A MONTH TO GIVE COUNSEL TIME TO? SO THEN WE CAN WORK BACKWARDS BECAUSE I WANT, I'D LIKE, YOU KNOW, BEING ON THE WORK GROUP, I'D LIKE TO WORK WITH A, A REALISTIC TIMELINE RATHER THAN AS SOON AS YOU CAN.

SURE.

AND I WILL, LET ME CLARIFY THAT AS SOON AS YOU CAN DEPENDS ON THE, THAT THIS COMMISSION FEELS WE, UH, ABSOLUTELY COULD TAKE A PROVISION, DECIDE IT NEEDS SOME WORK, DECIDE THAT MAYBE IT'S NOT FAIR OR RIGHT TO CHANGE IT.

NOW, IF WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OPERATIONAL TIME PERIOD, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE GENERATE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO SAY THAT EFFECTIVE THIS DAY, YOU KNOW, PAST THE CURRENT ELECTION CYCLE, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS CHANGE THAT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE TO THE, THE POINT I WAS MAKING ABOUT THE ASAP IS THAT IF THERE IS A GLARING PROBLEM WITH ONE OF THESE DOLLAR LIMITS, THAT ONE OF US ON THE COMMISSION FEELS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED SOONER, RATHER THAN LATER, GIVEN THE TIMEFRAME OF THE UPCOMING ELECTION PARENTHESES ELECTIONS, IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO HAVE IT DONE SOONER.

SO, OKAY.

SO THERE ISN'T AN URGENCY TODAY FOR US TO MAKE A MOTION AND MOVE IT FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO.

IT IS A, IT IS A SELF-IMPOSED URGENCY IF THERE IS ANY.

OKAY, GREAT.

THANK YOU.

NO PROBLEM.

AND I'LL GO SECRETARY LEARNER AND THEN COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

I THINK MY ONLY POINT IS JUST THAT WE SHOULD BE CLEAR ABOUT, UM, THE AUDIENCE ISN'T REALLY THE RIGHT, THE TARGET, LIKE THE, WHOEVER WE FEEL WE HAVE KIND OF JURISDICTION OVER BECAUSE THERE IS, THERE IS A CONFLICT HERE, BUT NOT A COMMON, THERE'S AN, THERE'S A TENSION BETWEEN TRANSPARENCY AND ALMOST ACCESS, RIGHT? SO, UM, TO YOUR POINTS ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE RUNNING IN CAMPAIGNS SHOULD KNOW WHO IS FUNDING, UM, YOU KNOW, KEMP COMMUNICATIONS THAT AFFECT THEM.

SO IF WE, IF WE MAKE IT GO TOO HIGH, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUT SOME TRANSPARENCY.

UM, I THINK THIS COMMISSION FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT THE ACCESS QUESTION.

I MEAN, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK OBVIOUSLY A MODEST INCREASE ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE THE GAME TOO MUCH.

I WILL SAY THAT THINGS LIKE FACEBOOK, IT DOESN'T, IT HAS HUGE SCALE AND REACH AND IT'S NOT EXPENSIVE.

SO YOU CAN MAKE A BIG IMPACT WITH SMALL AMOUNTS OF MONEY ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

SO, UM, A THOUSAND DOLLARS CAN PROBABLY BUY MORE THAN WE THINK HE CAN, YOU KNOW, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU DON'T WANT TO BE DROWNING IN THESE REPORTS WHERE SOMEBODY ACCIDENTALLY SLIPS UP AND IT'S A REALLY DIMINIMOUS.

AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST, THAT'S JUST THE TENSION BETWEEN US.

I WANT US TO BE KIND OF THINKING ABOUT WHO WE ARE, WHAT IS THE WORD I'M THINKING? WHO, WHO ARE OUR BENEFICIARIES? IT'S MORE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I DON'T KNOW THE WORD.

NO, NO, I, I APPRECIATE THAT.

UM, WHO WE'RE WORKING FOR.

RIGHT.

UH, AND ONE THOUGHT THAT OCCURRED TO ME BECAUSE IN OUR, IN OUR WORKING GROUP, WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS SPECIFIC LIMIT AND THAT'S WHERE WE BROUGHT UP INITIALLY, THE IDEA THAT, WELL, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO RUN A FACEBOOK AD? AND WHAT WOULD A FACEBOOK AD OF $500 GETS YOU POTENTIALLY, UH, NOT BEING A SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING GURU MYSELF.

I DON'T HAVE GOOD ANSWERS TO THAT.

AND I THINK IT'D BE WORTH, UH, SPENDING TIME TO GET A GOOD ANSWER TO THAT.

A THOUGHT THAT OCCURRED TO ME IS SORT OF LISTENING NOW WAS, UH, MAYBE

[00:30:01]

WE THINK ABOUT NOT SAYING THIS IS A GOOD IDEA OR A BAD IDEA, BUT FLOATING IT, THINK ABOUT TREATING DIGITAL DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES DIFFERENTLY.

UH, GIVEN WHAT WE ROYAL WE KNOW ABOUT HOW INFORMATION SPREADS ONLINE AND GIVEN THAT WE KNOW THAT IT CAN, YOU CAN CHEAPLY REACH A LOT OF PEOPLE JUST AS A GENERAL OBSERVATION.

AGAIN, IT'D BE GREAT TO HAVE SOME CONCRETE DATA JUST WANTED TO FLOAT THAT AS AN IDEA.

THAT'S NOT QUITE, UH, I RAISED THAT JUST AS SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE COULD ACT ON OUR AGENDA ITEM.

IT'S ABOUT THE DOLLAR LIMITS AND THAT'S NOT A DOLLAR LIMIT, BUT JUST A THOUGHT SECOND SECRETARY RESEARCH ON THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS, YOU GUYS REMEMBER HOW THAT CASE WE'VE HAD A COMPLAINT WHERE FACEBOOK ADS HAD A, HAD A PROMINENT ROLE.

YEAH.

BUT I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS MORE OF THE DATE THAN A DOLLAR LIMIT.

I FEEL LIKE WE DID SOME RESEARCH ON THAT.

YES.

AND I THINK COMMISSIONER RYAN HAD HAD A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN FACEBOOK AND SAYS, MY JOB IS FACEBOOK ADS.

AND HE WAS, HE WAS KIND OF A RESOURCE WITNESS ON THE COMMISSION TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT ALL MEANT.

UM, SO COMMISSIONER STANTON'S HAND, GO AHEAD.

LET'S DO WE HAVE ANY CASES OR SITUATIONS IN THE PAST THAT WE'RE AWARE OF THAT THERE, WHERE THIS IS RELEVANT? I GUESS WHAT'S, WHAT'S PROMPTING THIS.

WE SHOULD CONSIDER CHANGING THIS 500, RIGHT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

IS IT JUST MORE, THIS CODE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SO LONG AND MAYBE IT'S OUTDATED.

IT'S ONE, THERE SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING MORE.

SO COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, I APOLOGIZE THAT I'M, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT PROMPTING WE DID HAVE COMPLAINTS THAT WERE RELEVANT TO THIS TIMING THING.

RIGHT.

UM, YOU KNOW, WAS STUFF REPORTED SOON ENOUGH AND THAT'S FINE.

UM, THE TRANSPARENCY ISSUE WITH TIMING IS IMPORTANT.

IT'S JUST REALLY QUESTIONABLE ABOUT THE $500, BUT TAKE, GO BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHAT'S OUR TIMELINE.

THERE'S ALWAYS ANOTHER ELECTION.

SO WHENEVER WE DECIDE TO MAKE RECOMMEND THE CHANGES AND WHENEVER CITY COUNCIL, OR IF CITY COUNCIL ACTS ON THE RECOMMENDATION IS WHEN IT WILL BE.

AND THERE WAS ALWAYS BE ANOTHER ELECTION.

UH, I WAS ASKING MORE WHAT'S THE, IS THERE A PRECEDENT OR IS THERE SOMETHING HISTORICALLY ABOUT THE DOLLAR LIMIT WHAT'S PROMPTING OUR COMMISSIONER.

DAN DANBURG SEEM TO HAVE MORE, LET ME CLARIFY.

I DON'T MEAN WHY DID WE CHANGE? WHY DOES IT STATE 500? I'M ASKING WHY, WHY ARE YOU CONSIDERING CHANGING 500? I FEEL LIKE WE ENDED UP SEEING THESE CASES WHERE WE ALL FEEL SORT OF LIKE, WHY ARE WE SITTING HERE WASTING SOMEBODY'S TIME FOR SOMETHING THAT HAS GOT SMALL? I MEAN, THAT'S, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING WE OFTEN COLLECTIVELY STRUGGLE WITH AND IT, IT ALMOST FEELS DIMINIMOUS IS WHERE HE KEEPS SAYING DIMINIMUS, BUT FOR THE TIME OF THIS BODY, AND ALSO FOR PUTTING SOMEBODY THROUGH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IT COSTS TO GET REPRESENTATION FOR THIS, WHAT THEY ARE WORRIED IT'LL DO TO THEIR REPUTATION, THE PUBLIC SCRUTINY OF THEM FOR SOMETHING LIKE $500.

SORRY, DEBRA.

YEAH.

AND SO ALL THAT TO SAY, I THINK THAT THIS IS, THIS REALLY IS WORTH TAKING A CLOSE LOOK AT, AND I THINK, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT UP PERMISSION TO GREENBERG SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT A DUTY THAT WE IMPOSE ON A SOPHISTICATED CAMPAIGN OR POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE.

THIS IS A LEGAL REQUIREMENT ON ANYONE.

UM, SIMILAR TO, UH, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

WE HAVE TO THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT THOSE BECAUSE IF SOMEONE CAN RUN A FOUL OF EXCEEDING THAT LATER, THE BUNDLING LIMIT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD, IT'S A GOOD CATCH.

AND I THINK WE WOULD BE GOOD TO, SORRY.

I SAW SOME LIGHTS TURN OFF.

OKAY.

THE MOST INCENSE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO DO THAT THE WHOLE NIGHT LONG.

UM, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, YOUR DANFORD.

YEAH.

YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT'S KIND OF AN ONGOING HARD THING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND IS IF YOU'RE FILING FOR OFFICE OR IF YOU'RE GOING THROUGH GETTING SOMETHING ON A PROPOSITION BALLOT, THERE'S PAPERWORK, YOU GOT TO FILL OUT.

AND PART OF THAT PAPERWORK IS AN ACCEPTANCE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR REPORTING.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE

[00:35:01]

HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN, YOU KNOW, SAY THERE'S A $200 CAMPAIGN LIMIT, I GET AN ACT BLUE OR WHATEVER SOLICITATION FOR THESE CANDIDATES THAT I'D LIKE TO SUPPORT EVERY THREE DAYS.

AND I ANTICIPATE THROUGH IF I'M NOT REALLY KEEPING TRACK OF HOW MUCH I'VE GIVEN, BUT THERE IS A LIMIT I'M ANTICIPATING THAT THE CAMPAIGN WILL LET ME KNOW THAT, OOPS, WE NEED TO, I NEED TO REFUND THE LAST $15 BECAUSE YOU'RE OVER THE LIMIT.

BUT PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST DECIDING TO GET INVOLVED IN A MONEYED WAY, VERY LATE IN THE CAMPAIGN, THEY HAVEN'T FILLED OUT ANY PAPERWORK, GIVING THEM ANY KIND OF KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE THESE OBLIGATIONS, EXCEPT THAT, OF COURSE YOU CAN'T BE IGNORANT OF THE LAW IN ANY KIND OF A SITUATION, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE WERE SELF FREQUENTLY SEEING YOUNG FIRST TIME SECRETARIES IN SOMEONE'S OFFICE, WHO'S BEEN TOLD TO FILL OUT THESE PAPERS AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LAW IS AND THEY'RE DEPENDING ON THEIR SUPERIORS AND THE ACTUAL CONTENT CONTRIBUTORS TO TELL THEM WHAT TO DO.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE GET CALLED.

YEAH.

AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I, THE, THE CASE THAT KIND OF THE HYPOTHETICAL THAT RUNS THROUGH MY HEAD WHEN I THINK ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC, UH, EXAMPLE IS SAY THERE IS A STREET ARTIST WHO, WHO BUYS $500 WORTH OF PAINTS TO PAINT A MURAL SAYING, UH, SUPPORT OUR POLICE VOTE.

YES.

ON PROP A, UH, THAT STRAIGHT ARTISTS PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE LIABLE, UH, FOR A VIOLATION JUST BECAUSE THEY, THEY SPENT MONEY ON NICE PAINT.

AND CONVERSELY, IF SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, UH, DOES THE OPPOSITE SAYS THAT NO WAY PROP A, YOU KNOW, MURAL ON THE SIDE OF A STORE, ALL THAT TO SAY THAT STREET PAINTS CAN BE EXPENSIVE.

I DON'T KNOW THE GOING PRICE OF PAINT, BUT I SEEN THAT SOMEONE PAINTING A BIG MURAL COULD SPEND OVER $500.

UH, SO, YOU KNOW, ONE ANOTHER THOUGHT IS, UH, AGAIN, NOT QUITE THE DOLLAR LIMIT, BUT THINKING ABOUT MAKING A DISTINCTION BETWEEN, UH, A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WHO CAN CERTAINLY DO CAMPAIGN EXPENDED, DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES, AND ANYONE ELSE THAT MIGHT BE A WORTHY DISTINCTION TO IN THINKING ABOUT THESE LIMITS.

UM, BUT SECRETARY LERNER, GO AHEAD.

WHOA.

IN YOUR HABITAT.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED EARLIER THAT THESE ARE ALL ABOUT EXPENDITURES BY CAMPAIGN AND YOU SAID, YES.

UH, SO, UH, QUESTION, UH, THESE ARE CAMPAIGN RELATED.

SO ELECTION, MAYBE CAMPAIGN FINANCE IN THE LECTURE, UNRELATED GENERALLY, UM, THESE DOLLAR LIMITS APPLY SOMETIMES TO CAMPAIGN SOMETIMES TO CONTRIBUTORS EXPENDITURES, CONGREGATION, THE GUY, HE JUST DID HIS GO FUND ME EVERYTHING.

YEAH.

UH, I'LL GO, LORI, AND, AND DANBURG GO AHEAD.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST, I APPRECIATE THIS CONVERSATION.

IT'S NICE NOT HAVING A HEARING AND TO BE ABLE TO LIKE ACTUALLY FLUSH THESE THINGS OUT.

SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT IT'S NICE TO BE ABLE TO REALLY HAVE THESE FULL CONVERSATIONS, NOT BEING EXHAUSTED AT MIDNIGHT AND JUST LIKE RUNNING THROUGH IT.

UM, AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO ECHO COMMISSIONER LERNER, I THINK HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD, UH, AND SORT OF, UH, COMMISSIONER DANBURG SENTIMENT AS WELL THAT I THINK NO MATTER WHERE WE GO, WHETHER WE GO, YOU KNOW, STAY AT THE SAME PLACE, GO UP DOWN WHATEVER THERE IS NECESSARILY A TENSION BETWEEN ACCESSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

RIGHT.

AND SO LIKE, HOW DO WE GET AROUND THAT? YOU KNOW, BECAUSE EVEN THE THINGS THAT COMMISSIONER GREENBERG IS RAISING THE CONCERNS THEY GO TO ACCESSIBILITY, THEY ALSO GO TO ACCOUNTABILITY.

UM, SO IT'S JUST, I THINK, AND I HEAR THAT IN A LOT OF THE EXAMPLES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, HOW WE RESOLVE THAT IS I THINK A VERY DIFFICULT TASK, BUT YEAH.

NOT SHYING AWAY FROM THE HARD STUFF, UH, COMMISSIONER DENVER.

YEAH.

I HADN'T REALLY BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT MORE AND MORE AND MORE WE'RE SEEING TRENDS WHERE THE MOST OUTRAGEOUS, THE MOST UNTRUE, THE MOST, UM, CRAZY STUFF GOES VIRAL AND THAT'S LEFT AND RIGHT.

AND THAT DOESN'T COST ANYTHING, BUT BOYD CONNECT TAKE A CANDIDATE BY SURPRISE.

UM, YOU KNOW, I, THERE MIGHT NEED TO BE SOMETHING DONE DIFFERENTLY WITH SOCIAL

[00:40:01]

MEDIA, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT I SURE, WITHOUT OPENING THE ENTIRE PANDORA'S BOX OF, UH, ELECTIONS AND SOCIAL MEDIA.

UH, I ONLY BROUGHT IT.

WE'VE ONLY BROUGHT UP THE SOCIAL MEDIA EXAMPLE OF THAT.

UH, IT'S, IT'S AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY CAN GO A LONG WAY FOR THESE PURPOSES.

UM, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT, AND THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO, UH, I THINK, UH, I'M TELLING MYSELF THIS AS A MEMBER OF THE WORKING GROUP, BUT FOR THE WORKING GROUP AND FOR ANYONE ELSE'S, WE LOOK AT THIS SPECIFIC DOLLAR LIMIT MOVING FORWARD IS TO LOOK AT THESE ARE REPORTS THAT HAVE TO BE FILED.

SO PRESUMABLY REPORTS HAVE BEEN FILED AND IT WOULD BE WORTH LOOKING HISTORICALLY AT THE DATA OF HOW MUCH ARE THESE CAMPAIGN DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES ARE USUALLY THE ONES THAT ARE REPORTED AT LEAST.

UH, AND WE CAN FIND A MEAN, WE CAN SEE TRENDS ON WHAT THESE, WHAT THE REPORTS ARE ACTUALLY BEING SPENT OR WHAT THE EXPENDITURES ARE BEING SPENT ON IN THESE REPORTS.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE WORTH STUDYING TO, UH, SECRETARY OF LEARNER.

SO SINCE WE ARE HERE TOGETHER AND HAVE A LITTLE TIME, MAYBE WE CAN BRAINSTORM A LITTLE BIT OR JUST PEOPLE CAN EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS ON WHO DO WE THINK THAT WE ARE SERVING? WHAT, WHAT CAUSE SHOULD THIS COMMISSION BE? AND MAYBE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE TWO, BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT PEOPLE THINK, BECAUSE THAT IS KIND OF WHERE WE'RE, IF WE THINK THAT ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IS THE CAUSE THAT WE'RE REALLY SERVING, THEN I THINK WE, IT STAYS RIGHT.

BUT IF WE THINK IT'S REALLY ABOUT MAKING THIS PROCESS, SIMPLIFYING THE PROCESS AND ALLOWING MORE PEOPLE TO BE INVOLVED, THEN I THINK THAT THAT'S THEN WE'D HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION.

BUT I AGREE WITH YOU LOOKING AT THE DATA, CAUSE MAYBE IT JUST BE LIKE, THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE.

SURE.

UH, MY VERY BRIEF ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, WHICH I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT ONE FOR ALL OF US TO THINK ABOUT, UM, IS UNFORTUNATELY BOTH, UH, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE CAN CHOOSE OR NECESSARILY PRIORITIZE, UH, IN EVERY INSTANCE, ONE OVER THE OTHER.

AND I THINK IT'S, UH, I THINK I'M, UH, I'M ALL ABOUT BALANCING.

I THINK THAT IS, UH, A BALANCE AND I WANT TO BE, UM, SENSITIVE TO THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ON OUR AGENDA THAT MAY HAVE MAY TAKE SOME TIME, BUT I DO, I DON'T WANT TO STIFLE ANYONE'S THOUGHTS ON THIS OR OTHER DOLLAR LIMITS.

SO GO AHEAD, MR. YOUR STANTON.

I THINK THAT IS AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.

AND, AND MORE CONCRETELY, I'D LIKE TO SEE US PARTICIPATE IN THAT EXERCISE TO ACTUALLY GET THAT.

I THINK THAT IT'S, UM, VERY RELEVANT TO ALL BUSINESS ITEM TWO, A WITH THE STATEMENT OF WHAT THE COMMISSION DOES AND HOW THE PUBLIC CAN USE THE COMMISSION.

SO I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT DISCUSSION OR THAT EXERCISE WRAPPED PERHAPS IN THAT DISCUSSION OF THAT ITEM.

ABSOLUTELY.

UM, AND I, I, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE COMMISSIONERS FOR, YOU KNOW, EVERY EVERYTHING THAT COMES BEFORE IS TO THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE FUNDAMENTAL VALUES.

I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THEM A LOT IN COMMUNICATIONS AND LETTERS I'VE WRITTEN INTO THE CAPACITY I HAVE, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, GO AHEAD.

UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE INTERNET IS THE WAY TO GET THE ANSWER TO HOW MUCH DOES A FACEBOOK AD COST ONE PLACE, IT SAYS 97 CENTS PER CLICK, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO REACH 500 PEOPLE.

ANOTHER SAYS BETWEEN 50 CENTS AND THREE 50, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO REACH A THOUSAND PEOPLE.

IT'S I THINK IN YOUR, YOU KNOW, COMMENT ABOUT DIMINIMUS I STILL THINK THE $500 IS TOO LOW, BUT GIVEN THE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS, DOES IT REALLY GET REPORTED ANYWAY, JUST NOT NECESSARILY BEFORE THE ELECTION.

UM, I THINK THE WORKING GROUP SHOULD LOOK AT IT AGAIN AND THEN MAYBE WE COULD MOVE ON.

SURE.

AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT MAKES SENSE.

AND I, AND I, FOR THESE SPECIFIC LIMITS, THE DOLLAR LIMITS IN TWO DASH TWO, UH, I, I PREFER TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION BEFORE RUTTEN, YOU'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL AND THERE'S A FORM OF FORMAT.

APPARENTLY WE HAVE TO USE MAKING SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS AS I LEARNED THIS WEEK.

UH, BUT UH, I SAW THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION DEPLOYING THE BRAIN TRUST OF COMMISSIONERS ON THIS SPECIFIC ITEM, BECAUSE I REALLY DO THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT ONE ON THE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE REPORTING REQUIREMENT.

UM, SO I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP.

UH, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? NOT JUST DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES, BUT TWO DASH $2 LIMITS

[00:45:01]

GENERALLY GOING ONCE GOING TWICE, WE WILL MOVE ON IN OUR AGENDA.

WE HAVE SOME OLD BUSINESS.

UM, SO YES, GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONER STANTON, THE DISPOSITION OF NEW BUSINESS ITEM ONE, A WHAT'S THE NAME? UH, SO NEXT STEP IS, UH, THE WORKING GROUP HAS HEARD THE FEEDBACK AND THE, UH, WE'VE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION AS A COMMISSION AND ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE WELCOME TO THINK, YOU KNOW, ABOUT WHAT WE MIGHT DO WITH TWO SU DOLLAR LIMITS AND SPECIFICALLY THE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

UH, BUT WE, I THINK MY SENSE IS THAT WE ARE DONE DISCUSSING IT FOR NOW IN THE OPEN COMMISSION MEETING AND THAT THE WORKING GROUP IS LIKELY GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO LOOK AT IT, POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT PAST REPORTS.

SO NO PROBLEM.

SO MOVING INTO

[2.a. Statement of What the Commission Does & How the Public can use the Commission and Statement on Equity, Access, and the Need for Reform by the Working Group on Race, Identity, and Equity]

ITEM TWO OLD BUSINESS INTO A, UH, SO WE HAVE A STATEMENT OF WHAT THE COMMISSION DOES AND HOW THE PUBLIC CAN USE THE COMMISSION IN THE STATEMENT ON EQUITY ACCESS AND NEED FOR REFORM.

THIS HAS BECOME THE, UH, VICE CHAIR, KALE SHOW, UH, FOR DRAFTING THE, UH, WHAT WAS AN OP-ED BECAME A MEDIA STATEMENT, UH, IN, UH, COMMISSIONER LAURIE WAS PART OF THE WORKING GROUP.

I WAS PART OF THE WORKING GROUP.

UH, I KNOW I, I SHOWED, I FEEL A LOT OF GUILT FOR NOT BEING INVOLVED AS MUCH AS I SHOULD HAVE BEEN, BUT MARY KAY HAS BEEN DRAFTING AND REDRAFTING TAKING OUR FEEDBACK AT EVERY MEETING.

SHE, UNFORTUNATELY, COULDN'T BE HERE THIS EVENING.

SO, UH, THAT IS WHERE THAT STANDS.

UM, I THINK THAT'S, UH, GOING TO BE SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT AT THE NEXT ONE, SINCE SHE WAS, SHE WAS THE ONE WHO WAS GOING TO BRING THE ITEM AND PRESENT IT, BUT, UH, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER LIE AND HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH HER BEFORE THIS MEETING.

AND SO SHE IS WORKING ON, UH, I, I BELIEVE YOU ALL DISCUSSED COMBINING THE TWO STATEMENTS.

UM, SO SHE'S WORKING ON THAT NOW THAT I'M ABLE TO PARTICIPATE AGAIN.

UM, I THINK SHE AND I WILL DISCUSS EARLY NEXT WEEK ON HOW TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MOVE FORWARD IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED IN JOINING OUR WORKING GROUP.

I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS THAT WE WANT TO START GAINING SOME MOMENTUM ON.

UM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, LET THE CHAIR KNOW, UM, IF YOU'D BE INTERESTED.

SO I, I THINK I AM, I AM IN NETWORKING GROUP ALREADY.

UH, I AM IN BOTH OF OUR CURRENT OPERATING WORKING GROUPS AND IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO REPLACE ME ON A WORKING GROUP, WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN WE GET THERE ON THE AGENDA.

SO I HATE TO BE, UNLESS WE

[2.b. Content of the agenda for future meetings, including description of Commission’s jurisdiction and/or functions.]

WANT TO DISCUSS THAT STATEMENT FURTHER TB IS THE CONTENT OF THE AGENDA FOR FUTURE MEETINGS, INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMISSION'S JURISDICTION AND OR FUNCTIONS.

AND THIS WAS RAISED BY COMMISSIONER STANTON.

I BELIEVE IF NOT OUR LAST MEETING, IT WAS OUR LAST MEETING, UH, OR THE MEETING BEFORE POTENTIALLY.

UM, BUT THE IDEA BEING THAT ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS KIND OF OUR PUBLIC FACING DOCUMENT FOR EVERY MEETING AND WHAT THE COMMISSION DOES, UH, THERE SHOULD BE JUST A SIMPLE PLAIN LANGUAGE STATEMENT.

YOU HAVE TAX REVIEW COMMISSION DOES THIS, UM, TO DO THIS, LIKE OUR PURPOSE IS THIS, THIS IS WHAT WE TRY TO DO.

A SIMPLE PLAIN ENGLISH STATEMENT JUST ON THE AGENDA.

SINCE THAT IS WHEN THE PUBLIC LOOKS UP, THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THEY SEE ON THE WEBSITE IS OUR AGENDAS AND OUR MEETINGS.

UM, AND WE DISCUSSED AS WELL, NOT JUST INCLUDING IT ON THE AGENDA, BUT POTENTIALLY THE WEBSITE ITSELF, AS ON THE LANDING PAGE FOR THE COMMISSION, THIS IS THE COMMISSION AND WHAT IT DOES.

UM, I KNOW I'VE RECEIVED EMAILS FROM PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS COMPLETELY FAR AFIELD FROM WHAT THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION REALLY DOES.

THEY JUST ASSUME LIKE, OH, THE CHAIR OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION, THERE IS AN ETHICAL MORAL COMPONENT TO THIS STORY.

LET ME ASK THIS GUY.

AND I HAVE TO EXPLAIN NO THAT NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT, WHAT I DO IN SERVING ON THE COMMISSION.

SO I'LL, UH, I WAS GONNA PASS IT TO COMMISSIONER STANTON.

I KNOW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO, UM, COMMISSIONER STANCE AND TAKE A STAB AT THINKING ABOUT WHAT THAT STATEMENT WOULD BE.

I KNOW THERE WAS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UH, COORDINATING WITH COMMISSIONER KALE AND THE STATEMENT OR THE WHAT KIND OF, I THINK THE MEDIA PIECE IS WHAT WE DECIDED TO CALL IT AFTER THE LAST MEETING, AS OPPOSED TO AN OP-ED, BECAUSE THERE WASN'T AN OPINION BEING EXPRESSED NECESSARILY.

UM, BUT THE MEDIA PIECE, UH, SO THAT THERE'S CONSISTENCY AND HARMONY AND THE LANGUAGE BEING USED, BUT HAPPY TO PASS IT TO YOU FOR AN UPDATE.

IF YOU HAVE ONE, MY GOSH, I APOLOGIZE.

I, I KNEW I HAD AN ACTION.

I COULDN'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT WAS.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, UM, COMMISSION NUMBERS, I HAVE NOT, UM, I HAVE NOT MADE ANY

[00:50:01]

FURTHER PROGRESS ON THAT, ON THAT ITEM, NOT A PROBLEM, JUST LIKE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ALWAYS HAVE ELECTIONS.

WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE MEETINGS AS LONG AS WE'RE A BODY, SO, AND MORE AGENDAS.

SO WITH THAT, UM, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT MEETING ON THAT ITEM.

AND WE'LL MOVE TONIGHT TO TWO C,

[2.c. Working group status reports and/or recommendations on the following.]

WHICH IS WORKING GROUP STATUS REPORTS AND OR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE FOLLOWING.

AND IT IS, UM, IT IS A DECENT LIST OF STUFF FOR THE, MY AFFECTIONATELY CALLED KITCHEN SINK, WORKING GROUP.

THAT'S THE WORKING GROUP ON SANCTIONS PROCEDURES AND OTHER ISSUES.

UM, WHAT I AM GOING TO DO HERE IS PASS IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

SHE CIRCULATED, UH, THIS NICE HANDOUT.

UM, WE WERE ANTICIPATING POTENTIALLY HAVING THE ABILITY TO SHOW A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, BUT, UH, THESE SLIDES ARE GOING TO DO JUST FINE.

SO WITH THAT COMMISSIONER GREENBERG UPDATE FOR THE WORKING GROUP.

OKAY.

SO THE FIRST THING WAS THE DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE REPORTING.

WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT.

SO THE NEXT THING IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, WHICH IS, UM, THE COMPLAINTS THAT, UM, SO WE WROTE A RESOLUTION WHICH WAS RENAMED RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL.

UM, I THINK ALL OF THE WHEREAS IS, ARE STILL APPROPRIATE.

BASICALLY THE ISSUE IS THAT WE HAVE WAY PEOPLE FILING COMPLAINTS, THE LAWS THAT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED ARE COMPLICATED AND THESE COMPLAINTS OCCASIONALLY, OR MAYBE OFTEN, BUT IT STICKS IN MY MIND, UM, GET DISMISSED BASED ON TECHNICALITIES THAT, UM, ARE THE RESULT OF PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT SECTION OF CODE IS BEING VIOLATED.

SO, UM, THE RECOMMENDATION SAYS TO TAKE AWAY FROM SECTION TWO DASH 7 41 B THAT REQUIRES THAT THE, UM, SECTION OF CODE OR CHARTER PROVISION ACTUALLY BE LISTED IN TO REMOVE THAT.

UM, I HAD INITIALLY, AND WE KIND OF SEEM TO IN AGREEMENT WITH THE IDEA THAT THE WRITTEN NOTICE, UM, FOR THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, INSTEAD WHAT'S SPECIFIED THE CODE SECTION OR CHARTER PROVISION ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN VIOLATED, BUT THE BIG ISSUE THAT'S RAISED WITH HAVING THAT WRITTEN NOTICE SPECIFY THE SECTION OF CODE OR CHARTER IS WHO'S SUPPOSED TO DO IT RIGHT.

AND I'M LIKE HIM, YOU KNOW WHAT MY THINKING BEING WELL, THE CHAIR ALREADY WAS DOING THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND THAT THE CHAIR ALWAYS HAD HELP FROM EITHER CITY LEGAL OR OUTSIDE COUNSEL IF LEGAL IS CONFLICTED.

BUT, UM, BASED ON THE FEEDBACK FROM LYNN, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S MAYBE NOT THE BEST IDEA.

WOULD YOU SAY THAT? DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT? OR SHOULD I JUST GO ON WITH AN ALTERNATIVE IDEA? WELL, IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, STANDARD CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THE CHARTER SETS FORTH THE WHO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS CAN REPRESENT.

AND IT'S NOT THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

AND I CAN SAY THAT I CONTINUALLY GET REQUESTS THAT I HAVE TO TELL A COMPLAINANT OR RESPONDENT.

I CAN'T PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE.

HERE'S THE PROCEDURE, UM, CONSULT YOUR OWN ATTORNEY.

SO, UM, UNDERSTOOD.

SO AS MUCH AS I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT YOU WORK FOR ME, UM, IT SEEMS THAT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMISSION ITSELF TO FIGURE OUT THE SECTION OF CODE OR CHARTER PROVISION ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN VIOLATED.

SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IN THE TEENY, ANY PRINT ON THESE SLIDES INSTEAD, I THINK IT'S THE ALTERNATIVE IS IF AT THE END OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, THE COMMISSION DECIDES THAT A FINAL HEARING SHOULD BE HELD.

THE COMMISSION MUST ALSO SPECIFY THE CODE SECTION OR CHARTER PROVISION THAT'S BEEN VIOLATED.

THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY IN THE CODE.

I THINK IT COULD BE ADDED TO SECTION TWO DASH SEVEN DASH 44 D AND THEN IT DOESN'T FALL ALL ON THE CHAIR.

I MEAN, THE CHAIR CAN GET IT WRONG TOO.

JUST LIKE A LAY PERSON.

THE CHAIR COULD HYPOTHETICALLY EVEN BE A LAY PERSON.

UM, SO I THINK IF THE CHAIR, IF THE COMMISSION BELIEVES THERE'S REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION MAY HAVE OCCURRED, THE COMMISSION SHOULD ALSO BE ABLE

[00:55:01]

TO SAY WHAT THAT VIOLATION IS, SECRETARY LEARNER DANBURG.

SO, UH, THAT'S CLEAR, ARE YOU SAYING THAT BASED ON THE FACTS THAT ARE ALLEGED THEN, SO WE WOULD BE ASSOCIATING.

WE WOULD BE BASICALLY ASSESSING THE FACTS, WHETHER THEY'RE TRUE AND ACCURATE AND THEN NO, NOT WHETHER THEY'RE TRUE AND ACCURATE, BUT WHETHER THERE'S REAL LEVEL GREEN GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED, WE'VE REPEATEDLY SEEN VIOLATIONS WHERE, UM, BUT EITHER WHATEVER WAS DONE OR MONEY WAS RAISED AND THERE WAS NO PACK AND NO, UM, MAYBE NO FILING AT ALL OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS OR EXPENDITURES, BECAUSE THERE WAS A CHOICE NOT TO FILE A PACK.

WHEN WE SEE THAT WE KNOW WHAT THE VIOLATION IS.

SO WE WENT ON, I'M NOT SAYING WHETHER IT'S REASONABLE TO BELIEVE THAT THIS HAPPENS, WHETHER THE FACTS ALLEGED SOMETHING RELEVANT IN THE COAST, WE ALWAYS DO IN A PRELIMINARY HEARING, WE HEAR WHAT IS THE COMPLAINT AND WE, BUT YEAH, I JUST, THAT THAT STILL DOESN'T GET OVER.

WELL, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE TRUE.

THEY STILL MAY HAVE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

UM, BUT WHAT THEY DESCRIBE IS IN OUR JURISDICTION AND WE BELIEVE THERE'S REASONABLE GROUNDS THAT A VIOLATION MAY HAVE OCCURRED.

THAT'S THE STANDARD FOR A PRELIMINARY HEARING, PRELIMINARY HEARING REALLY ISN'T A BIG DEAL, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY JUST, WE JUST DECIDE WHETHER WE SHOULD GO FORWARD, BUT IF WE'RE GOING FORWARD TO A FINAL HEARING, THEN WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO SAY WHAT THE CHARGES ARE.

RIGHT.

AND EVEN THEN WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT.

EVEN IF, I MEAN, WE, WE WRITE GENERALLY THE WORST THING THAT CAN COME OUT OF CURRENT CODE RIGHT NOW FROM OUR COMMISSION IS A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR, WHICH A FRIEND OF MINE DESCRIBES AS A BIG TRAFFIC TICKET.

UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A $500 FINE.

IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE GOING TO JAIL FOR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN THIS CONDITION.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF YOU RAISED COMMISSIONER LOVINS OR WAS RAISING PREVIOUSLY THE ISSUE OF DUE PROCESS, THE DUE PROCESS, AS LONG AS WE'RE SAYING WHAT THE CHARGE IS FOR THE FINAL HEARING, I THINK DUE PROCESS CONCERNS SHOULD BE SATISFIED AND IT DOES PUT MORE WORK ON THE COMMISSION THAT NOW WE HAVE TO CHOOSE THE SECTION OF CODE, BUT TO ME THAT'S SUPERIOR TO SEEING, UM, YOU KNOW, CLEAR EVIDENCE OF VIOLATIONS IN MY MIND, AND THEN WE HAVE TO DISMISS IT BECAUSE THEY CITE THE WRONG SECTION OF CODE.

YEAH.

UH, AND I'LL JUST BRIEFLY OFFER, UM, AND INVITE ANY COMMENTS, THOUGHTS, AND OPINIONS ABOUT THIS.

UH, WE, WE THOUGHT WE HAD A, UH, RECOMMENDATION AND LANGUAGE THAT WAS GOING TO WORK.

AND THEN OVER THE PAST, THIS WAS A MONDAY NIGHT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE WORKING GROUP, I THINK WAS, IT WAS MONDAY OR TUESDAY THAT WE WAS MONDAY THAT WE MET, UH, VIRTUALLY AND DISCUSSED AND KIND OF SHARED SCREEN HAMMERED OUT THIS RECOMMENDATION AND THEN OVER THE PAST DOING THIS WORK RIGHT.

UM, AND, UH, IT BECAME WITH SOME FEEDBACK, IT WAS KIND OF CLEAR THAT MAYBE THERE'S A LITTLE MORE WORK TO DO.

UH, AND THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO OFFER IS THAT WITHIN OUR OWN WORKING GROUP, IF YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE AGENDA, ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO IS WE SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT PAST CASES AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, THIS IS A KIND OF LESSONS LEARNED WORKING GROUP.

AND AS WE DISCUSSED WITHIN OUR WORKING GROUP DISCOVERED, UH, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT DISAGREEMENTS ON HOW PAST CASES WERE HANDLED AND DECISIONS AND DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE.

AND NONETHELESS, WE STILL KIND OF CAME TO A CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS, THIS SPECIFICALLY IS AN ISSUE, HOW WE, HOW WE TREAT COMPLAINTS COMING IN AND HOW WE DON'T WANT TO BE OVERLY BURDENSOME ON THE COMPLAINANT WHEN THE COMPLAINANT IS OFTEN A LAY-PERSON.

UM, AND I'LL ALSO BRIEFLY MENTION THAT LYNN, UH, PROVIDED SOME FEEDBACK WHEN WE ASKED HER FOR IT AND HAD A SUGGESTION ABOUT TREATING, PUT, PLACING A DIFFERENT BURDEN OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU SPECIFY THE CODE, TREATING THE COMPLAINANT DIFFERENTLY WHEN IT IS THE CITY AUDITOR OR CITY ATTORNEY SAYING THAT THEY ABSOLUTELY SHOULD HAVE TO SPECIFY, BECAUSE

[01:00:01]

IF ANYONE'S GOT, IF ANYONE IS GOING TO KNOW WHAT SECTION OF CODE IS POTENTIALLY BEING VIOLATED, IT'S A CITY AUDITOR.

UM, AND, UH, NOT HAVING THAT SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT FOR A LAYPERSON FILING A COMPLAINT.

UM, BUT THERE ARE OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER I'LL I'LL LIKE YOU SAID, YOU RAISED YOUR HAND, UM, AND THEN I'LL GO BACK TO COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

SO GO AHEAD.

UM, DID Y'ALL CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, ADDING LANGUAGE? I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THIS WAS LIKE KIND OF LAST MINUTE CHANGE UP, I GUESS, BUT, UM, JUST SPECIFYING THAT, UM, IN AN ALLEGATION CITING THE WRONG CODE AS BEING VIOLATED SHALL NOT BE GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL.

UM, AND THE COMMISSION IS EMPOWERED TO SELECT A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, SECTION OF THE CODE.

IF A VIOLATION IS FOUND, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

UH, IN SOMETHING THAT I HAD GRAPPLED WITH INITIALLY, UH, THE, THE EVOLUTION OF THIS ISSUE, UH, IT WAS, UH, TO OUR WORKING GROUP TO THINK ABOUT WITHIN OUR WORKING GROUP.

I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF TO COME UP WITH IDEAS.

I TRIED TO COME UP WITH IDEAS AND WAS MY OWN WORST ENEMY AND THINKING UP, WELL, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT WORKABLE.

THIS MIGHT BE A PROBLEM.

AND ON THAT FRONT, UH, I THOUGHT ABOUT HAVING A PROVISION IN CODE SPECIFICALLY SAYING THAT, UH, FOR LIKE A SIMPLE TECHNICAL, LIKE A SCRIBNER'S ERROR, SO TO SPEAK IN WRITING THE WRONG NUMBER ON THE COMPLAINT FORM THAT LIKE THE SECTION NUMBER WAS JUST WRONG.

MAYBE IT DOESN'T EXIST IN THE CODE, OR THEY DESCRIBE A CLEAR CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATION, BUT THEY ACCIDENTALLY WROTE TWO DASH SEVEN INSTEAD OF TWO DASH TWO, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

UM, IT BECAME QUICKLY HARD TO DELINEATE WHAT WAS THE RIGHT WAY TO DESCRIBE THAT ERROR.

AND IT, AGAIN, SORT OF PUT POWER IN THE MORE POWER IN THE CHAIR TO DECIDE WHAT IS, AND ISN'T WHAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS TRYING TO DO SO TO SPEAK OR WHAT THE VIOLATION REALLY WAS.

UM, BUT YEAH, BUT I GUESS, I MEAN MORE EVEN SUBSTANTIVELY WHERE THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE CONDUCT ALLEGED IS IN FACT, A VIOLATION OF THE SECTIONS OF THE CODE OVER WHICH WE HAVE JURISDICTION, THE FACT OF THE COMPLAINANT NOT CITING THE RIGHT SECTION SHOULD NOT BE GROUNDS FOR DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT.

SO KIND OF GOING BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER GREENBERG WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, IF WE WANT TO HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE A FINDING THAT IF THE ALLEGATIONS ARE LIKE TAKING THE ALLEGATIONS AS TRUE, WHAT WOULD THE VIOLATION BE? IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF, YOU KNOW, AND WE'D FIND IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THESE THREE SECTIONS OR THIS ONE SECTION.

AND WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT THERE IS THAT VIOLATION.

JUST IF THE FACTS ENDED UP BEING TRUE, IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF XYZ CODE.

SO WE CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION PRELIMINARILY.

UM, BUT I GUESS I JUST WANT TO, EVEN REGARDLESS OF WHICH SORT OF SPECIFIC DIRECTION WE GO IN, I THINK WE NEED TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE ABOUT WHAT IS OBLIGATORY ON THE COMPLAINANT, UM, AT EITHER, YOU KNOW, CAUSE EVEN RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN'T SAY NECESSARILY THAT IT'S A GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL, BUT MAKING IT CLEAR CAUSE THEY SHALL DO IT, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T SAY ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO AMEND THE US CAUSE THEY DIDN'T DO IT PROPERLY.

SURE.

UH, APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT.

I'M GOING TO, I SEE A NUMBER OF HANDS.

UM, I'M GOING TO GO COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS DANBURG LEARNER IN THAT ORDER.

SO COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, GO AHEAD AND MICROPHONE, PLEASE.

PARDON ME ON, ON MY INTERPRETATION OF THIS, BUT IT SEEMS AS IF YOU'RE SAYING, THEY SAID THAT THIS COMMISSION SHOULD BE BOTH THE DRAFTER OF WHAT I SEE AS A CHARGING INSTRUMENT BASED ON JUST OBSCURE FACTS BROUGHT IN BY COMPLAINANT AND THEN PRESIDE AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE FACTS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CHARGING INSTRUMENT, WHICH WE'VE KIND OF GIVEN A PRELIMINARY THUMBS UP TO AND CODE DOES ALLOW THAT WE ARE EVEN ALLOWED TO FILE COMPLAINTS.

SO CHANGING A DETAIL OF A COMPLAINT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG STRETCH WHEN WE'RE ALREADY ALLOWED TO FILE COMPLAINTS.

BUT IT'S WHAT YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT THAT WE'RE LIKE ACCUSER AND JURY.

YEAH.

WE'RE BOTH ADVOCATE AND JUDGE AND THERE IS, I MEAN IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE AND WE'VE NEVER DONE IT BECAUSE OF THAT.

I WOULD SAY REAL QUICK, I'M GOING TO, UH, I LOVE THE CONVERSATION, UH, BUT UH, KIND OF THE ONE AT A TIME, I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE EVERYONE ADDRESS THE CHAIR AND THE REALLY ROBERT'S RULE SORT OF WAY.

BUT UH, UH, ONE AT A TIME APPROACH TO MAKING COMMENTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED.

OKAY.

SO IT, FOR ME, I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE SOME CONSTITUTIONALITY ISSUES THERE

[01:05:01]

BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM LIKE WE'RE OVERSTEPPING IN DRAFTING A CHARGING INSTRUMENT FOR WHICH WE'RE ALSO GOING TO BE THE FACT-FINDER FACT-FINDER AND INTERPRET OF THE LAW FOR JUST AS A, AS A CRIMINAL LAWYER.

YEAH.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO SEC COMMISSIONER AND THEN SECRETARY LEARNER HAD HER HANDS, UM, YES.

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS SAID EXACTLY WHAT I SAID IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING ABOUT THIS.

I THINK, UM, EVEN MORE CLEARLY THAN I DID THEN I LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE ALTERNATIVE BECAUSE IN FACT THAT'S WHAT WE DO.

IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH, IF SOMEONE COMPLAINS OF FIVE THINGS, WE HAVE THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, WE MAY SAY THERE IS A REASONABLE GROUND TO BELIEVE THAT THESE TWO MAY HAVE OCCURRED, BUT NOT THESE THREE.

UH, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT ALTERNATIVE BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE SPECIFYING BETWEEN THEM.

MY PROBLEM IS GIVING NOTICE, GIVING A CHANCE TO RESPOND EVEN TO THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.

YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS