Sep 24, 2025 Ethics Review Commission

[00:00:01]

GOOD EVENING.

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

I CALL THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.

IT IS SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2025, AND IT IS 6:05 PM WE ARE AT AUSTIN CITY HALL IN THE BOARDS AND COMMISSION.

ROOM NUMBER 1, 1 0 1 AT 3 0 1 WEST SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS.

SEVEN EIGHT SEVEN ZERO ONE.

I WILL NOW CALL THE ROLE CHAIR.

POEY.

I'M HERE.

VICE CHAIR SHARKEY.

SECRETARY TURN.

LOU LUIS FIGUEROA.

PRESENT.

PATRICK KEEL.

HERE.

WILLIAM BILL KING.

HERE.

WALLACE LUNDGREN? HERE.

ANDREA LOWE? HERE.

BRIAN MCGIVEN.

HERE.

JORDAN PRETY.

HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM AND NO ONE IS ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.

UM, AND MS. MANEZ, WE HAVE NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU.

ITEM NUMBER

[1. Approve amendments to the minutes of the Ethics Review Commission Regular meeting on June 25, 2025.]

IT WAS ONE SMALL CHANGE, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.

IT WAS ONE CHANGE ON PAGE FOUR.

UM, AT THE TOP IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH WHERE IT LISTS THE VOTE COUNT, IT LISTS APPROVED ON A THREE TO FIVE VOTE, BUT IT SHOULD BE FAILED.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTE THE REVISION COMMISSIONER PRETY HAS MOVED.

WE HAVE A SECOND.

SECOND.

COMMISSIONER KEEL IS SECONDED.

ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROV.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES.

UH, RAISE YOUR HAND, YOUR RIGHT HAND.

UH, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

ITEM TWO ON THE AGENDA

[2. Approve the minutes of the Ethics Review Commission Regular meeting on August 28, 2025.]

THIS IS LAST MONTH'S MEETING? CORRECT.

AND I HAD LOOKED THEM OVER, UM, THIS MORNING AND MADE A COUPLE VERY SMALL CHANGES.

UM, SO I FOUND THEM, UH, ACCEPTABLE AS, AND I SENT THE AMENDMENTS TO MS. MS. BEEZ AND I FOUND THEM.

I, I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT WAS PRINTED OUT WAS MY, MY LITTLE AMENDMENTS.

SO I'LL GIVE YOU ONE MINUTE, MINUTE AND A HALF TO LOOK IT OVER AND THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.

WHAT WERE YOUR CHANGES? I CAN'T REMEMBER.

WHAT WERE YOUR CHANGES? I MEAN, THEY WERE SMALL EDITING CHANGES MAINLY.

OKAY.

THEY WEREN'T, UH, CHANGES OF SUBSTANCE OR FACT OR ANY SUCH THING.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AUGUST MINUTES.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

COMMISSIONER PRETI, MOVE TO APPROVE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FIGUEROA.

ALL IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

COMMISSIONER, ARE YOU IN? I'LL ABSTAIN WHEN WE I WILL ABSTAIN WHEN WE OH, I'M SORRY.

YES.

GET TO THAT POINT.

UH, OKAY.

ALL, ALL OPPOSED? ALL ABSTENTIONS.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER LOW.

I'M SORRY.

UH, AT ANY POINT DURING, UM, SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS AFTER THIS POINT, UH, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, UH, WE ARE ENTITLED TO DO SO.

[3. Briefing from Executive Liaison, Caroline Webster, on a draft ordinance proposing amendments to City Code Sections 2-7-27 (Limit on the Commission’s Jurisdiction) and 2-7-71 (Definitions).]

THESE NEXT TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA REGARD BRIEFINGS.

FIRST IS A BRIEFING FROM OUR EXECUTIVE LIAISON, CAROLINE WEBSTER, ON A DRAFT ORDINANCE PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY TO CITY CODE SECTIONS TWO DASH SEVEN DASH 27 LIMITS ON THE COMMISSION'S JURISDICTION AND TWO DASH SEVEN DASH 71 DEFINITIONS.

MS. WEBSTER.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

UH, THIS IS CAROLINE WEBSTER WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN LAW DEPARTMENT.

UM, LIZETTE HAS PULLED UP A VERY BRIEF, UH, JUST FEW SLIDES THAT I'M GONNA REFER TO AS I GO OVER THIS.

UM, SO WE HAVE A DRAFT ORDINANCE

[00:05:01]

UH, THE REASON THAT I'M PRESENTING IT TO YOU ALL TODAY IS BECAUSE THERE'S A SECTION OF CHAPTER TWO SEVEN THAT STATES THAT THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION HAS THE RIGHT TO, UH, BASICALLY REVIEW ANY OF THE SECTIONS OF CITY CODE OR CHAPTERS OF CITY CODE OVER WHICH YOU HAVE JURISDICTION AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL.

AND SO, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S COMING FROM A REVIEW THAT YOU ALL HAVE MADE, OR A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ARE MAKING TO COUNCIL, I STILL WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND PRESENT IT TO YOU ALL SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE, UH, THAT THIS IS, THIS IS, UM, WILL IMPACT OBVIOUSLY, UH, NOT IMPACT YOUR JURISDICTION 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT CHANGING SO MUCH ABOUT THAT.

WE'RE JUST CLARIFYING.

AND THEN 2 7 71 ALSO MAKES A CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHO HAS TO FILE STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTEREST.

UH, SO LIKE I SAID, IT'S COMING FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

IT'S BEEN VETTED THROUGH HR AND A COUPLE OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS AS WELL.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL WERE AWARE AND COULD ANSWER ANY, UH, COULD ASK ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU WANTED.

OKAY.

SO THE FIRST SECTION, AND I KNOW THAT'S QUITE TINY AND THERE'S A LOT OF WORDS ON THERE, BUT, UH, UH, I'M GONNA GO THROUGH WHAT WE'RE SAYING, WHAT IT SAYS THERE.

SO, AS YOU KNOW, WE RECENTLY HAD A COUPLE OF, UM, COMPLAINTS THAT WERE FILED THAT ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF, UH, ARTICLE FOUR OF CHAPTER TWO SEVEN, WHICH IS THE CITY'S CODE OF ETHICS.

AND BECAUSE OF A SECTION IN, UH, SPECIFICALLY SECTION 2 7 27, WE HAD TO MAKE A JU A DECISION ABOUT JURISDICTION AND WHETHER THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION COULD HEAR THOSE COMPLAINTS.

AND THE REASON IT CAME UP IS BECAUSE THE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS THAT THOSE COMPLAINTS WERE MADE AGAINST.

AND WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THAT QUESTION, IT BECAME CLEAR THAT SECTION 2 7 27, UH, A REFERENCE IN THAT SECTION IS OUTDATED.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE, UH, SECTION 2 7 27 WAS AMENDED ALONG WITH, UH, SECTION 2 3 5, UH, WERE AMENDED IN 2019.

BUT THEN SECTION 2 3 5 WAS AMENDED AGAIN IN 2024.

UH, BUT A CORRESPONDING CHANGE WAS NOT MADE TO 2 7 27.

AND SO NOW, 2 7 27 INCLUDES A REFERENCE TO AN OUTDATED SECTION OF CITY CODE.

BUT WHEN YOU REVIEW THE RECORD OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE IN 2019 AND THE ONE IN 2024, IT'S CLEAR THAT, UM, THE CHANGE IN 2024 WAS NOT INTENDED TO ALTER THE ERC'S JURISDICTION.

IT JUST KIND OF MOVES THINGS AROUND.

IN CHAPTER IN SECTION 2, 3 5, 2 3 5 DEALS WITH THE AUDITOR'S VARIOUS DUTIES AND INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS, UH, THAT THEY MAKE.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE 2 7 27 REFERS TO IT.

SO I'M JUST GONNA COVER, FIRST OF ALL, UM, BASICALLY WHAT 2 7 27 SAYS TODAY IS, AND THAT'S WHAT THE FIRST THING THAT'S WRITTEN UP THERE IS, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THE CITY CODE, THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION MAY NOT HEAR OR INITIATE A SWORN COMPLAINT ALLEGING A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOUR CODE OF ETHICS AGAINST AN EMPLOYEE DESCRIBED IN TWO IN SECTION 2 3 5 L TWO, INCLUDING A MEMBER OF THE CITY'S CLASSIFIED MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM, OR A MEMBER OF A STATE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM.

AND SO WHAT YOU GET FROM THAT IS THAT YOU CANNOT HEAR A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN, UH, OF THE CODE OF ETHICS AGAINST AN EMPLOYEE THAT'S LISTED IN 2 3 5 L TWO OR AGAINST A MEMBER OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE OR THE STATE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT CURRENTLY SAYS.

BUT THEN YOU GET, IT GETS CONFUSING BECAUSE, UM, 2 3 5 L TWO, UH, HAS BASICALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF DOUBLE NEGATIVES.

AND SO IT SAYS 2 3 5 L TWO STATED BEFORE 2024.

UM, UH, IT INCLUDED A CITY OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE NOT LISTED IN SUBSECTION ONE ABOVE, AND WHO WAS NEITHER A MEMBER OF THE CITY'S CLASSIFIED MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM, NOR OF A STATE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM.

SO THEN YOU HAVE TO GO TO SUBSECTION ONE TO FIND OUT WHO IS LISTED IN SUB WHO WHO IS LISTED AND WHO IS NOT LISTED IN SUBSECTION ONE.

SO, AND I KNOW THIS IS DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN, SO, SO BEAR WITH ME.

AND SUBSECTION L ONE INCLUDES A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR THEIR DIRECT STAFF, A PERSON APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO CITY CHARTER, OR A PERSON APPOINTED CITY COUNCIL TO A CITY BOARD TASK FORCE OR SIMILAR BODY.

AND, SORRY, MY COMPUTER IS MISBEHAVING.

AND WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU READ THROUGH ALL THAT AND YOU PUT ALL THE DOUBLE

[00:10:01]

SO THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING KIND OF REMOVES ALL THOSE REFERENCES TO WHAT IS NOT IN THIS SECTION AND WHAT IS HERE AND WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT THERE IN ORDER TO JUST KIND OF JUST MAKE IT MUCH MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND SIMPLE.

AND MY COMPUTER JUST WILL NOT.

THERE WE GO.

SO THIS SLIDE, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU THE CHANGE THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

SO RATHER THAN SAYING WHO YOU CANNOT HEAR A COMPLAINT ABOUT, I'M REFERRING TO ANOTHER SECTION OF CITY CODE THAT COULD AT SOME POINT BE AMENDED.

WE DECIDED JUST TO BASICALLY ECHO WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN SECTION 2 3 5 L UH, AS IT WAS AMENDED IN 2024 TO SAY WHO YOU CAN HEAR COMPLAINTS AGAINST, OR IF IT'S A, A COMPLAINT ALLEGING A VIOLATION OF THE, UH, CITY'S, UH, CODE OF ETHICS.

SO NOW IT WILL SAY, UM, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PERSIAN CITY CODE, THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION MAY ONLY HEAR OR INITIATE A SWORN COMPLAINT ALLEGING A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOUR, THE CODE OF ETHICS AGAINST A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR THEIR DIRECT STAFF, A PERSON APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO THE CITY CHARTER, OR A PERSON APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO A CITY BOARD TASK FORCE OR SIMILAR BODY.

SO THAT IS JUST A RESTATEMENT OF WHAT THE, THE CURRENT RULE IS.

IT JUST MAKES IT SO THAT IT'S CLEAR AND SOMEONE DOESN'T NEED TO FLIP TO ANOTHER SECTION OF CITY CODE TO UNDERSTAND IT.

AND WHERE IS IT? THE, SOMEWHERE I HAVE LISTED, I THINK I DELETED THAT SLIDE.

WHO, UM, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IT, WHO ARE THE, UM, PEOPLE, THE INDIVIDUALS APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO THE CITY CHARTER? IT'S A PRETTY SMALL LIST.

IT INCLUDES THE AUDITOR, IT INCLUDES THE CITY CLERK, IT INCLUDES A MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE OR SOMEONE SERVING IN THEIR PLACE.

IT INCLUDES MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK, MEMBERS OF THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

UH, WELL, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE NOT CITY EMPLOYEES, BUT CITY MANAGER.

CITY MANAGER.

YES.

DID I NOT SAY CITY MANAGER? YEAH.

SORRY, I'M HAVING TO LOOK AT SOME NOTES I WROTE EARLIER 'CAUSE I ACCIDENTALLY DELETED A SECTION, I THINK OF MY SLIDE, BUT YEAH, IT'S AUDITOR.

YES, THAT'S RIGHT.

CITY MANAGER.

AND, UM, YEAH, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THOUGH THEY'RE NOT EMPLOYEES OF COURSE, BUT, SO THAT'S JUST REALLY A QUITE A SMALL LIST.

SO DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT CHANGE BEFORE I MOVE ON TO THE SECOND CHANGE THAT'S GONNA BE IN THE ORDINANCE? UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, IN CASE ANYONE ELSE DIDN'T KNOW, WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL A MONTH OR TWO AGO IS THAT THE HEADS OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTS ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER, RIGHT? YES.

YEAH.

SO THEY DON'T, HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS DON'T COME UNDER OUR JURISDICTION.

THAT'S CORRECT, YEAH.

AND, AND THAT WAS A CHANGE MADE IN 2019, UH, BEFORE, UH, IT WAS AMENDED IN MARCH OF 2019.

AND BEFORE THAT THE DEPARTMENT HEADS WERE INCLUDED UNDER YOUR JURISDICTION FOR THESE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS.

BUT THERE WAS A DECISION, UM, MADE, UH, BY THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE IN CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS, I'M SURE, UM, TO REMOVE THAT AND BASICALLY INCLUDED SORT OF ANYONE WHO WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, WHICH INCLUDED DEPARTMENT HEADS, BUT IT ALSO INCLUDED TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES AND A BUNCH OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT, THAT IT WAS DETERMINED WEREN'T REALLY APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR YOU ALL TO HEAR COMPLAINTS AGAINST THEM.

UM, THE COMPLAINTS AGAINST DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS LIKE THAT ARE STILL HEARD.

THEY'RE HEARD BY THE AUDITOR.

SO THE AUDITOR WOULD BE CONDUCTING AN INVESTIGATION AND THEN KIND OF DEPENDING ON WHICH CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEE OR OFFICIAL IT IS, UM, IT WOULD EITHER GO TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR THEIR COMMENTS AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL, OR I THINK MAYBE DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO ALL THE VARIOUS TYPES OF

[00:15:01]

IT'S JUST THAT THE ONES THAT YOU ALL REVIEW IS LIMITED TO THIS SMALLER GROUP.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MCGON? THANK YOU.

IT'S NOT A QUESTION.

I JUST WANNA SAY I THINK THIS IS REALLY SMART.

UM, I THINK PEOPLE ADMINISTERING THE LAW AND ALSO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REALLY BENEFIT FROM CLARITY, YOU KNOW, IN WHEN THE, IN THE LAW.

AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A HUGE IMPROVEMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. SMITH.

OH, YES, COMMISSIONER LOWE.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, JUST COMPARING THE KINDS OF INVESTIGATIONS THIS COMMISSION CAN DO TO THE KINDS OF INVESTIGATIONS THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE CAN DO FOR THE DIFFERENT CLASSES OF EMPLOYEES OR APPOINTEES.

UM, SO I UNDERSTAND THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE DOES HAVE STAFF INCLUDING INVESTIGATORS, LAWYERS, SO FORTH.

UM, ARE THEY AUTHORIZED TO DO DEEPER, DEEPER IS NOT THE RIGHT WORD, BUT ARE THEY AUTHORIZED TO DO INVESTIGATIONS THAT WE WOULD NOT BE AUTHORIZED TO DO UNDER THE STATUTE OR IN THE PREVIOUS STATUTE? UH, THEY, UNDER SECTION 2, 3, 5, THEY'RE AUTHORIZED TO INVESTIGATE A LOT.

MANY, MANY, BASICALLY EVERY TYPE OF EMPLOYEE.

THIS IS JUST A QUESTION OF WHICH INVESTIGATIONS HAVE SUBSTANTIATED.

THEY WOULD THEN SUBMIT A COMPLAINT TO YOU ALL FOR YOU ALL TO, AND TO, FOR YOU ALL TO DETERMINE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE ALLEGATION.

SO 2, 3, 5, LIKE I SAID, IT'S REALLY ABOUT WHAT THE AUDITOR DOES AND WHAT REPORTS OF THEIR INVESTIGATIONS THAT THEY SUBMIT TO YOU AND WHICH ONES THEY SUBMIT TO THE CITY MANAGER OR CITY COUNCIL OR DEPARTMENT HEADS OR WHOMEVER MM-HMM .

SO JUST REALLY JUST THEIR SECTION KIND OF TALKS ABOUT WHO HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE VARIOUS TYPES OF OH, THANK YOU.

THE VARIOUS TYPES OF COMPLAINTS.

DO I NEED TO REPEAT ALL THAT ? NO.

OKAY.

UM, MM-HMM .

SO I MEAN, THIS SECTION, YOU ALL CAN ONLY INITIATE A SWORN COMPLAINT YOURSELVES, UH, ALLEGING A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOUR AGAINST THIS SPECIFIC GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS AS WELL.

THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE I WAS GOING ON THIS .

SO, UM, AS TO COMMISSION INITIATED COMPLAINTS, WE WOULD NEVER HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO, UM, FORCE ANY OTHER AGENCY, NOT FORCE, BUT YOU KNOW, TO GET ANY OTHER AGENCY TO, UM, ENGAGE IN THE KIND OF INVESTIGATION THAT OTHER ENTITIES OR OTHER OFFICERS WOULD BE ABLE TO DO BECAUSE IT'S UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY AND IT'S NOT UNDER, UNDER OUR AUTHORITY.

CORRECT.

YOU CAN ONLY INITIATE YOUR OWN COMPLAINT, UH, OF AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOUR AGAINST THOSE SPECIFIC LISTED INDIVIDUALS.

YOU CANNOT INITIATE A COMPLAINT IF IT'S A, IF IT'S AN, IF IT'S NOT A COMPLAINT ALLEGING OF VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOUR, IT'S MORE TO DO WITH LIKE CAMPAIGN FINANCE OR WHAT, OR FILING OF VARIOUS DOCUMENTS, YOU KNOW, FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS.

YOU ALL DO HAVE AUTHORITY OVER A LARGER NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS, BUT IF IT'S THIS TYPE OF COMPLAINT, IT'S ONLY LIMITED TO THAT SET OF OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES.

RIGHT.

BUT WHAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT IS JUST NOT THE GROUP OF PEOPLE OVER WHOM WE HAVE JURISDICTION, BUT THE MECHANISMS WE HAVE TO EXERCISE THAT ENFORCEMENT POWER.

OKAY.

THE, WE'RE NOT REALLY POSTED FOR THAT DISCUSSION.

OH, I'M SORRY.

OKAY.

SO I, I CAN DISCUSS IT IN THE WORKING GROUP PART BECAUSE I BELIEVE, UH, OKAY.

YEAH.

SO I CAN, SHALL I MOVE ON? OR, SO MOVING ON.

SORRY.

IF WE CAN GO BACK TO, UH, THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH I THINK IS NEXT ONE.

NO, THAT'S THE ONE.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

I'M SORRY.

.

OKAY.

AGAIN, THERE'S A LOT OF WORDS HERE, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE I WANTED TO PUT THE WHOLE CHANGE ON A SINGLE SLIDE.

UM, CURRENTLY, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT WE ADVISE ON IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT IS, UH, WHEN THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO HAS TO FILE A STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTEREST UNDER CHAPTER TWO SEVEN, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME CONFUSION OVER EXACTLY WHICH EMPLOYEES ARE INCLUDED OR WHICH OFFICIALS ARE INCLUDED.

AND, UH, RATHER THAN BASICALLY LIST OUT EVERY SINGLE POSITION THAT MIGHT BE INCLUDED, WHICH IS A LONG LIST AND CHANGES EVERY NOW AND THEN, UH, WE, WE HAVE AMENDED THIS TO BASICALLY, UM, ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER, UM, TO THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETIN, WHICH THE CITY MANAGER HAS A ROLE OF CLARIFYING ALL OF THE, THE SECTIONS OF CITY CODE AND OTHER THINGS THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETIN.

SO IT'S CLEAR EXACTLY WHO THEY APPLY TO OR WHAT THE TERMS MEAN, VARIOUS THINGS.

AND SO THE CITY MANAGER OFTEN, UM, ISSUES

[00:20:01]

AND SO THIS BASICALLY ALLOWS, RATHER THAN TRYING TO LIST OUT THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT JOB TITLES, UH, WHICH DON'T FIT FOR EVERY DEPARTMENT, NOT EVERY DEPARTMENT HAS A DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD, THEY MIGHT HAVE AN ASSISTANT DEPARTMENT HEAD, OR THEY MIGHT HAVE SOMEONE ELSE WHOSE TITLE IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT, BUT THEIR DUTIES ARE THE SAME.

AND SO IT BECAME DIFFICULT FOR THE LAY PERSON OR ANYONE REALLY TO, TO READ THIS AND, UH, UNDERSTAND WHO HAD TO APPLY BECAUSE IT INCLUDES SPOUSES OF, UH, CITY OFFICIALS AND C CD CERTAIN CITY EMPLOYEES AS WELL.

AND SO WE WANTED TO JUST MAKE IT MORE CLEAR.

AND SO THIS CHANGE, BASICALLY IT MAKES SOME CAPITALIZATIONS, UH, THAT WERE REQUESTED.

SO THAT'S NOT REALLY SUBSTANTIVE, BUT IT ADDS, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION.

IT ADDS PURCHASING AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES WITH THE AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE CONTACT WITH THE CITY.

AND THEN IT HAS THIS KIND OF CATCHALL PHRASE THAT STATES THAT ANY OTHER EMPLOYEES AS DESIGNATED BY THE CITY MANAGER, UH, THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETIN.

AND SO THE GOAL, THE INTENT THERE IS THAT ONCE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETIN IS ISSUED, THEY'LL PROVIDE CLARITY, UH, TO CITY EMPLOYEES, OFFICIALS AND MEMBERS, UH, NOT EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS WHO, UM, WHO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN EXPECT TO SEE WHAT THEY CAN REQUEST AND PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT REQUEST, ET CETERA.

ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT,

[4. Staff briefing from Staff Liaison, Lizette Benitez, on established Ethics Review Commission working groups.]

UH, COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE PROVIDED YOU ALL A LIST WITH THE ESTABLISHED WORKING GROUPS.

SO IT SHOWS AT THE TOP INACTIVE WORKING GROUPS AND AT THE BOTTOM ACTIVE WORKING GROUPS.

UM, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION ON SOME OF THE WORKING GROUPS.

SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE WORKING GROUP ON SANCTIONS, PROCEDURES, AND OTHER ISSUES.

THAT ONE WAS CREATED IN FEBRUARY, 2023.

UM, AND AT THAT MEETING IN THE MARCH MEETING, I'M SORRY, MARCH, 2023, IT WAS LISTED THAT THE TERMS WERE ENDING FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS.

UM, AND THE WORKING GROUP ITEMS SHOULD HAVE BEEN LISTED IN A FUTURE MEETING.

HOWEVER, IT WAS NEVER POSTED FOR ANOTHER MEETING.

AND WITH NO ACTIVE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS, THAT WORKING GROUP WAS DISBANDED.

THE NEXT WORKING GROUP IS THE WORKING GROUP ON RACE IDENTITY AND EQUITY, AND THAT ONE WAS DISBANDED IN FEBRUARY, 2024.

THE FOLLOWING WORKING GROUP IS THE WORKING GROUP TO PREPARE CALENDAR OF COMMISSION DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

UM, THAT ONE WAS DISBANDED AT THE JULY, 2025 MEETING.

THE NEXT ITEM IS WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW GENERAL LOBBYING ISSUES INCLUDING REGISTRATION THRESHOLDS IN CITY CODE, UH, FOR EIGHT THREE.

THAT ONE WAS CREATED IN AUGUST OF 2022 AND DISBANDED AS BOTH MEMBERS ON THAT WORKING GROUP, UH, WERE NO LONGER ON THE COMMISSION.

AND THE LAST INACTIVE WORKING GROUP IS THE WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW AND EVALUATE CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO TWO.

THAT ONE WAS DISCUSSED IN A DECEMBER, 2022 MEETING, HOWEVER, NO ACTION WAS TAKEN TO CREATE THAT WORKING GROUP.

THE FOLLOWING THREE WORKING GROUP ITEMS ARE ALL ACTIVE.

THE FIRST ONE BEING THE WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW ERC COMPLAINTS PROCESS.

THAT ONE WAS CREATED AUGUST, 2022 WITH COMMISSIONERS LOW TER AND PRETI.

THE FOLLOWING WORKING GROUP IS A WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW AND REVISE ERC BYLAWS.

THAT ONE WAS CREATED AUGUST, 2024 WITH COMMISSIONERS, UH, CHAIR HUMPHREY, UH, COMMISSIONER SHARKEY AND KING.

AND THE LAST WORKING GROUP IS A WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW AND REVISE ERC RULES AND REGULATIONS CONSISTING OF COMMISSIONER SHARKEY AND FIGUEROA.

AND THAT ONE WAS, UM, CREATED JULY, 2025.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR DOING ALL THE WORK NECESSARY TO PUT THIS LIST TOGETHER.

UM, WOULD I BE CORRECT TO ASSUME THAT WHEN THE WORD DISBANDED IS USED, IN SOME CASES IT'S USED BECAUSE I THINK WE FORMALLY DISBANDED IT.

FOR INSTANCE, AT THE LAST MEETING, WE FORMALLY DISBANDED THE ONE TO PREPARE CALENDAR OF COMMISSION DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

OTHERS INDICATE THEY WERE DISBANDED BECAUSE THE MEMBERS WHO WERE ON THE WORKING GROUP, CORRECT.

DO WE HAVE TO TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL FORMAL ACTION? NO, THIS IS JUST A BRIEFING AS THERE WAS, UM, A REQUEST FROM MULTIPLE COMMISSIONERS ON ACTIVE WORKING GROUPS AND CERTAIN WORKING GROUPS.

THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON WHERE THOSE WORKING GROUPS STOOD.

SO THIS WAS JUST

[00:25:01]

OKAY.

AND THE, UM, ACTING MEMBERS, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THE LAST ONE, THE WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW AND EVALUATE CITY CODE CHAPTER 2.2 WAS SORT OF UNCLEAR.

NO ACTION WAS EVER TAKEN TO CREATE THE WORKER GROUP IN THE FUTURE.

IT WAS JUST DISCUSSED, SO WE NEVER CREATED IT.

THAT IS CORRECT.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

THEN I'M ASSUMING WE, WE DON'T HAVE TO ACT ON ANY OF THE INACTIVE ONES.

UM, WE HAVE A AGENDA ITEM THAT IT, OR I'M SORRY.

NO, WE ARE NOT POSTED FOR THAT.

UM, IN FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THESE WORKING GROUPS IN THE INACTIVE ONES, UM, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO SHOW INTEREST IN THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FOR ANY OF THOSE LISTED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO, UM, ITEMS FIVE THROUGH 10.

ITEM FIVE IS TO

[5. Set and adopt the Ethics Review Commission regular meeting calendar for 2026.]

WE ALL HAVE A COPY OF THAT IN OUR AGENDA PACKETS.

UM, UNLESS SOMEONE SEES THAT THREE OR FOUR OF THEM ALL COME WHEN YOU'RE GONNA BE DOING SOMETHING ELSE, MAYBE WE'LL APPROVE IT.

UH, I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE TO LOOK OVER THE LIST.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER LOWE, DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA THE LOCATION YET? I MEAN, I KNOW WE'RE NOT, UM, DEFINITE ON MANY OF THEM, BUT ARE THESE FIRST JANUARY THROUGH OCTOBER EXPECTED TO BE HERE? UM, WE EXPECT TO BE THE, BUT ALL COMMISSIONS AND, UM, ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE ON A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE BASIS WHEN SUBMITTING ROOM RESERVATIONS.

MM-HMM .

UM, SO I WON'T KNOW UNTIL CLOSER TO THE END OF THE YEAR.

OKAY.

AND LIKELY, UH, NOVEMBER 11TH AND DECEMBER 9TH WILL BE ELSEWHERE? CORRECT.

THOSE, THOSE TWO MONTHS, UM, INCLUDING JULY.

JULY TYPICALLY IS HELD FOR, UH, BUDGET MEETINGS FOR COUNCIL.

SO THOSE TYPICALLY ARE NOT RESERVED FOR CITY HALL.

THANK YOU.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CALENDAR.

SO MOVED.

IT'S MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KEEL.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.

SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FIGUEROA.

ALL IN FAVOR, JUST RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL OPPOSED, ALL ABSTAINING.

THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUS.

ITEM

[6. Discussion and possible approval of a draft ordinance proposing amendment to City Code Sections 2-7-27 (Limit on the Commission’s Jurisdiction) and 2-7-71 (Definitions), with representatives from the City Auditor’s office available to answer relevant questions from the Commission.]

DO YOU TWO GENTLEMEN HAVE ANYTHING YOU ANY STATEMENTS YOU WANNA INITIATE BEFORE I ASK FOR QUESTIONS? JASON, AVI, DEPUTY CITY AUDITOR.

UM, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

I THINK CAROLINE HANDLED IT PERFECTLY.

SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY STATEMENTS, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS AS YOU SEE FIT.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DRAFT TO APPROVE RECOMMENDING THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

IS THAT HOW I WOULD PUT IT? WE DON'T APPROVE THE ORDINANCE, RIGHT? WE APPROVE A RECOMMENDATION.

WELL, CAROLINE WEBSTER LAW DEPARTMENT, UM, THERE IS A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION PROCESS, UH, THAT, THAT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CAN DO WHERE THEY MAKE, THERE'S LIKE A WRITTEN RECOMMENDATION AND IT'S SENT AUTOMATICALLY TO COUNCIL, UH, ONCE IT'S PASSED.

SO, SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING IT, IT'S MORE THAT I WANTED YOU ALL TO HAVE THE CHANCE TO BE SURE THAT YOU HAD THE CHANCE TO DISCUSS IT, TO ASK QUESTIONS OF MYSELF OR THE AUDITOR AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND, UM, A APPROVAL.

I WOULDN'T SAY I WOULDN'T, NOT, NOT SO MUCH RECOMMENDATION JUST BECAUSE THAT'S A TERM OF ART IN BOARD AND COMMISSION WORLD.

BUT IF YOU

[00:30:01]

BUT I WANTED, YOU KNOW, WANTED TO BE ABLE TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND YOUR, YOUR, UH, APPROACH TO IT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE OR OKAY.

IN THE OF I APPRECIATE THAT.

I HAVE ASKED YOU, 'CAUSE I SAW THE WORD POSSIBLE APPROVAL HERE.

SO, UH, DOES ANYBODY WANNA DISCUSS THIS PROPO? YES.

COMMISSIONER LOWE.

OKAY.

YOU KIND OF HEARD WHAT MY QUESTIONS WERE THAT, UH, MS. WEBSTER SAID MAYBE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY POSTED FOR.

UM, BUT MY QUESTION IS, UM, BASED ON THESE CHANGES, UM, IS THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE ANTICIPATING DOING ANYTHING DIFFERENT, UM, IN GENERAL FOR THE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS? OR ARE THESE JUST, IS IT JUST CLARIFICATION OF WHAT CLASSES OF PEOPLE ARE AFFECTED BY, UM, THAT AUTHORITY? BRIAN MOY, I'M THE CHIEF INVESTIGATIONS AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR.

UM, I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY CHANGES IN HOW WE OPERATE, UH, WHO WE WOULD INVESTIGATE, AND THEN WHETHER WE WOULD FOLLOW OUR NORMAL PROCESS, WHICH RESULTS IN A PUBLIC REPORT OR FOR THE SUBSET THAT IS MOSTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION HERE, WHICH AGAIN, EVENTUALLY GETS FILED IN A COMPLAINT THAT GOES BEFORE THE RC ALL THAT WOULD STAY THE SAME.

THESE CHANGES ARE REALLY JUST CLEANING UP HOW YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE IN CODE.

'CAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S CONFUSING.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THEN I'LL, I'LL JUST ASSUME THAT WE'LL PROCEED THE WAY YOU STATED, WHICH IS THAT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE MADE BY YOUR OFFICE, I GUESS.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

SO NO FURTHER DISCUSSION THAT IS NECESSARY.

THANK YOU.

ITEM SEVEN,

[7. Discussion and possible action to keep, dissolve, merge, rename, or change membership of established Ethics Review Commission working groups, including discussion and possible action to clarify and possibly expand the scope, purpose, and goals of the Working Group to Review the ERC Complaint Process to include a comprehensive review of all Ethics Review Commission rules and to make any corollary changes to the name and or membership of that working group.]

TO REVIEW THE ERC COMPLAINT PROCESS, TO INCLUDE A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ALL ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION RULES, AND TO MAKE ANY COROLLARY CHANGES TO THE NAME OR MEMBERSHIP OF THAT WORKING GROUP.

AND WITH REGARD TO THAT WORKING GROUP, THIS CAME UP BECAUSE, UH, UH, SECRETARY TURN MADE A REPORT ON BEHALF OF THE WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW THE ERC COMPLAINT PROCESS.

AND HE MADE A, A, A GOOD REPORT, BUT I THEN QUESTIONED, I THINK, WHAT THE MANDATE WAS.

AND I BELIEVE IN RETROSPECT, I MADE A MADE MISTAKE THINKING IT WAS FOCUSED ONLY ON COMMISSION INITIATED COMPLAINTS.

AND COMMISSIONER LOWE, COULD YOU, YOU ARE THE ONLY, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE LONGEST SERVING MEMBER OF THAT GROUP.

AND COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT YOU, COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO THE COMMISSION WHAT YOU EXPLAINED TO ME? OKAY.

WELL, ACTUALLY I AM THE LONGEST SERVING COMMISSIONER, PERIOD .

UM, I STARTED IN MARCH OF 2023 WHEN I JOINED THAT WORKING GROUP, UM, CHAIR SORUN, LOUIS SORUN WAS THE CHAIR, AND MICHAEL LOVENS WAS ALSO ON THAT WORKING GROUP.

MICHAEL LOVENS THEN BECAME THE CHAIR AFTER LOUIS SORAN LEFT THE COMMISSION.

UM, OUR UNDERSTANDING AT THAT TIME, UM, WAS THAT WE WERE REVIEWING THE ENTIRE COMPLAINT PROCESS THAT OF COURSE INCLUDED COMMISSION ISSUED COMPLAINTS.

AND, AND ONE OF THE REASONS WE FELT WE HAD TO DO THAT WAS BECAUSE COMMISSION INITIATED COMPLAINTS NEED TO BE SEEN IN THE CONTEXT OF HOW WE PROCESS COMPLAINTS.

UM, YOU KNOW, AT A VERY FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL, WE CANNOT, UM, IT WOULD BE VERY UNFAIR AND VERY UNEQUITABLE IF THE COMMISSION INITIATED PROCESS IS SOMEHOW DIFFERENT FROM THE REST OF THE COMPLAINT PROCESS.

IF A RESPONDENT IS NOT TREATED THE SAME WAY IN BOTH PARTS, OR IF THE PUBLIC PERCEIVES THAT TO BE THE CASE, WE REALLY WANNA AVOID THAT.

UH, THE SECOND THING WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY NOT AN ANALOG TO THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION OR THE, UH, TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION IN THAT THE ENABLING STATUTES ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

THE REGULATIONS ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

AND AS I WAS ASKING THE AUDITOR STAFF, UM, THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT STAFF THAT WE HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, TO WORK ON INITIATE COMMISSION, INITIATE COMPLAINTS.

UM, SO IT WAS, IT WAS TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PROCESS BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE STAFF, IF WE DON'T HAVE AUTHORIZATION TO DO CERTAIN THINGS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A MECHANISM WHICH APPLIES TO, UH, COMMISSION INITIATED COMPLAINTS AS WELL AS THE PROCESSING OF ALL COMPLAINTS.

UM, I WAS NOT HERE AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT I DID LISTEN TO THE VIDEO AND I BELIEVE WHAT, UM,

[00:35:01]

I MEAN, WE KNOW THAT RIGHT? WITH, UH, WITH MANY COMPLAINTS ARRIVING AT THE TIME OF AN ELECTION IN THE PAST, WE HAVE NOT PROCESSED THEM EFFICIENTLY.

AND WE RAN INTO THAT SITUATION.

AND I GUESS WE HAVE OVER TIME IN WHICH THERE WOULD BE AN ELECTION, YOU KNOW, ONE RACE, 20 CANDIDATES, SOME WOULD, WOULD FILE COMPLAINTS AGAINST THREE.

THOSE, YOU KNOW, WOULD GO ALONG AS THEY DID.

AND IT WOULD BE VERY OBVIOUS.

THE OTHER 17 VIOLATED THE LAW EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

IT WAS A MATTER OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION, PUBLIC RIGHT.

ALL OF THE MEDIA AND EVERYTHING.

AND WE WERE THEN LEFT IN A POSITION WHERE ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO WERE FILED AGAINST BY OTHER CITIZENS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ANY KIND OF ACCOUNTABILITY OR ANY CONSEQUENCES.

UM, AND THE OTHERS, EVEN THOUGH EVERYONE KNEW THEY VIOLATED LAW IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, NEVER HAD ANY ACCOUNTABILITY OR ANY CONSEQUENCES.

AND I REMEMBER THERE WAS A MEETING COMMISSIONER KEEL SAID, WELL, WHY ARE WE HERE IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY ENFORCEMENT ACTION? UM, AND I'M NOT PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, I KNOW THAT WAS ON THE RECORD.

UM, AND, AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONER, THERE WERE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO SAID, WELL, IT'S BECAUSE IT JUST LOOKS VERY UNFAIR SINCE EVERYBODY KNOWS THE OTHER 17 VIOLATED THE LAW IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

AND IT IS NOT UNTIL WE HAVE A PROCESS TO HANDLE THIS, UM, EXPEDITIOUSLY AND, AND EQUITABLY.

UM, WHICH THEN I THINK GAVE MUCH GREATER URGENCY TO THIS WHOLE PROJECT.

UM, SO FROM THE VERY BEGINNING WHEN FORMER CHAIR LEVINS AND FORMER CHAIR SOBER ON, AND I TALKED ABOUT IT, IT WAS A, I MEAN, IT WAS INTENDED TO BE THIS GLOBAL, UM, REVIEW OF THE COMPLAINT PROCESS.

UM, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, THIS, UH, COMMISSION INITIATED PROCESS, WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN OUR ENABLING STATUTE, BUT HAS, WE'VE NEVER USED IT.

WE'VE NEVER APPLIED IT, WE'VE NEVER TRIED TO MAKE IT WORKABLE.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT WOULD NEVER BE OUR INTENT TO FOCUS ONLY ON THE COMMISSION INITIATED PROCESS THAT ONLY CAME UP BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT.

EVEN THOUGH WE'RE AUTHORIZED TO DO IT.

UM, WE HAVE HANDLED MANY OTHER COMPLAINTS, BUT YOU KNOW, IT, IT, WE CANNOT SEE ONE.

I MEAN, IT HAS, WE CAN'T, IT CAN'T BE A VACUUM, RIGHT? WE, WE HAVE TO SEE THEM ALL TOGETHER.

UM, SO THAT IS WHAT THE WORKING GROUP HAS BEEN, UM, FOCUSED ON.

I KNOW SECRETARY RETURN DID SAY HE WAS GONNA DO A FLOW CHART AND UNFORTUNATELY HE'S NOT HERE TODAY, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE HE WILL DO IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

AND I THINK AT THAT POINT IT WILL BE VERY CLEAR THAT, UM, EVERY COMPLAINT HAS TO FLOW ALONG THE SAME WAY, WHETHER WE INITIATE THEM OR WHETHER SOME, UH, OTHER CITIZEN OR THE AUDITOR FILES A COMPLAINT.

UM, SO THAT'S, I MEAN, I, I CONSIDER IT TO BE A VERY BROAD MANDATE AND I CONSIDERED IT TO BE SUCH BACK IN BEGINNING OF 2023.

I, I DUNNO, COMMISSIONER FREDDY MAY HAVE MORE.

YEAH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS PROCEED.

SORRY, I, I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION 'CAUSE JUST THE WAY THAT THIS IS DRAFTED IN HERE IS IN OUR, UH, ACT NUMBER SE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, IT SAYS TO INCLUDE A COMP COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ALL ETHICS COMMISSION RULES AND MAKE ANY COROLLARY CHANGES.

BUT WE ALSO HAVE A WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW AND REVISE ETHICS COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT WE, THAT MS. BONITA JUST MENTIONED.

I WASN'T PRESENT AT THE JULY, 2025 MEETING, SO I'M NOT SURE OF THE SCOPE OF THAT.

BUT HOW ARE WE DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN THOSE TWO AND WHAT IS LIKE, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? I'LL ATTEMPT AN ANSWER.

OKAY.

, I THINK MAYBE THIS IS JUST ACCIDENTALLY TOO BROAD.

A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ALL ETHICS COMMISSION RULES.

I'M ASSUMING THAT WORKING GROUP IS ONLY LOOKING AT ONES DIRECTLY RELATED TO COMPLAINTS.

[00:40:01]

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION? OKAY.

WELL, THANK YOU.

UM, CAN I, WHO, WHO ARE THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE NOW? IT'S COMMISSIONER LOWE AND PATTER, COMMISSIONER PETTY AND SECRETARY TER.

RIGHT NOW.

WE WERE GONNA HAVE AN UPDATE FROM THAT WORKING GROUP, BUT, UH, SECRETARY TER, UM, UH, WAS FORCED TO DELAY HIS RETURN TO THE US RIGHT.

SO HE WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY.

SO WE'RE PUTTING THAT OFF UNTIL THE OCTOBER MEETING CHAIR.

MAY I, MAY I, UM, ASK A QUESTION YES.

OR MAKE A STATEMENT.

UM, CAROLINE WEST WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

SO COMMISSIONER PRETI JUST TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, THOSE TWO RULE, THOSE TWO WORKING GROUPS.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT THE ETHICS COMMISSION HAS ADOPTED MOST, THIS IS WHERE I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME CONFUSION MAYBE, IS THAT WHICH RULES APPLY TO THE COMPLAINT PROCESS AND WHICH RULES ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT ARE DOING SOMETHING ELSE.

SO, 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THE RULES ARE, ARE ENTITLED, UM, RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR COMPLAINTS AND HEARINGS.

AND SO THERE'S PRE-HEARING PROCEDURES AND THERE'S A SECTION CALLED COMPLAINTS, COMPLAINT REQUIREMENTS, DISQUALIFICATION OF ERC MEMBERS FROM THE HEARING, LEGAL REPRESENTATION, PROHIBITION OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, OTHER THINGS.

SO I GUESS THE CONFUSION THAT TO ME THE CONFUSION THAT EXISTS IS STILL, WHICH RULES ARE BEING REVIEWED BY THE, WHICH ONES, WHICH RULES ARE CONSIDERED PART OF THE COMPLAINT PART AND WHICH RULES ARE NOT.

MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LOW MM-HMM .

I BELIEVE WHEN SECRETARY RETURN STARTED HIS PRESENTATION LAST MONTH, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WAIVERS.

OKAY.

THERE ARE NO WAIVERS IN THE CURRENT RULES.

AND WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT IS PERHAPS ADDING RULES THAT ADDRESS THAT.

OKAY.

SO I, I BELIEVE THAT OUR WORKING GROUP IS TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY IN THE RULES AS WELL AS, UM, THINGS THAT ARE IN THE RULES, BUT RIGHT NOW HAVE NOT BEEN APPLIED TO THE COMPLAINT PROCESS, AS WELL AS SOME OTHER RULES THAT ARE CLEARLY PART OF THE COMPLAINT PROCESS, WHICH WOULD BE PRE-HEARING, FOR EXAMPLE, AND FILING THE COMPLAINT.

UM, SO AGAIN, I I THINK IT'S VERY BROAD.

IT WOULD BE ANY RULES THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WOULD BE APPLYING TO WHATEVER THE NEW PROCESS WE, UM, ENVISION WOULD BE.

UM, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT'S BEYOND OUR MANDATE.

UM, I MEAN, I GUESS WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, MR. CHAIR.

BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I I, I DON'T REALLY THINK IT MATTERS WHAT THE HEADINGS ON EACH SECTION OF THE RULES ARE.

I, I, I THINK IT IS WHATEVER WE FEEL NEEDS TO BE CHANGED TO, UM, CREATE THE KIND OF MECHANISM THAT WE NEED.

AGAIN, MAYBE COMMISSIONER FREDDY HAS, SO WHAT IS YOUR WORKING GROUP GONNA DO THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER WORKING GROUP? UM, WELL, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, USING THE EXAMPLE ADAM USED LAST TIME ABOUT THE WAIVERS, UH, I DON'T REALLY EVEN KNOW.

I MEAN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, UH, WHETHER IT'S REALLY IN OUR JURISDICTION TO DO WHAT, WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, YOU KNOW, IT'S AT THE BRAINSTORMING STAGE NOW, RIGHT? SO, UM, I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NOT FALL UNDER A DIFFERENT WORKING GROUP THAT'S JUST REVIEWING THE RULES, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROPOSING RULES THAT WOULD ENABLE THE CON THE COMPLAINT PROCESS TO MOVE ALONG.

AND LET ME INTERJECT IN CASE THIS IS RELEVANT.

WHEN WE FORMED THE RULES AND REGULATIONS WORKING GROUP VERY INNOCENTLY COUPLE MEETINGS AGO, I SENT AN EMAIL TO THE TWO PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTEERED FOR THAT AND ASKED THEM TO DELAY ANY MEETINGS OR ACTION UNTIL WE SORTED OUT SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS.

'CAUSE YOU ALSO HAD TOLD ME YOU WERE WORKING AND REVIEWING SOME, SOME OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS.

SO I TRIED TO AVOID ANY IMMEDIATE CONFLICT AND WE CAN STILL WORK ON THIS AND, AND TALK ABOUT IT.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY, ITEM 10, UPDATE FROM THE WORKING

[10. Update from the Working Group to Review and Revise ERC bylaws (King, Pumfrey, and Sharkey).]

THAT WORKING GROUP, UH, IS COMPOSED OF, UH, OF, UH, COMMISSIONER KING, VICE CHAIR SHARKEY, AND MYSELF.

AND WE

[00:45:01]

I'M GOING TO BE, UH, SENDING THEM VERY SOON TO MS. WEBSTER, SO WE RUN, DON'T RUN INTO ANY LEGAL PROBLEMS WITH OUR PROPOSALS.

AND THEN PERHAPS AT THE NEXT MEETING WE WILL BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE PROPOSALS.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU.

FUTURE AGENDA

[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]

UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? PEOPLE, WELL, WE'RE ALSO, WE WILL, WE ARE DELAYING ITEM EIGHT, THE UPDATE FROM THE WORKING GROUP ON THE ERC COMPLAINT PROCESS UNTIL THE OCTOBER MEETING.

AND NUMBER NINE ALSO, WHICH IS JUST KIND OF THE FOLLOW UP.

TWO, EIGHT.

YES.

OKAY.

UM, ANY OTHER PROPOSAL FOR WHAT TO PUT ON THE NEXT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT.

THAT CONCLUDES ALL MR. CHAIR.

UM, SO IF WE WANT TO ADD SOMEONE TO THE WORKING GROUP, FOR EXAMPLE, DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATE ITEM AS IN NUMBER SEVEN? DO, DO YOU SEE, ADD SOMEONE OR SOMETHING AND WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, I WAS THINKING A PERSON, BUT ANYTHING ELSE WE, MY READING OF OUR BYLAWS IS THE WORKING GROUPS ARE INFORMAL IN THE SENSE THAT ANY MEMBER CAN BEGIN PARTICIPATING AT ANY TIME.

AND YOU CAN ALSO HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, UH, CHAIR, IF I MAY.

UM, YOU ALL HAVE TO SET THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE WORKING GROUP.

SO YOU CAN DO THAT NOW UNDER, OR ANY OF YOUR WORKING GROUPS UNDER ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

UM, IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU WANNA DO TODAY, IF YOU WANT IT TO BE A FUTURE ITEM, THAT'S CERTAINLY FINE, BUT, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO SET THE MEMBERSHIP MM-HMM .

IT'S NOT SOMETHING LIKE, IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S COVERED IN AN OPEN MEETING.

IT'S NOT JUST SORT OF PEOPLE COME AND JOIN OR NOT JOIN.

AND PART OF THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE SURE THE MEMBERSHIP CONTAINS LESS THAN A QUORUM BECAUSE WORKING GROUPS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

OKAY.

I GET IT.

THE REASON I WAS SAYING I THOUGHT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT LOOSER THAN THAT IS BECAUSE IT SAYS THE COMMISSION CAN DETERMINE THE SIZE OF A WORKING GROUP, BUT MAYBE THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT WAYS OF INTERPRETING THAT.

DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH.

UM, MR. CHAIR, THIS, AND THAT'S THE REASON I MADE MY COMMENT.

I BELIEVE THE WAY WE'VE DONE IT IN THE PAST IS, UM, UM, WE HAVE JUST APPROVED WHOEVER WANTS TO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE FORMALLY APPROVED, WE, WE USUALLY DO IT AT A MEETING.

WE SAID, WHO WANTS TO BE A MEMBER OF THE, AND I KNOW WE HAD DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, UM, AT LEAST AS TO THIS COMPLAINT WORKING GROUP, WE HAVE DISCUSSED ASKING, UM, FORMER CHAIR SOBER AND FORMER CHAIR LEVINS TO PARTICIPATE.

SO MY QUESTION IS WHETHER WE NEED TO, I MEAN, I KNOW THEY CAN PARTICIPATE, UM, WE CAN EVEN MAKE THEM FORMALLY PART OF THE WORKING GROUP, OR WE CAN JUST CONSULT WITH THEM.

SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT HAS TO GO ON THE AGENDA AS A SPECIFIC ITEM, UH, IF I MAY MM-HMM .

AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT NOT VIOLATING THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

MM-HMM .

SO YOU CAN'T CONSULT WITH PEOPLE WHERE AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE CONSULTED WITH A QUORUM.

SO I STRONGLY RECOMMEND YOU DO NOT BRING OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS INTO A WORKING GROUP THAT WEREN'T SPECIFICALLY APPOINTED.

BUT WHAT ABOUT PREVIOUS MEMBERS? YEAH.

THE TWO PREVIOUS MEMBERS WOULD NOT COUNT AS A QUORUM.

IF IT'S PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU JUST WANNA COME AND SPEAK TO YOU, THAT YOU WANNA GET THEIR EXPERTISE AND JUST HAVE 'EM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S FINE.

THEY CAN COME AND SPEAK TO YOU, BUT THEY'RE NOT A MEMBER OF THE WORKING GROUP.

I MEAN, THEY, YOU CAN HAVE OUTSIDE PEOPLE BECOME MEMBERS OF A WORKING GROUP, THAT'S FINE.

BUT AS FAR AS I THOUGHT YOU WERE TRYING TO, I I PROBABLY MISHEARD YOU, BUT I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, YOU COULD CONSULT WITH OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO WEREN'T PART OF THE FORMAL WORKING GROUP AND THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED.