Apr 24, 2025 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION

I'M IN THE ROOM OR SOMETHING,

[00:00:01]

[ CITY OF BAYTOWN NOTICE OF MEETING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 2025 5:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL 2401 MARKET STREET, BAYTOWN, TEXAS 77520 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF QUORUM ]

COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL, BAYTOWN, TEXAS 7 7 5 2 0.

AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF QUORUM AT 5:02 PM I'M GONNA START WITH CITIZEN COMMENT.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR CITIZEN COMMENT? NO, SIR.

GOOD DEAL.

WELL, NO ONE WISHES TO SPEAK.

[a. Review and discuss an updated draft of the ethics ordinance including the complaint process and creation of an Ethics Board.]

ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING, COUNSEL.

UM, SO I AM HAPPY TO BE IN FRONT OF YOU AGAIN TALKING ABOUT, UH, THE CREATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS AND THE ETHICS BOARD.

SO, JUST AS A REMINDER, WE MET, UH, TWO WEEKS AGO AND KICKED OFF THIS DISCUSSION, REALLY FOCUSED ON A COUPLE OF THOSE LARGER KEY ITEMS TO GET SOME FEEDBACK.

SO, UH, COULD DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AND BRING THAT TO YOU.

UH, SENT THAT OUT FOR YOU.

I'VE ALSO PLACED A COPY AT YOUR, UH, SEATS TONIGHT SO YOU CAN KIND OF FOLLOW ALONG.

SO WE ARE GOING TO WALK THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, UH, OR THE ARTICLES BOTH FOR THE CODE OF ETHICS AND THEN THE ETHICS BOARD.

AND THEN HOPEFULLY BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE END, WE WILL HAVE EVERYTHING FAIRLY WELL LINED OUT SO THAT AT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, Y'ALL CAN ADOPT, UH, THE NEW ORDINANCE AND ARTICLES.

SO, UH, AS I SAID, WE ARE WALKING THROUGH THIS THING KIND OF PIECE BY PIECE.

I'M GOING TO STOP AND PAUSE ON A COUPLE OF THE ITEMS WHERE WE'VE EITHER ALREADY HAD SOME CONVERSATION AND WANNA MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW UP ON THAT, OR WE NEED TO CHECK IN AND MAKE SURE IT'S THE DIRECTION Y'ALL WANNA GO.

THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF PIECES THAT I'M GONNA CALL, OR, UM, SOME OF THOSE KIND OF STANDARD LEGAL PIECES THAT ARE IN THERE.

I WILL, UH, LIST ALL THOSE OUT AND GIVE Y'ALL AN OPPORTUNITY TO QUESTION, COMMENT ON THAT.

UM, BUT WE WON'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THAT SO THAT WE CAN GET THROUGH ALL OF IT.

SO, TO START THINGS OFF, WE START WITH, UM, THE BEGINNING DIVISION ONE, THE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS.

SO THIS IS THE SECTION WHERE WE OUTLINED THOSE PRINCIPLES.

OUR DISCUSSION LAST TIME WAS, WANTED TO KEEP THAT IN, BUT WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR THAT WAS NOT THE BASIS FOR A COMPLAINT.

SO THAT IS ADDED INTO, UH, THE COPY IN IN FRONT OF YOU.

THAT, UM, SENTENCE IS KIND OF THERE RIGHT ABOVE THE, WHERE THE NUMERATION STARTS FOR THE PRINCIPLES.

THE NEXT ITEM IS THE DEFINITIONS.

THE ONE THAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME WAS THE CITY OFFICIAL, AND THAT DISCUSSION Y'ALL LANDED ON WANTED TO HAVE THIS ORDINANCE, UM, AN ARTICLE APPLY TO THE MAYOR, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, OUR BOARD MEMBERS, THE CITY MANAGER, AND THEN THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES AND ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

SO THAT LANGUAGE HAS BEEN CHANGED, UM, IN THIS, UH, COPY IN FRONT OF YOU.

AND I WILL STOP THERE AND SEE IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON EITHER ONE OF THOSE.

I JUST LIKE TO SAY, UM, JUST SO THAT RESIDENTS CAN BE INFORMED ON WHY THE CITY MANAGER JUDGE AND AND ASSOCIATE JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR A COMPLAINT TO BE FILED IS BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO EMPLOYEES THAT COUNCIL AND MAYOR HAVE.

SO BEFORE WE GET ANY QUESTIONS, JUST SO IT'S ON RECORD AND PEOPLE, THEY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, WELL, WHY DID YOU TAKE OUT OTHER EMPLOYEES? WELL, OTHER EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO BE HANDLED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

SAME THING WITH, WITH, UM, EVERYONE IN THE COURT BEING HANDLED BY THE, UM, THE JUDGE, YOU KNOW.

SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, OR CONCERNS? I, ALRIGHT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT, UH, SECTION.

SO THIS IS DIVISION TWO, THE STANDARDS.

SO THE STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, WE HAD A CONVERSATION LAST TIME, MOSTLY CENTERED AROUND KIND OF MORE OF HOW YOU WANTED THOSE LAID OUT.

NOT REALLY ANY CHANGES TO WHAT ALREADY EXISTED IN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.

SO THIS IS, UM, WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE LISTED IN OUR CURRENT CODE, THE ONE, UH, ITEM THAT I WOULD

[00:05:01]

SO, UH, HAVING READ THIS MANY, MANY TIMES, AND EVERY TIME I READ IT, I FIND SOMETHING ELSE THAT I'M LIKE, HMM, LET ME, LET ME BRING THAT TO THE CONVERSATION.

SO NUMBER 12 ON THIS LIST, UM, THIS IS NOT ONE THAT I SAW ON OTHER CITY EXAMPLES.

UM, THIS IS UNIQUE TO OUR ARTICLE OF, OF STANDARDS.

CURRENTLY, THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, IF ONE OF YOU WAS AT A DISTRICT LISTENING SESSION AND YOU SAID, HEY, WANNA LET EVERYBODY KNOW WE HAVE THIS GREAT CITY EVENT THIS SATURDAY, IT'S FROM EIGHT TO FIVE, IF OVER HERE, YADA YADA PLACE COME JOIN US.

AND WE HAVE A RESIDENT WHO LOADS UP THE FAMILY AND DRIVES OUT THERE AND THEY'RE THERE AT NINE O'CLOCK AND TURNS OUT IT DOESN'T START UNTIL 11, YOU COULD HAVE AN ETHICS FAULT ETHICS COMPLAINT FILED ON YOU BECAUSE YOU MISREPRESENTED THE FACTS OF THAT EVENT.

SO I SAY THAT TO SAY THIS KIND OF FALLS IN THAT SAME AREA OF BROADNESS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THE PRINCIPLES.

IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE THIS IN, I WOULD RECOMMEND ADDING SOME LANGUAGE WHERE IT'S WILLFUL, INTENTIONAL, KNOWINGLY, SOMETHING AROUND THAT SO THAT THERE'S SOME OTHER PARAMETERS AROUND IT.

I WILL TELL YOU, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT I SPOKE WITH OUR LEGAL TEAM ABOUT.

THEIR FEEDBACK ON THIS IS EFFECTIVELY, THIS IS LIKE PERJURY AND FROM A LEGAL DEFENSE SITUATION, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVE UP AND VIRTUALLY NEVER GET, I'M GONNA SAY A CONVICTION OF.

AND SO THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND TAKING OUT, OBVIOUSLY UP TO COUNSEL, IF YOU WANNA LEAVE IT IN OR OUT.

AGAIN, IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT IN, I WOULD DEFINITELY SUGGEST ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE, UM, TO THAT EITHER WILLFUL, KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY, THAT KIND OF THING.

SO I'LL STOP AND LET Y'ALL HAVE DISCUSSION AND GIVE SOME FEEDBACK THAT MAKES SENSE.

WELL, YEAH.

TO MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, KNOWINGLY OR INTENTIONALLY MM-HMM .

AND, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT IF WE CAN ADD IN THE TERMINOLOGY OF WILLFUL OR INTENTIONAL, UM, WELL, I, THAT, THAT'S A REAL SLIPPERY SLOPE WE'RE GOING DOWN THERE BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETIMES THERE'S INFORMATION THAT WE'RE PROVIDED MM-HMM .

THAT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT.

AND SO FOR ME TO SAY, WELL, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, IT'S KNOWINGLY AND WILLFUL THAT I MISREPRESENTED THE FACTS, BUT I COULD BE UNDER A DO NOT DISCLOSE REQUIREMENT FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION ISSUES THAT MM-HMM .

WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT.

IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THE INTENT WOULD BE SO THAT WE'RE NOT JUST INTENTIONALLY MISREAD MISREPRESENTING PEOPLE, BUT THERE ARE TIMES WE'RE PUT IN THAT POSITION THAT WE HAVE TO CLAIM IGNORANCE WHEN WE KNOW BETTER.

COULD WE JUST SAY IT'S SOMETHING I CAN'T TALK ABOUT, NOT A LIBERTY TO DISCUSS? YEAH, YOU CAN ALWAYS HAVE A LIBERTY TO DISCUSS.

YEAH.

BUT I MEAN, I'M JUST, AS AN EXAMPLE, THAT WAS A PRETTY GOOD EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, MISQUOTING A DATE OR TIME AS LONG AS IT'S NOT INTENTIONAL, BUT MM-HMM .

THERE ARE TIMES THAT WE'RE PUT IN THOSE POSITIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, I I GUESS YOU'D ALWAYS HAVE TO BE CAREFUL TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT.

YEAH.

MM-HMM .

BUT I'M JUST, AGAIN, IF THIS, IF WE'RE THE ONLY ONES THAT SHE SURVEYED THAT HAS THAT, I WOULD BE CAUTIOUS TO ADD THAT IN.

YOU KNOW, HOW TIGHT DO WE WANT THIS? OBVIOUSLY IF, IF WE'RE KNOWINGLY, WILLINGLY AND DELIBERATELY MISLEADING OR QUOTING OTHER THINGS, THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT COULD BE BROUGHT FORWARD WITH THAT.

BUT WE DEAL WITH A LOT OF INFORMATION YEAH.

FROM TIME TO TIME.

AND THAT'S A, JUST A REAL SLIPPERY SLOPE TO GET ON.

I CAN UNDERSTAND.

I, I, I AGREE WITH, UH, MR. LESTER.

UM, THERE THERE IS LOSS OF OBJECT SUBJECTIVITY AND IT'S KIND OF HARD TO DETERMINE INTENT SOMETIMES.

AND THAT COULD LEAD TO A LOT OF, UM, , A LOT, A LOT OF, UH, MESS JUST TO DETERMINE IF THE, IF THAT'S THE INTENT.

UH, ALSO, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT IS TO MAKE THIS OBJECTIVE AS POSSIBLE.

IT'S IMPORTANT THAT, IN MY OPINION, THAT THESE, MOST OF THESE APPLY TO PENAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODES, UH, JUST TO CLEAN UP ANY MUDDINESS AND, AND SUBJECTIVITY TO IT.

SO, SO LEGAL, YOU ALL SAID THAT THIS WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE.

YES.

AND, AND, UH, COUNSEL, LET ME FIRST STATE THAT, UM, I WAS ON A ZOOM CALL DURING THIS MEETING AND LOSS OF CONNECTION DURING THIS PARTICULAR DISCUSSION, .

SO IF I MISS,

[00:10:01]

PLEASE DON'T, UH, FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST ME.

UM, BUT, UH, CHRISNER VANCE, PLEASE SPEAK UP IF I, IF I MAY MISSTATE, UM, THE ARGUMENTS.

BUT, UM, I THINK THE CONCERN FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT WAS THAT EVEN IF WE PUT IN WILLFUL OR INTENTIONAL, THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SUBJECTIVITY IN THIS PARTICULAR PARAGRAPH.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAD DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY WAS TAKING OUT THE SUBJECTIVITY AND REFERRING TO SPECIFIC STATU, UH, STATUTORY CONDUCT.

AND THIS MIGHT BE A LITTLE CONTRADICTORY AND IT WOULD ALSO BE DIFFICULT TO PROVE WHEN YOU TAKE EVIDENCE ON INTENTIONAL VERSUS NEGLIGENCE VERSUS, UH, I SIMPLY FORGOT.

SO FROM THAT STANDPOINT, IT'S NOT REALLY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK.

MAY YES, MA'AM.

UM, AND I THINK ALSO INFORMATION, UH, IS VERY FLUID, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO EVENTS, WHETHER IT'S WEATHER RELATED, WHETHER IT HAD TO MOVE LOCATIONS FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND PEOPLE SHOW UP AT ONE LOCATION AND THEN IT'S ANOTHER.

UM, AND SO I CAN SEE THOSE SITUATIONS HAPPENING.

I ACTUALLY HAD A SITUATION, UH, LA LAST WEEK THAT I THOUGHT SOMETHING WAS HAPPENING AND THEN IT DID IT.

AND SO I COULD HAVE ALSO BEEN HELD TO THIS STANDARD.

AND SO, UM, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WHETHER IT STAYS IN OR OUT, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR, AND IF THERE'S NOTHING CLEAR IN ORDER FOR US TO KEEP IT, THEN WE TAKE IT OUT.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE AT HGAC, THERE WAS, I FORGET THE CITY OFFICIAL ELECTED OFFICIAL WE WERE TALKING WITH, AND HE SAID THEY HAD JUST REDONE THEIRS A FEW YEARS AGO, AND THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD IT WATERPROOF WHERE PEOPLE COULDN'T MAKE FALSE CLAIMS. AND THEY WERE GOING BACK, LOOKING AT IT, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE A CLAIM THAT HONESTLY THEY CAN DOCTOR UP A STORY TO MAKE A CLAIM AND IF THEY WANT TO DO IT, UM, I'M JUST THINKING, WORST CASE SCENARIO, I DON'T THINK ANYONE ON COUNCIL NOW WOULD DO IT.

BUT WHAT IF WE DID HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT WAS DELIBERATELY GIVING INFORMATION THEY SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT OR FALSE INFORMATION TO STIR SOME STUFF UP.

HOW THEN WOULD WE BE ABLE TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE? MM-HMM .

HOW WOULD WE POLICE THEM OR POLICE OURSELVES IF WE HAVE SOMEONE INTENTIONALLY DOING THAT.

MM-HMM .

THAT'S THE REASON WHY I WAS SAYING MAYBE WE SHOULD KEEP THIS IN HERE AT WILLFUL OR INTENTIONAL, BUT IF IT'S GONNA MAKE IT THAT MUCH DIFFICULT, IF WE THINK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE INDIVIDUALS MAKING, TAKING THIS OUT OF CONTEXT AND REALLY BOGGING DOWN WHAT TAKE, UH, THE CITY CLERK TAKING REPORTS, WOULD IT BE WORTH IT AT, AT THAT POINT? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL THINK WOULD HAPPEN? HAPPENED? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY.

IS, IS THERE LANGUAGE IN THE ARTICLE THAT WOULD ALLOW A COUNCIL, ANYONE ON COUNCIL TO INVESTIGATE SOMETHING LIKE WHAT MAYOR JOHNSON'S SAYING, IF, UH, THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY LEAKING INFORMATION? OR IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN THE CURRENT, IN THE CURRENT ARTICLE OR IN THE CONTEXT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CHANGES, UH, PROPOSED? SO, SO DO WE, AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE HAVE THE LIBERTY TO INVESTIGATE AN ISSUE LIKE THAT YOU DO UNDER THE CHARTER.

UNDER THE CHARTER.

MM-HMM .

ALRIGHT.

UH, AND, AND IN THE CURRENT LANGUAGE, THERE'S, UH, CONSISTENT LANGUAGE IN THERE AS WELL THAT'LL ALLOW US TO INVESTIGATE AN ISSUE WITH, SO IS THAT SAME LANGUAGE FOUND IN HERE IN IN THE CURRENT, UH, ITERATION OF THE ARTICLE? YES.

IT'S STILL IN THERE MM-HMM .

UM, AND IN OUR PROPOSALS, UM, THERE IS SOME DELEGATION OF THAT AUTHORITY TO THE ETHICS BOARD, BUT IF A COMPLAINT IS NOT DISMISSED AT A PRELIMINARY PROCEEDING, THEN IT WOULD COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AN ULTIMATE DETERMINATION ANYWAY.

SO IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE SAYING THAT WE AS A COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES, HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR LEAKING INFORMATION OR GIVING FALSE INFORMATION REPEATEDLY?

[00:15:02]

CAN WE GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT TO SEE EXACTLY WHERE IT IS? IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE ETHICS CODE.

YEAH, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M WANTING TO KNOW.

MM-HMM .

UM, YES.

IT IT EXISTS OUTSIDE.

OUTSIDE, YES.

OUTSIDE OF THE ETHICS CODE ARTICLE.

MAY NOW, I'M SORRY.

I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR TOO THAT THIS NOT ONLY APPLIES TO US, BUT IT ALSO APPLIES TO THE INDIVIDUALS WE PUT ON THESE COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS MM-HMM .

SO AGAIN, THE, AN AVERAGE CITIZEN PARTICIPATING IN MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS IN ONE OF OUR COMMITTEES COULD MISREPRESENT SOMETHING OR MISSTATE SOMETHING OUT OF JUST NON-INTENTIONAL.

BUT THAT'S HARD.

AGAIN, THAT BECOMES VERY HARD TO PROVE WHAT IS INTENTIONAL, NON-INTENTIONAL.

AND SO AGAIN, IF IT WAS ONLY APPLICABLE TO US, I PROBABLY HAVE LESS CONCERN.

MM-HMM .

BUT IT'S APPLICABLE TO PEOPLE WHO JUST COME IN AND HELP US MM-HMM .

AND DON'T HAVE THE TRAINING OR TENURE OR EXPERIENCE THAT WE TYPICALLY GAIN VERY QUICKLY.

THAT'S TRUE.

UH, SO IT IS JUST A SLIPPERY SLOPE.

AND THAT'S, I'LL LET IT GO WITH THAT.

I, GO AHEAD.

I'M SORRY.

SO I, I PERSONALLY, I SEE THIS AS TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS IN TERMS OF LEAKING INFORMATION THAT WOULD, IN A SENSE IN MY MIND, REQUIRE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE INFORMATION AS WHEN WE GO BACK THERE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION.

THAT'S ONE THING.

AND, AND THAT WE, WE ARE HELD BY OUR ATTORNEY AND, AND CODES THAT THAT STAYS BEHIND DOORS.

MM-HMM .

SO IF THAT LEAKS, THERE'S PROBABLY SOME LEGAL THINGS THAT WOULD HAPPEN WITH THAT.

AND WHAT NUMBER 12 SAYS IS JUST MISREPRESENTING FACTS.

SO IF, YOU KNOW, I WILLFULLY OR INTENTIONALLY SAY, OH, WELL, YOU KNOW, UM, WE'RE GONNA PUT THIS BUSINESS ON THAT OTHER SIDE OF TOWN AND IT'S NOT COMING HERE, OR WE'RE GONNA PUT IT OVER THERE, OR WE'RE HOSTING A HUGE FAIR, OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND IT DOESN'T REALLY HAPPEN.

AND SO I THINK THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS IN, IN MY MIND YEAH.

LEAKING INFORMATION THAT REQUIRES THAT IT WAS BEHIND EXECUTIVE SESSION OR, OR LEGAL INFORMATION THAT WE WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO LEAK PERIOD MISREPRESENTATION OR, UM, A SOURCE OF FACTS OR RECOMMENDATION BROUGHT FOR THE CITY.

I THINK THAT'S JUST THAT YOU'RE PUTTING OUT FALSE INFORMATION.

MR. MAYOR, IF, IF I MAY ADDRESS COUNCIL MEMBER ALVARADO'S CONCERN MM-HMM .

UH, THAT SORT OF, UH, UH, LEAKING OF INFORMATION DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, THOSE ARE SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS THAT ARE PART OF THIS CODE.

SO WHEN WE'RE REFERRING TO THOSE, UH, PENAL CODE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE PROVISIONS THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE MM-HMM .

SO THEN I THINK, SO THEN WE KIND OF HAVE THAT SENTENCE.

SO IF SOMEONE IS STILL, GO AHEAD.

I'M SORRY.

OH, SO YEAH, THAT KIND OF ANSWERS QUESTION, KIND OF MY CONCERN.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF WITH, WITH, WITH, UH, COUNCILMAN LESTER, AND I THINK ALVARADO THAT IT REALLY DOESN'T NEED TO BE IN THERE.

SO TO CLARIFY WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR, IF SOMEONE IS DELIBERATELY GIVEN MISINFORMATION, NOT EVEN LEAKING INFORMATION, THEY'RE GIVEN MISINFORMATION EITHER ONLINE WHEN THEY'RE TALKING TO INDIVIDUALS, TALKING TO, TALKING TO CROWDS, DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY THROUGH THE CHARTER TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE TO OPEN INVESTIGATION TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE? YES, YOU DO.

OUTSIDE OF THE ETHICS COMPLAINT PROCEDURE MM-HMM .

YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DETERMINE THE ELIGIBILITY AND, UH, THE, THE ELIGIBILITY OF YOUR MEMBERS AND TO DETERMINE WHETHER SOMEONE HAS, UH, VIOLATED ONE OF THOSE PROVISIONS.

YOU ALSO HAVE YOUR OWN RULES OF CONDUCT FOR MEETINGS IN WHICH, UH, THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED.

IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY IN THERE RIGHT NOW, BUT THERE ARE, UH, PROVISIONS IN YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT TALK ABOUT, UH, THE WAY TO DEMEAN YOURSELVES IN PUBLIC.

SO IT'S

[00:20:01]

YOU COULD.

OKAY.

COULD WE MAKE NOTE TO MAYBE HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AT A LATER TIME? YES, SIR.

SO AS FAR AS ITEM 12, AS FAR AS THE DIRECTION WE'RE NEEDING IS, DO WE KEEP IT OR NOT? ? I, I'M, IF WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND DISCUSS SPECIFICALLY ADDING SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER TO WHERE WE CAN HOLD SOMEONE ACCOUNTABLE FOR DELIBERATELY GIVING FALSE INFORMATION, I'D BE IN FAVOR OF TAKING ITEM 12 OUT.

IF NOT, I'M GOING TO WANT TO SEE IT STAY IN.

YEAH.

AND WE'RE IN DRAFT MODE MM-HMM .

SO NOTHING IS GOING TO BE SET IN STONE.

WE'RE JUST KIND OF GIVING GUIDANCE TODAY.

YEAH.

SO, MS. GRAHAM, HOW DO YOU FEEL? UH, I WANT IT TAKEN OUT.

OKAY.

THERE YOU HAVE IT.

ALL RIGHT.

THE NEXT, UH, PIECE, MR. MAYOR? YES, SIR.

IF I MAY ADDRESS YOUR, UH, QUESTION ABOUT WHERE IT IS.

MM-HMM .

IT WOULD BE IN THE CHARTER UNDER SECTION 17, UH, 0.4, WHICH GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO INQUIRE INTO THE CONDUCT OF ANY OFFICE, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY OF THE CITY AND MAKE INVESTIGATIONS AS TO MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS.

GOOD DEAL.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT, THE NEXT, UH, SECTION IS THE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO FORMER CITY OFFICIALS.

SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN IN OUR ORDINANCE, UH, BEFORE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME.

THIS HAS A LIMITED APPLICATION IN TERMS OF IT, UH, ANY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT CITY OFFICIALS RECEIVE THAT THEY HAVE TO CONTINUE TO KEEP IT CONFIDENTIAL, EVEN ONCE THEY LEAVE OFFICE.

AND THEN, UM, IT RESTRICTS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM, UH, REALLY KIND OF DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, AS WELL AS BECOMING AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY, UM, FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

AND THEN THE LAST, UH, SECTION OF DIVISION TWO IS THE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.

AND DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON EITHER OF THOSE? YES.

SO ON THE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO FORMER CITY OFFICIALS, ARE Y'ALL RECOMMENDING REMOVING THOSE REGULATIONS? NO.

BASED ON Y'ALL'S CONVERSATION LAST TIME Y'ALL SEEMED LIKE Y'ALL WERE KIND OF AGREEABLE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD IT IN, SO I ADDED IT IN MM-HMM .

OH, YOU WANT, I WANTED TO REVISIT THAT BECAUSE I, I JUST, UM, FOR ME, THAT'S A STRANGE THING TO, IF SOMEONE'S FINISHED WITH THEIR DUTIES UNDER OATH, I'D LIKE SOME EXAMPLES THAT WE THINK WE WOULD NEED TO GO BACK.

UM, WHEN I SAY WE SOMEONE IN THE COMMUNITY UNDER AN ETHICS VIOLATION FOR A FORMER CITY OFFICIAL WELL BEING IN REAL ESTATE MM-HMM .

NOT SAYING I WOULD DO THIS, SO LET'S, WE GOT YOU.

OKAY.

BUT BEING IN REAL ESTATE, IF I KNEW, HAD PROPRIETARY INFORMATION ON SOMEBODY WANTING TO PUT SOMETHING IN A CERTAIN AREA OF TOWN, I'M NOT ON COUNCIL.

I COULD DRIVE CONVERSATION TO DRIVE THE PRICE UP BY LEAKING THAT INFORMATION TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

BUT IS SO, BUT SHE'S SAYING CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT THERE'S ALREADY OTHER THINGS THAT THAT FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS THERE, THERE'S ALREADY TIMELINES AND THINGS THEY'RE HELD, HELD TO, CORRECT? NO, IT'S NOT.

OH, THERE'S NOT.

NO, NO, THERE'S THREE.

YEAH.

NO, THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT PIECES.

SO THE FIRST PIECE IS ABOUT ALL CITY OFFICIALS, SO THAT BOARD MEMBERS, COUNCIL, THAT SORT OF THING.

AND, UH, CONFIDENTIAL HOLDING, CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL EVEN ONCE THEY LEAVE OFFICE.

AND THEN THERE'S TWO MORE ITEMS UNDER THIS.

ONE OF 'EM IS THAT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN'T BASICALLY DO BUSINESS WITH THE CITY AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN'T WORK FOR THE CITY FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

SO, SO THERE ARE THREE SEPARATE THINGS.

SO I JUST NEED A LITTLE REMINDER.

SO GOING BACK TO SOMETHING THAT MR. GRIFFITH SAID OVER AND OVER AGAIN, TYING THIS TO PENAL CODE.

MY, MY ONLY OBJECTION TO THIS IS IF WE TRULY HAVE A, AN ETHICS VIOLATION, IT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE TIED TO SOMETHING LEGAL WHERE WE WOULD HAVE TO GO AFTER THE PERSON LEGALLY MM-HMM .

SO, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T UNDERSTAND ENTERTAINING AN ETHICS VIOLATION UP HERE AT THE DAAS.

IF THERE WAS, LIKE, IF IT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING WITH SOMEONE.

SO LIKE, IF YOU GO INTO SECTION 2, 8 0 3 OF THE SHEET THAT WAS PUT ON YOUR DESK, SUBSECTION TWO, ONE OF THOSE THINGS WOULD BE NO FORMER MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL DIRECTLY INTO A, ENTER INTO A CONTRACT OR TRANSACTION WITH THE CITY THAT EXCEEDS $1,000 WITHIN 60 MONTHS FOLLOWING THE

[00:25:01]

SO THAT WOULD GIVE THIS COUNCIL A PARAMETER NOT TO FEEL OBLIGATED TO INTERACT WITH SOMEBODY WITH A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER.

I WILL TELL YOU IN MY TENURE HERE, THAT'S ALREADY HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES WITH FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH THE CITY WANTING TO DO A BUSINESS DEAL WITH FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND I THINK THAT'S PER THE LAST DISCUSSIONS, THAT WAS WHY THE COUNCIL WANTED TO CONSIDER SOMETHING IN HERE.

OKAY.

THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH COVERED.

THAT'S WHY I'M, BUT THANK YOU.

YES, MA'AM.

ALL RIGHT.

NO, I MEAN, THERE, THAT'S A LOT.

YEAH, IT'S A LOT.

YEAH.

16 MONTHS IS, THAT'S FIVE YEARS.

16 MONTHS IS A LONG TIME.

.

YEAH.

THAT'S A LONG TIME.

WELL, THERE'S, I MEAN, THAT'S THE THING IS A LOT OF TIMES, AND LIKE WHEN YOU LEAVE A COMPANY AND YOU HAVE A, A NON-COMPETE CLAUSE, SOMETIMES IT'S A NON-COMPETE FOR FIVE YEARS.

IT'S PRETTY MUCH, NOW I'M GONNA TELL YOU THIS, WHEN THE STATE OF TEXAS NON-COMPETE DOESN'T, IT'S THE RIGHT TO WORK.

SO IT DOESN'T REALLY VALUE VALIDATION, BUT CONFIDENTIALITY DOES.

BUT IF I CAN'T, I'LL USE THE MAYOR'S EXAMPLE.

SOMEBODY'S IN REAL ESTATE, THEY SERVE ON COUNCIL FOR A COUPLE OF TERMS, AND THEN THEY GET OFF REAL ESTATE AND THE CITY'S WANTING TO DO SOMETHING AND THEY HAPPEN TO EITHER OWN OR THEY REPRESENT THAT PROPERTY THAT WOULD TAKE IT OUT OF THEIR HANDS.

THAT'S TRUE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK 60 MONTHS IS A LONG TIME.

YEAH.

MAYBE A YEAR.

MM-HMM .

KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BUFFER.

MM-HMM .

BUT FIVE YEARS, THAT'S A LONG TIME TO, TO ASK TO, 'CAUSE THAT REALLY RESTRICTS THE ABILITY TO DO THINGS.

THAT IS A LONG TIME, A YEAR WOULD TAKE AWAY ANY POTENTIAL READY ACCESS INFLUENCE THAT MAY BE OUT THERE A YEAR.

THAT'S KIND OF A, THAT'S ENOUGH OF A GAP.

I THINK.

I JUST WANNA CLARIFY FOR THE BAYTOWN SUN AND THE PEOPLE WATCHING ONLINE, UH, THAT NO TRANSACTION HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

THERE'S JUST BEEN AN ATTEMPT AT A TRANSACTION.

BUT THIS WOULD JUST GIVE THE POLICY TO NOT PUT A COUNCIL IN, IN A POSITION.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

YES.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

.

SO, COUNCIL LESTER'S, UH, COMMENT, UM, A YEAR.

YEAH.

YOU KIND OF HAVE SOME, SOME TYPE OF, THERE'S A LOT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN A YEAR, BUT IN, AS FAR AS IN DEVELOPMENT AND EVERYTHING, IT'S SOMETIMES IT'S THREE TO FOUR YEARS.

IT'S A LONG TIME IN DEVELOPMENT.

SO FIVE YEAR, I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THIS IS SOME BIG STUFF.

WE'RE, WE'RE MOVING.

I, I'M, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH FIVE, BUT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE ONE, I THINK ONE IS NOT LONG ENOUGH.

I THINK FIVE IS A LONG TIME.

UM, IF WE LOOK AT IT, AND LET'S SAY SOMEONE DOES OWN PROPERTY OR A BUILDING AND THE CITY IS IN NEED OF IT, AND IT WOULD REALLY BENEFIT THE CITY.

WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO HINDER THAT FOR FIVE YEARS IF THE CITY'S APPROACHING THEM FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD.

LET'S SAY A ROAD'S GETTING PUT IN AND MY PROPERTY IS SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PATH OF THAT ROAD.

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO HINDER THAT FOR FIVE YEARS? IT'S NOT THAT THIS PERSON CAME TO THE CITY AND ASKED FOR THEM, BUT THE CITY COULD HAVE REACHED OUT TO THEM.

I THINK WE JUST NEED TO CUT IT IN HALF.

THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S KINDA THE OPPOSITE.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE CITY, THE CITY APPROACHES SOMEBODY.

IT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE THEM APPROACHING THE CITY.

BUT IS THIS, DOES THIS SAY THAT THIS ONE IS ALL TERMS? SO I GUESS IF WE CAN, IF WE CAN MAKE IT WHERE THEY DON'T, THEY CAN'T SOLICIT BUSINESS FROM THE CITY, BUT THEN THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THEY COULDN'T GO AFTER A BID OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I JUST, I BUT THE PROBLEM, HERE'S THE THING IS, IF, IF, LIKE, TO YOUR POINT, IF, YOU KNOW, WE, I'M NOT UP HERE TO TRY TO MAKE MONEY OR ANYTHING, OR DOING THAT PART MM-HMM .

IF I WANT SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE CITY, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, HERE'S, I HAVE THIS THAT'S COMING.

I KNOW THIS IS, I COULD HELP YOU OUT WITH THIS.

I'M NOT GONNA GIVE IT TO ME.

THIS IS A FRIEND OF MINE WHO OWNS THE COMPANY.

HE'S GONNA DO THE BUSINESS WITH YOU.

AND IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BAYTOWN.

Y'ALL, I'M WALKING AWAY.

I'M NOT INVOLVED.

I'M NOT MAKING MONEY.

'CAUSE I'M NOT HERE, WE'RE NOT HERE TO, TO FINANCIALLY GAIN ANYTHING.

WE ARE HERE TO DO THE SERVICE OF THE CITIZENS.

SO I DON'T MIND FIVE YEARS STATE ATTORNEY COUNSEL, MA'AM, MAKE A SUGGESTION.

WE ALREADY HAVE STATUTES AND RULES IN PLACE FOR DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS.

THAT'S TRUE.

WE COULD DRAFT SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND OF COURSE THEY WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE ON ANYTHING.

ANYWAY.

I, I SHOULD SAY COUNCIL MEMBERS MM-HMM .

UH, UH, APPOINTED OFFICIALS, CITY MANAGER AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS, UH, AT MUNICIPAL JUDGE AND ASSISTANT MUNICIPAL JUDGES.

WE COULD DRAFT LANGUAGE THAT IS SIMILAR TO THE CURRENT DISCLOSURE RULES.

THOSE INDIVIDUALS AS FORMER, UH, OFFICIALS, WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE ON THOSE DEALS.

AND THERE WOULD BE SOME PUBLIC RECORD OF WHAT THEIR TIES TO ANY DEAL MIGHT BE.

I LIKE THAT.

AND, UM, THAT COULD BE FURTHER EXPLAINED, UH, IN NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS ONBOARDING AS WELL.

.

SO TAKE IT OUT OF HERE.

JUST TAKE IT OUT OF HERE.

OKAY.

WELL, WE COULD JUST DRAFT DIFFERENT

[00:30:01]

RIGHT.

BUT WHAT, SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE TIMELINE THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING, THAT WOULD JUST GO AWAY MM-HMM .

AND IT WOULD GO MORE WITH WHAT YOU SAID, THE OTHER TYPES OF AGREEMENTS THAT WE MAKE.

DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT.

YEAH.

I LIKE THAT.

I, I LIKE, I, I, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN FRANCO AND WE, BAYTOWN HAS DEFINITELY HAD THINGS BEFORE THAT HAVE COME UP WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT REAL ESTATE AND THINGS, EVEN BEFORE ANY OF US WERE SITTING UP HERE AND PROBABLY LONG BEFORE WE EVEN, YOU KNOW, THOUGHT OF THIS POSITION.

BUT I, I, I THINK THE FIVE YEARS IS TOO LONG.

AND, AND I WILL SAY THAT I THINK THAT IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO BUSINESS, LIKE YOUR EXAMPLE, UH, MR. FRANCO ABOUT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GET YOUR FRIEND OR WHATEVER.

I MEAN, PEOPLE CAN GET THEIR SON, THEIR SON-IN-LAW, THEIR BROTHER, THEIR COUSIN, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT THEIR COMPANY, I FEEL LIKE IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DO SOMETHING, THEY'RE GOING TO FIND A WAY TO DO IT.

UM, FIVE YEARS SEEMS A REALLY LONG TIME.

UH, I, I, I DON'T, FOR THE RECORD, I DON'T OWN ANY OF MY OWN BUSINESSES, BY THE WAY.

I JUST WANT Y'ALL TO KNOW THAT I HAVE NO PLANS TO, BECAUSE I CAN SEE WHERE THIS COULD BE MISCONSTRUED AS WELL.

UM, I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT ALL THE WHAT IFS.

RIGHT.

UM, AND YOU, YOU'RE BRINGING UP EXCELLENT POINTS, BY THE WAY.

UM, THIS IS ALL ABOUT ETHICS.

WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE GOOD ETHICS POLICY.

BUT I THINK STAYING, JUST CONTINUING TO TRY TO STAY WITH STANDARD TYPES OF AGREEMENTS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE EXISTING, TYING THINGS TO PENAL CODE, JUST KEEPING EVERYTHING VERY TIGHT IS THE BEST WAY TO GO.

I MEAN, IT, THIS IS MORE NOT TYING INTO A PENAL MORE TO A CIVIL TYPE THING.

MM-HMM .

NOT A PENAL, BUT THE THING IS, I DON'T EVEN MIND SAYING THAT THE CITY, FORMER OFFICIAL OR, UH, FAMILY MEMBERS, IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS CAN'T DO IT EITHER.

I DON'T MIND EVEN THAT PART.

I DON'T THINK THAT I'M, I'M JUST A PROPONENT THAT WE ARE HERE FOR SERVING THE CITY AND WE AREN'T HERE TO MAKE ANY PROFIT OR ANY TYPE OF, ANY TYPE OF GAIN FINANCIALLY FOR OURSELVES.

YEAH.

AND I'M NOT SAYING, AND I'M TRYING TO ELIMINATE THAT PROCESS AND ANY DOUBT FROM ANYBODY'S MIND, BUT THEY CAN ALWAYS GO FIND A FRIEND.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A FAMILY MEMBER.

I MEAN, I WAS JUST GIVING AN EXAMPLE LIKE Y'ALL DID.

IT CAN ALWAYS BE SOMETHING ELSE.

I DO LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, ABOUT DISCLOSURES AND KEEPING IT ALONG THOSE LINES.

UM, IF THAT'S THE CASE, I WOULD SAY IF WE'RE GONNA MOVE THAT ROUTE, WE REALLY DON'T NEED THIS IN HERE IF WE'RE GONNA ASK PEOPLE TO DISCLOSE.

YEAH.

AND I, I AGREE WITH THE DISCLOSURE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THIS IS DIRECTLY STRICTLY AT COUNCIL MEMBERS.

YES.

SO A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER THREE YEARS FROM NOW, COMES BEFORE A NEW COUNCIL THAT DOESN'T REALLY KNOW HIM OR WHATEVER.

HE HAS TO DISCLOSE.

OKAY.

I WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER.

MM-HMM .

DA DA DA DA DA, UH, 'CAUSE WE'VE ACTUALLY IN THE PAST HAD SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS TRANSACT BUSINESS WITH THE THAT'S TRUE.

AND THAT'S TRUE.

AND THIS WOULD PRECLUDE THAT.

SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH THAT AS WELL.

UM, SO AGAIN, AS LONG AS THERE'S A FULL DISCLOSURE SO EVERYBODY KNOWS UP FRONT, THEY'RE A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, THIS IS WHATEVER.

AND THEN THE COUNCIL CAN MAKE ITS OWN DECISIONS ON TOP OF THAT.

AS LONG AS THERE'S FULL DISCLOSURE.

I'M JUST REAL LEERY ABOUT SAYING ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR THIS AMOUNT OF TIME.

YEAH.

UM, SO FIVE YEARS WITH DISCLOSURE FORM.

NO, HE'S SAYING NO.

IT WAS, I THOUGHT I HEARD REMOVE IT ALL TOGETHER, REMOVE IT ALL TOGETHER, ISSUE DISCLOSURE FORM, AND JUST BEEF UP THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS THAT ANY FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COMES TO, TO THIS PANEL WANTING SOME TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT DEAL.

OR, YOU KNOW, WHAT, IF A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER WANTS TO START A BUSINESS DOWN ON TEXAS AVENUE AND COMES FROM ONE OF THE BIG GRANTS, I MEAN, THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THEM FROM DOING THAT.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S OUR INTENT.

OUR INTENT IS TO, TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO INFLUENCE.

MM-HMM .

GOING ON.

AND IF IT'S FULLY DISCLOSED, I THINK THAT'S PREDICATE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PUTS THAT IN ARM.

SO, MS. COUNCILMAN ALVARADO, COULD WE STEP, UH, TAKE A LITTLE STEP FURTHER AND, UM, SO IF THEY'RE WORKING WITH OUR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TEAM OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM, AND THEY'RE FILLING OUT WHATEVER FORMS THEY NEED TO FILL OUT, HAVE THAT BE A QUESTION AS WELL.

MM-HMM .

AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU, UH, EVER BEEN A COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN OR AN ELECTED OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN AND FOR HOW LONG OR WHATEVER? YEAH.

THAT WAY, IF YOU'RE GONNA ADD THAT, I WOULD ALSO ADD COMMITTEE MEMBER.

OR HAVE YOU SERVED ON THE COMMITTEE OR BOARD? BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO SOME INFORMATION THAT THEY GET TO, OF COURSE NOW WE'RE PUSHING THAT OUT AROUND YEAH.

BECAUSE SOME OF OUR, SOME OF OUR COMMITTEES REQUIRE US TO HAVE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AND LIKE THAT.

AND SO THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANYBODY WANTING TO SERVE ON OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BECAUSE THEN IT, IT'S LIKE WE'RE ASKING FOR THEIR EXPERTISE, BUT THEN TAKING AWAY THEIR ABILITY TO DO BUSINESS.

YEAH.

WELL, IN THE TOWN THAT THEY OPERATE IN.

BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THE APPLICATION IS GONNA BE DENIED BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A GUIDELINES.

IT'S JUST SAYING THAT, OH, THIS PERSON DID SERVE ON THIS.

OH, YOU'RE WANTING 'EM TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY SERVED.

YES.

I I THOUGHT YOU

[00:35:01]

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

I MISUNDERSTOOD.

SHE'S SAYING YOU'RE GONNA PUT ON THE APPLICATION ALSO PUT THAT YOU'VE DISCLOSED THAT YOU'VE BEEN ON A BOARD OF COMMISSION.

MM-HMM .

I'M, I'M EVEN MORE LEERY OF THAT THAN THIS ORIGINAL, BECAUSE THAT'S PUSHING IT OUT TOO FAR.

'CAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING THESE CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE AND NOW WE'RE GONNA START PUTTING A RING AROUND THEM.

AND I, I AT LEAST ONE ELECTED OFFICIALS ON THERE.

YEAH.

I LIKE THAT IDEA.

YEAH.

CITY COUNCIL OUGHT AGREE WITH THAT.

I, I'M WITH CITY COUNCIL.

WE HAVE A HARD ENOUGH TIME GETTING PEOPLE TO SERVE ON COMMITTEES, .

AND IF WE START GOING THAT ROUTE WITH IT, KNOWING THAT WE'RE ASKING MY COUNCILWOMAN GRAHAM HAS SUGGEST SAID THAT WE'RE ASKING SPECIFICALLY OWN A SMALL BUSINESS, OWN A LARGE BUSINESS, BE A REAL ESTATE AGENT.

AND IF THEY FIGURE, I'M NOT EVEN GONNA DEAL WITH IT.

IF I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO THE EXTRA MILE HERE, I, I, I, I, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST KEEP IT WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY MANAGER OR FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FORMER CITY MANAGERS.

YEAH.

CITY FISHER.

YEAH.

CLARIFY THAT IS FOR WHEN THEY APPLIED FOR PERMIT.

YES.

BUT PROCESS THEY GO THROUGH, YEAH.

GRANTS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

ANYTHING MM-HMM .

YES.

YES.

OKAY.

I MEAN, NOT SETTING UP THEIR WATER FOR THEIR HOME OR ANYTHING.

, THEY DON'T NEED TO CLARIFY THIS FINANCIAL, I WOULD THINK IT WOULD ONLY HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC .

WE CAN USE THE SAME, UH, LANGUAGE THAT WE USE FOR, UH, CURRENT DISCLOSURES.

SO IT WOULD TIE IT TO ARY GAINS, RIGHT? YES, SIR.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON.

ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE ON DIVISION THREE.

OH, SORRY.

NOT MOVING ON.

JUST KIDDING.

SO NUMBER THREE OF OF REGULATIONS, APPLICATIONS TO FORMER CITY CAP OFFICIALS.

NUMBER THREE.

MM-HMM .

SAYS, NO FORMER MEMBER OF THE CITY MAY BE EMPLOYED BY THE CITY IN ANY CAPACITY WITHIN 60 MONTHS FOLLOWING THE END OF THE FORMER MEMBERS'.

MOST RECENT TERM OF OFFICE.

NOW.

I SEE THAT WORKS FOR, UM, I GUESS HOW I READ THIS IS IF YOU'RE A CITY OFFICIAL, I MEAN, IF YOU'RE CITY COUNCIL, YOU CANNOT WORK IN CITY.

YEAH.

THE WAY THIS IS, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? YEAH.

THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN IS IT'S STRICTLY LIMITED TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

OKAY.

UM, IT DOES NOT AFFECT IF YOU'VE SERVED ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OR, OR THAT KIND OF THING.

THIS IS A RESTRICTION JUST TO COUNCIL, THIS IS ACTUALLY REALLY BAD, MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR COUNCILS THAT WANT TO MOVE TO A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT, THEY OUS THE CITY MANAGER, CHANGE THE GOVERNMENT, AND THEN THE MAYOR IS HIRED AS A CITY MANAGER.

THAT, THAT IS, THIS IS A PRETTY COMMON, UH, LANGUAGE PIECE IN, UH, CHARTERS.

UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS TO BE HERE IN THE ETHICS PIECE, BUT IT IS A COMMON LANGUAGE PIECE IN CITY CHARTERS.

OR IF THEY DON'T OUS THE CITY MANAGER AND CHANGE THE GOVERNMENT, WHAT THEY DO IS THEY PROVIDE INFLUENCE TO GET A DIRECTOR POSITION.

UM, IT IT, THIS IS FAIRLY COMMON.

IS IT NORMALLY FIVE YEARS? IT'S NOT FIVE YEARS, NO.

IT'S TYPICALLY A YEAR FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN.

BUT I'M GONNA USE A PERSONAL EXAMPLE.

UM, I DIDN'T, I HONESTLY DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THIS WAS IN HERE.

SO IF I'M NO LONGER A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND I WANTED TO GO BACK AND WORK FOR PARKS AND REC, I WOULD'VE TO WAIT FIVE YEARS.

YES, MA'AM.

WE'RE AT A HIRING FREEZE.

NOW I'M GONNA SAY THIS.

I KNOW, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT.

WE WILL ALLOW, WE WILL ALLOW FORMER EMPLOYEES TO RUN FOR COUNCIL.

YES.

AND THAT OH YEAH.

THAT, YEAH.

YEAH.

AND IF WE'RE GONNA WORK IN REVERSE AS WELL, IS WHAT I'M TALKING, GETTING AT.

IF THIS READ MY PLAYBOOK.

GO AHEAD.

GO AHEAD.

YEAH.

SO, SO WHY WOULDN'T THIS WORK IN REVERSE OF IF I WAS ON COUNCIL OR, UH, OR SOMEBODY WORKED FOR THE CITY, SHOULD THERE BE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME THERE'S NO INFLUENCE OVER AN EMPLOYEE GOING GETTING INTO CITY COUNCIL? 'CAUSE CITY COUNCIL'S ELECTED.

RIGHT? AND SO THERE'S NO INFLUENCE WHERE COUNCIL HAS INFLUENCE OVER, SAY, YOU'RE BEST FRIENDS WITH ME, RIGHT? LIKE ONE OF Y'ALL ARE BEST FRIENDS WITH ME, AND AS SOON AS YOU GET OFF COUNCIL, I'M GONNA OFFER YOU A SIX FIGURE JOB BECAUSE YOU DID A GREAT JOB AS A COUNCIL MEMBER.

THAT'S WHAT IT'S TRYING TO WORK AGAINST.

BECAUSE THEY'RE, AT THAT POINT, I COULD BE GARNERING VOTES, OR THE CITY MANAGER COULD BE GARNERING VOTES WITH A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER THAT'S ABOUT TO GET OFF, PASS SOMETHING AND THEN OFFER YOU A JOB, UH, AS SOON AS YOU GET OFF CITY COUNCIL.

BUT LIKE ME WORKING WITH PARKS AND REC AND THEN RUNNING FOR AN ELECTION, I, I MEAN, I HAD TO GET THE VOTES FROM MY DISTRICT.

IT DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY STAFF MEMBERS.

AND I THINK THAT'S GREAT INSIGHT.

WHAT YOU BRING TO THE COUNCIL OF WORKING FOR THE CITY, BOTH OF Y'ALL KIND.

THAT KIND OF HELPS OUT.

HONESTLY, I WOULD SAY ANYTHING, IT COULD HURT YOU.

'CAUSE PEOPLE MAY BE LIKE, I DON'T LIKE THEM WHEN THEY WORK.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? , I CAN SEE WHERE IT WOULD WORK FOR THIS WELL, AGAINST,

[00:40:01]

HIS EXAMPLE.

SO MAYBE WE JUST HAVE IT AT THAT LEVEL OR WHEREVER, WHATEVER LEVEL YOU FEEL THAT THERE WOULD BE DUE INFLUENCE.

I, I, I FEEL LIKE THAT AGREEING WITH YOU WITH THE, AT THE CITY MANAGER LEVEL, YOU KNOW, UM, I, I WOULD SAY ALL UPPER ADMINISTRATION.

I, AFTER HE JUST EXPLAINED AND GAVE THE ANALOGY, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY DIRECTOR'S POSITIONS, CITY MANAGEMENT.

I, I DO THINK THAT IF I WAS NO LONGER A COUNCIL MEMBER AND I WAS LIKE, SABRINA, REMEMBER ALL THOSE LUNCHES WE HAD, YOU KNOW, OR WHATEVER.

I MEAN, I JUST, I, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO ALSO ANY OF THE UPPER MANAGEMENT POSITIONS.

OKAY.

YOU GET LUNCH WITH SABRINA? I DO.

NO, I DON'T .

I'VE ACTUALLY, I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HAD LUNCH WITH YOU.

I JUST SAW YOU THERE.

I DUNNO.

I KNOW.

OKAY.

MY APOLOGIES ARE NOT ON POINT TONIGHT.

I HAVE NO GOOD EXAMPLES TONIGHT.

YOU DIDN'T GIVE DISCLOSURE NEXT TIME.

SO WET.

KEEP IT AT CITY COUNCIL.

BUT 60 MONTHS, AGAIN, IT'S A FIVE YEAR PERIOD.

THAT'S PRETTY LONG TIME.

AND I DON'T LIKE THE FIVE YEAR THING EITHER.

SO WHAT YOU SAID STANDARD WAS TYPICALLY A YEAR.

A YEAR.

I, I'D GO WITH PUT IT IN THERE FOR A YEAR.

THINK A YEAR.

I MEAN, Y'ALL, I AGREE WITH THAT.

I, I, I, I'M, I'M A PROPONENT OF JUST MORE JUST, I, I'M, I'M GONNA TELL YOU, I'M OKAY WITH 60 AS AS USUAL.

I'VE BEEN INVOLVED DIRECTLY WITH THE CITY AND OTHER CITIES PRIOR TO THIS 32 YEAR HISTORY.

I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER SEEN THAT HAPPEN.

MM-HMM .

NO.

IT'S, I DON'T THINK, AGAIN, I, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD THING TO HAVE IN THERE, BUT I I, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT SOMEBODY COMES OFF COUNCIL AND GOES RIGHT TO WORK FOR THE CITY THAT THEY WERE A COUNCIL MEMBER OF.

I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT.

I'VE SEEN IT IN SARA'S CASE WHERE WE'RE FORMER EMPLOYEES AND THEN BECOME COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND THEN AFTER THE TOUR, THIS IS, THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GOING BACK.

WE'VE LEARNED OUR LESSONS, WE'VE WORN ALL THE HATS AND WE'RE DONE.

YEAH.

SO, SO ONE YEAR, UM, I, I LIKE THE WAY IT IS, BUT PUT IT FOR ONE YEAR.

ONE YEAR.

10 CITY MANAGER AND DIRECTOR.

LET'S DO 2, 2, 2.

I LIKE ONE.

I LIKE TWO.

I LIKE ONE.

I LIKE ONE.

WE'LL GO WITH ONE.

ONE, I THINK ONE ONE YEAR.

OKAY.

THAT WAS CITY MANAGERS AND DIRECTOR POSITIONS.

THAT WAS A CONSENSUS OF FOUR TO THREE.

NO, THREE TO FOUR TO TWO WE'RE MISSING SOMETHING.

OH, YOU'RE RIGHT, MAN.

IS HE MY LIFE? THE OTHER, HE'S SO SKINNY.

WE DON'T KNOW.

I DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE.

WHY DO WE HAVE NEXT? HE'S WITHERING AWAY.

ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE MOVING ALONG.

WE ARE ON DIVISION THREE.

THIS IS OUR LONGEST SECTION.

SO, UM, THE FIRST SECTION IS 8 0 5 REPORTING OF THE ETHICS VIOLATIONS.

UM, YOU WILL NOTICE ON THE SCREEN AND THEN ALSO ON THE COPY YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PLACES WHERE THE WORDING, THE ARTICLE OR THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CROSSED OUT.

AND THE SECTION TWO DASH 8 0 3 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT HAS BEEN PUT IN ITS PLACE.

SO YOU'LL SEE THAT, I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT FOUR TIMES I CHANGED THIS, BECAUSE IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, WE TALKED ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES AND WE WANNA BE VERY, VERY CLEAR.

YOU CAN ONLY FILE COMPLAINTS FOR THE STANDARDS OF CONDUCT IN 8 0 3.

SO I WENT THROUGH AND CLARIFIED THAT IN THE REST OF IT.

SO I WANTED YOU TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU.

SO YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IN A COUPLE OTHER SECTIONS.

SO, SO WITH THAT, UM, IN TERMS OF THE REPORTING OF THE VIOLATIONS, SO THE FIRST SECTION A IS ABOUT, UH, THE FORM THAT THERE WILL BE A, A FORM THAT HAS TO BE COMPLETED AND TURNED INTO THE CITY CLERK.

UH, THE NEXT SECTION TALKS ABOUT THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR THE COMPLAINT.

SO THIS SPECIFIES THAT YOU CAN COMPLAIN ON THINGS WITHIN THE PAST 365 DAYS, OR WHICHEVER IS LATER OR UP TO 45 DAYS ONCE IT IS KNOWN.

SO YOU CAN'T JUST GO BACK AND JOURNEY THROUGH TIME AND PULL UP ANYTHING YOU WANT TO FROM THE PAST.

UM, TO FILE COMPLAINTS.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME RECENCY TO IT.

THE NEXT ITEM IS THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPLAINT.

UM, SO THIS SIMPLY STATES THAT THE CITY CLERK IS GONNA REVIEW THE FORM, MAKE SURE THAT IT IS ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLETE, PROVIDES IF IT'S NOT THAT THE CITY CLERK THEN NOTIFIES AND, AND GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT.