this will just ski
yeah it's Hodge dr. day key mr. Blanchet
you're mr. coy judge Wendell min yeah we
have a qualm and thank you very much
according to our agenda the first item
is public comment we have no public or
no comment okay second item is approval
of the minutes and and they were sent
out everyone had a copy as anyone has
comment on it
mr. coy one correction under six the
last paragraph says mr. Kouri enquired
about the confidentially complaints I
believe that was dr. day he said when I
looked at the video yeah okay anyone
else have any comment on the minutes
solution yeah we have a motion to
approve motion to approve the minutes in
a second all right we have a motion and
a second and so we'll have a vote all
those in favor say aye aye opposed nay
no opposition okay so they're approved
all right now are you ready
these will ever be oh good I'm glad to
hear that we need to note one other
appearance
yes dr. Drake II just note this came in
and now where you will have a report on
complaints file from our legal brain
judge ones no I'm just an advisor in
that I know but you got a brain there
was a complaint that is that was filed
and I think it maybe be helpful if I
kind of try to go through the chronology
of some of these I guess we were last
together back in October and I think
that's when the or no December I guess
disapproved a meeting then in January on
January 11th I received from the from
Diane the fact that a complaint had been
received into their office the day
before so I came in and picked it up
and I acknowledge receipt of the
complaint by phone to the complaint on
the same date actually talked to the
person and and at that time she advised
that she might be withdrawing the
complaint because she said she had in
her mind as to without there was
jurisdiction issues whether or not that
was appropriate as far as being filed
with the Commission here excuse me she
also advised us to repair in a more
detailed statement which did
subsequently come in I advised her that
I had commitments for the rest of the
week at that time would not be able to
get into the actual work on the
complaint until the following week on
the 19th I received an email stating she
was withdrawing the complaint which I
acknowledge so at that point in time I
felt the matter was was done there was
no further action on my part and it
really had not done any type of
other than reading through it a couple
of times hadn't really done any type of
work on it then on February 1st I
received by email a copy of a
whistleblower complaint which is another
section that's at the end of the
government ethics see if I can make
reference to it real quick here what are we calling the first thing that
was the first thing was a weather was an
ethics complaint okay
the second item filed in February was a
whistleblower complaint which I think my
recollection is it came by way of the
auditor's office first I think it was
filed with him with carbon copies sent
to carbon copies extra emails being sent
to you and I'll have to explain that to
myself and I don't know the other
individuals but by means of the email a
copy of being sent to me I acknowledge
receipt of that at that point in time
clear back when all this began as I had
advised the Chairman and the state's
attorney's office and people here I gave
up my license so I am not in a position
to give legal advice I will not go into
that type of process whatsoever
so when due to the nature of the
allegations in the complaint I advised
the Chairman wheeler and also I think I
had a conversation with mr.
Quinn advised him that I felt is
necessary that we have outside
independent legal counsel why did it
come from did you say the recorders
office auditor's office auditors are
right why did it come from the otter ah
there's honor the let me get back to the
provision when there's a whistleblower
complaint again this is section and
division seven section two dash two
eight six whenever any officer employee
of Kankakee County reason believes
evidence exists that another officer
employee has perpetuated gross
mismanagement gross misuse or waste of
public resources or funds abuse of
authority in connection with
administration of public program etc etc
shall bring the evidence to the
immediate attention of the state's
eternity the auditor or the employees
department head so that's how come it
went that way and there's some things
that you know discussion as to ordinance
revisions which is the next matter and
that which I'll get into that have come
to light because of this this
whistleblower complaint but nevertheless
back to the fact that it came from the
auditor's office that I contacted the
Chairman's office again outside legal
counsel was procured from the appellate
process prosecutor's office which is
standard process if a state's attorney's
office cannot handle it and through the
course of working with the this attorney
the two determination was made that
there was no jurisdiction
for us to be able to consider this
whistleblower complaint
the reason being at the time that the
whistleblower complaint was filed the
individual was not an employee of the
county was not was not an employee of
the county and again if you look at the
first sentence of 2 - 2 86 when any
officer or employee of Kankakee County
reasonably believes that they can
basically file this type of an action
purpose I believe over all of the
whistleblower protection is so employees
of a governmental entity do not have to
be fearful of losing their job if they
file these type of complaints so again
that's that's the protection that's
afforded out there again this individual
is or at the time of the filing of the
whistleblower complaint was no longer an
employee at the county I don't really
know the complete details of it and that
I know that the person was discharged I
don't know how agreeable was I you know
based on what's contained and some of it
there was some disagreement in the
complaints with the different things
that have been found there was some
difficulty that was occur between the
department head and the employee and
again because of the fact that I'm
approaching this at the current time as
I would any other time that a complaint
is filed I'm not going to be bringing
out names even though the gentleman
sitting over here is full aware of who
the names are and everything I'm still
going to approach it from the
perspective that
I don't think it's proper for me to
discuss the individuals name out in the
general public however I will put out
that the individual involved was an
employee of the state's attorney's
office that is why I felt that it was
necessary that outside independent
counsel be procured for two different I
you know I I wanted this group to be
able to say we had no impact or
influence from within the office and I
felt it was advisable for the state's
attorney's office
that they not be involved because it
removed them from being subject to an
argument that you know they weren't
shooting straight I just felt that it
was necessary that independent counsel
be appointed and ultimately chairman
wheeler agreed with that also so we are
now at a stage where I'm in the
ordinance we're supposed to give notice
well let me let me step back again in
that I sent a copy of the legal opinion
out to the complaint I got an email back
and basically advised the complainant
that in all fairness to them I and the
gist of the decision or the opinion from
the outside legal adviser was that due
to the fact that this person was no
longer employee and employee they were
not protected by the whistleblower
ordinance again I'm not gonna give out
legal advice that's not my capacity here
even though it talks about advisor
that's another thing I want to talk
about as far as the name of this I'm
supposed to investigate as to whether or
not there's a basis to bring an action
in front of the
ethics commission I advise the
complainin that this was the opinion
that was given by the outside legal
counsel the response I got was I
expected as much and in the letter I had
said I was going to give this person 28
days to file a response if they were a
disagreement as to that legal
determination the response again I got
back was that's what I expected I didn't
know how to take that was I to take that
as being I expected they were going to
find a way not to deal with it or I
expected that was going to be the result
because that's what my own that's what
this person's own independent legal
investigation had determined so I let it
run the 28 days and right about the time
28 days was running then I started
trying to get a hold of Toby so I could
come and report to the Commission in
this fashion as to what was occurring
because again you know there wasn't any
obligation to let the members of the
body know anything until we knew where
we were at with the investigation
unfortunately our ability to communicate
we were having difficulties until I
tried the old-fashioned thing of call
nor house phone well again the the
initial complaint that was withdrawn was
filed January 11th the whistleblower
complaint was filed February 1st
so some of the delay was Andy Guinness
is I guess this is kind of a learning
experience again causing us to want to
discuss things not only amongst this
body but also after this group has had
an opportunity to discuss it but also to
discuss it with the chairman and others
at the county board a process to where
we can expedite it as far as getting the
outside legal counsel if it's necessary
because you know this initially was
phone calls to chairman wheeler and then
the process of getting somebody who
retained that it all took some some time
of that and and I guess I I need to note
the fact that there were some other
allegations contained in this complaint
that also were directed toward the
chairman so it was even difficult having
that kind of conversation County George
chairman of County Board Chairman yeah
not yourself thank you sorry did leave
that open-ended yes there were some
allegations contained in the complaint
and the whistleblower action that were
directed toward chairman wheeler again
another reason why I felt that it just
should have been completely outside the
state's attorney's office as far as the
assistance the legal assistance that was
given but again even that made it
difficult for me having to have that
conversation with him and since he's a
subject matter of what contained in the
complaint so as it's something that we
need to maybe discuss as to how can we
create a process to where outside legal
assistance can be procured in those type
of touchy situations hey you know quite
admittedly the the ordinance of that
we're dealing with I know when we were
looking at the ordinance when it was
being drafted the complaint was involved
with the drafting of the ordinance so I
the person is fully aware as far as what
the contents are but I think at this
point in time based on the
recommendation from there and the
research from the attorney I feel that
the fact first of all that she the
person would through the complaint and
then secondly based on the analysis and
legal opinion of the outside attorney
stating that we don't have jurisdiction
it's my determination that there my
recommendation I'm sorry that notice
should be sent to the person saying
specification is closed no further
action is going to be taken well I think
mr. wounds woman you did exceptional
work on this it was a difficult
complaint to start with and the outside
legal advice was very good and what I
think in our case in our responsibility
would be if there was any question about
this to continue on but there doesn't
seem to be any question about the
validity of the resolutions that were
drawn you know yeah well
here's the next sticky wicket did okay
I'm sorry
can't get comfortable it's ticking Ricky
that wicked that came in yesterday
afternoon of course I didn't see it
until about 7:30 8 o'clock last night
when I finally sat in front of the
computer the complaint advised that that
they had learned from a reporter at The
Daily Journal that the county does not
believe the ethics complaint I file were
closed I guess it's a learning
experience for everyone to that end when
the committee does closed the complaints
due to the lack of jurisdiction I want
to exercise my right under the ordinance
to have the ethics advisory refer the
complaints to the appropriate agency I
don't know that that would be the US
Attorney for the Central District of
Illinois because of the alleged misuse
of public funds by state official or to
the Attorney General or the office of
the executive inspector general or all
three to determine the jurisdiction but
I wanted to give you the heads-up that I
will not be requesting them so again
here's where we're at
you have an individual that files
complaint would you the complaint you
didn't have an individual that files a
whistleblower complaint but we don't
have any jurisdiction on it are we then
obligated or is the Commission obligated
to send that on someplace else
well she feels that that word should go
why does she now do that I guess there
is a provision under the ordinance that
you know suggest that if the
determination is made that we don't have
authority then I should refer to this
agency here's the difficulty again it
puts me in this position I first of all
would have to do all the investigation
to make a legal determination that there
is a basis for
complaint to be filed against you know
with another entity again something else
I think we need to look at as to the
contents of the ordinance what would we
be obliged to to make that determination
I mean if she is of the complaintant and
they're saying that this is where it
should go then we I think our only
decision is do we put it in an envelope
and send it to them or do we tell her to
do it
what no yeah but I know you don't want
to spend the time or have the feeling
that you can be responsible for that
kind of illegal investigation I don't
have the wherewithal whether it be
licensed legal research tools etc and I
guess quite frankly the time that's
right and is the first complaint that
she withdrew that's sort of a moot
question because she did not refile it
right the contents of what were in there
most of what was in there was also
contained within the whistleblower so
she sort of did refile right III guess
my thoughts on it is if there would be
an obligation on our part to take
further action with it then any time let
me let me start over again
if a person files a complaint and it's
rejected and let's say there's no basis
to it whatsoever but then that person
contacting you say I want this referred
to the appropriate agency that then
places us each time to have to research
everything and I don't understand why we
would have to research it well it's if
it needs to go to another agency they
need to do these well that's the problem
that the our ordinance right now and I
basically suggest that we should refer
if we make the determination that there
is a legitimate complaint yeah a basis
for some type of further action that
should be taken by someone and again
that's something we're going to have to
look at in that and when we redress it
in that but right now I have no
documentation from outside legal counsel
that says that there was any basis to
the allegation of the complaint
therefore I have you know even if if
there is just again the decision to us
was based upon jurisdiction you know
that we just don't have jurisdiction
therefore we can't proceed the outside
little council was not requested to
research
whether or not there is any validity or
not
to the allegations of the whistleblower
complaint therefore we don't have any
basis you know I don't have anything to
convey to you that suggests that there
is some viability or there's some
validity to this complaint I don't have
anything at all like that to suggest one
way or the other that basically says you
know I think there's something there or
I can't say I don't think there's
something there but I don't have
anything at all to basically give to you
to make a determination of referral and
basically if I remember correctly all it
is in the complaint is this listing of
possible problems correct and did they
not have if I remember correctly did she
now have some contact with another
agency that would be County Department
that would be involved in that
well the whistleblower complaint was
filed in the auditor's office if there's
a misappropriation of funds that is
taking place then presumably that would
be something the auditor would be
looking at well that's what I'm saying
ma'am if they've already seen it maybe
they need to discuss that with us oh
okay well but we don't seem to have a
jurisdiction anyway because she's not an
employee correct
so I guess my perspective at this point
in time is that a communication would be
sent to her advising her that you know
because of the lack of jurisdiction no
further action be taken and that we have
nothing to base referral to another
agency
why did we think there's a Mary or can
it be it so we're just passing it on
without an opinion or if we passed on
we're wasting people's time I think
there is not and again I I think that's
the the difficulty that could arise is
if every time a complaint is received
and we're asked to pass upon to another
entity these are not some type of
requirement that we have a basis or a
reason why we're referring it to this
other entity which would require this
legal delving then you know you're not
interested in doing or probably legal to
do I don't know if any of it that I did
right now would be for my own personal
curiosity in in that that you know I
write I would pass it on to anyone else
and that well if I just it seemed that
also there's some area of choosing in
this particular thing as to what was to
be done with the funds you know yeah I
and again that's that's a whole issue
that I'm not personally wearing that but
you know you hear things through the the
grapevine that you know there has been
maybe some discussions that have taken
place about these things in the past and
that but oh right right
she did say them you know I
from my prior years from sitting up
where you're sitting at the current time
in the seven years on this board I know
there are certain parameters about how
different funds can be used and you know
dick Winkle who was the auditor at that
time that you know was very you know
every TIA to be crossed every I had to
be not a net cetera et cetera than that
I don't know where things are I mean
that's well five to thirty years ago so
I I don't know you know things change as
far as the rules the regulations case
law that may be interpreted things that
succumb I'm not in a position to say
yeah I think there's something here or
there isn't because I haven't researched
or looked at it and again I'm not in
that position to give that type of
recommendation to this this group well
and that's also saying that we don't
know as you are saying exactly how
discretionary funds can be used and well
and again as to the question of referral
and just trying to look at the overall
picture as to how to proceed in the
future do we want to be in a position or
does this Commission want to be in a
position where somebody can raise an
allegation however general or how
specific but with no maybe no legal
authority specifically cited but if
there is legal authority cited this
Commission doesn't know one way or the
other without legal counsel is there
some ability to that
it leads me back to the situation where
the Commission I think whenever there
are complaints that are filed are going
to need the assistance of legal counsel
at times which under the ordinance is
normally going to be the state's
attorney's office right this situation
is because of the parties involved
created the dilemma to where the state's
attorney's office really couldn't be
directly involved right
and again it's food for thought of
something we need to address in the
future on we have to consider if we need
to hire and it would be probably on a
hiring basis legal advice that could
become an expensive thing I mean five
dollars an hour or something at least
you know I guess I could say you get
what you pay for
yeah Lenny SEC said that often now we
are typing or so are dating ourselves is
that what we're trying to avoid we think
it's unnecessary we did it in this case
then anybody in the future would expect
the same well that's part of it but I I
guess I'm thinking from your perspective
do you want to be perceived as an entity
that willy nilly hands things off
without really having a basis for you
know dude when if you're going to be
sending in a letter to the Attorney
General or a federal prosecutor do you
want to get in a
be perceived as somebody that just
constantly is sending stuff that you
know they're gonna to almost every time
that it comes into their office or do
you want to be perceived as it entity
that if they've taken the time to send
this to me is something that we need to
look at but that also says that as the
complaints come in you do make a
judgment about whether or not you should
proceed in investigating you know and I
would have a tendency to think that it
would be more often than that something
that you could ask the state's
attorney's office to do because it would
not be involved
normal scheme of things the way I
perceive how we all operate together is
the complaint is received I receive that
I investigate it I you know it's
different than doing legal research on
it if there's issues that arise during
the course of my investigation then I
would contact the state's attorney's
office and say this is something I need
some guidance on as to I think as a
legal issue not an investigative issue
then once all that is compiled together
then through the looking at the
ordinance it's a question of sending it
to or presenting it to this body my
recommendation as to whether or not you
should proceed or not proceed one of the
words that they use in the our little
law is gross you know so now do we say
well if you're a whistleblower and
you're saying that some officer in the
county spent a hundred dollars in an
area to think it was proper is that
gross or do we say we would look at it
if it was going to be forty thousand
dollars or it was going to be a hundred
thousand you know I think maybe that's
something we should just
and it's two changes in it to be more
specific which might help right and once
we get by this you know again the next
item on the agenda is discussion as far
as potential changes which quite
honestly we're going to need the state's
attorney's office to be evolved with him
but I guess you know and I kind of
anticipated they might have been here
but then again once I saw they weren't
here I probably understand why they
aren't here it's you know they probably
wanted to keep that hands-off approach
but yeah I understand but eventually you
know today yet I still want to go
through areas that I feel that things
need to be addressed and we may have to
set up another meeting where then the
state's attorney can come in they have
the discussion with us and how many
ordinance revisions do you really think
there needs to be or do they need to be
a general classification a definition is
to you know whistleblower on a money
basis what are we talking about well
yeah I mean if we could maybe see that -
the next one yeah I guess if to the next
you know what I like to do is just see
what the Commission's thoughts are or if
you want to take formal action on it as
far as well my personal opinion is that
since we've been invited by outside
legal a lawyer you know who seems seem
to know what he was doing and whatnot
that this particular complaint is that
germane for us because it was made by
somebody who is not employed and that
seems to for us end the situation the
question just becomes then do we send it
on right right
would have the right to do it on their
own right they could say we definitely
and this person is knowledgeable and
long yeah well I would well I think you
probably need to address two things is
one make a determination as to whether
or not any further action should be
taken on the complaint that's one aspect
of it and the other aspect of it is
there going to be referral to any other
entity let's address that first issue if
you want to make a motion determining
whether or not we should do any further
work on that particular complaint wait
for their work especially given the fact
that there's been competent outside
legal advice is there a second to that
we need the second before we have a
discussion yeah Mike was this person a
former employee or no well first of all
I guess you you want a second we do we
need a second before we can do that I'll
second the motion came the question the
question was was this person a former
employee or never an employee former employee all right any
more discussion questions does everyone
understand the motion that we would end
our action on this complaint based on
the fact that we do not have
jurisdiction as given that information
given to us by competent legal
all those in favor say aye all opposed nay
okay the eyes have it so we will be done
handling this unless it comes back in
our dreams right now the second issue as
to whether or not we should refer this
complaint to another office as was
suggested by the complaint
anyone got any we would need a motion to
- not - if you want it that way or if
you if your motion is to not then you
have to vote yes I'll make a motion that
we do not refer this on to an additional
agency is there a second second
mr. coy that we do not refer this
complaint to any other agency any
questions discussion all those in favor
of this ordinance motion motion aye aye
any opposition
all right the according to our vote with
them we will not send this particular
complaint on to any other agency at this
point in time well and I guess I'll
state openly I will convey this to the
complainant by email this is the other
difficulty with through all the years
I've always had either a secretary or a
clerk working with me yeah I the person
has responded in that fashion and
acknowledge receipt of things in that
fashion so I will advise the individual
in that fashion but again with that
being done as we segue into the next
item on the agenda if we can I'm gonna
need some assistance probably a time
probably for communication as you stand
there and then maybe I don't know that
maybe somebody in administrative office
or state's attorney's office or wherever
that that well the next item on the
agenda is the discussion as to ordinance
revisions so let me go through some of
the things that I found as a result of
this well things I guess maybe we need
to note and then maybe my suggestion
would be is to set up a meeting and
maybe they could be conveyed over to the
state's attorney's office on the issue
of ordinance revisions and then maybe
subsequently set up in a meeting to
discuss them further but at least give
whoever would it be assigned this task
the opportunity to to look at them a
little bit I think that's right too and
I think that we can as individuals look
at the ordinance and see things that we
meet now after having been through this
process
might understand why we might need
changes well here's the first if you
look at it you know you have Division
one definitions then you go into
division - you have prohibited political
activities and all the sub parts and
then you have Division three gift ban
and several different sub parts mm-hmm
what else is there there's nothing else
that we really you know it's basically
apparently the way it's drafted now to
monitor political activity of
individuals that are members of the
county employee well what is is there a
Bamm county employees taking part in
political activities it's just basically
during compensated time and things of
that right so I mean there are a lot of
specifics about it here and they're
specific as far as gifts there's some
specifics about you know so what I'm
sayin you know women complaining about
being treated poorly and no well I mean
sexual harassment I there's not a
session on that there's not so well
nobody ever did that in the county well
I guess volunteering which one is Fiji
okay the county the county does have an
adopted sexual harassment policy and
it's outside of this process because it
becomes a human resource issue so they
make the complaints and so again I'm not
saying you don't want to address it I'm
just letting you know that that's we do
have something on file and adopted
it was just had to be redone because of
the state law changing so we chose
account II has a process for somebody
yes - where do they go to file that they
go to human resources and then if the HR
is not available they file it through
the Chairman's office and then I
disperse that to Human Resources and to
the state's attorney very good thank you
mr. chairman wheeler but again the the
issue is right now as I look at this
ordinance there's only two things
specifically contained in it there was
to deal with right which is again
allegations of political activity by
employees you know worst case scenario
during time of employment or during work
the other thing is a question of gifts
that receipt you know some of us working
in a department receiving monetary
entitlements what about this particular
allegation of misspending of money how
does that well that would be in the
whistleblower but okay looking through
this ordinance at the current time I
don't see anything that specifically
puts it under the auspices of the Ethics
Commission so that's another issue out
there that again you know you have the
one section of the ordinance that talks
about those two specific things then you
have an ordinance whistle blower
ordinance but it doesn't say
specifically that it shows who the
report is to be filed with but again let
me go back
yeah it talked about being filed with
these other individuals like the auditor
and right the auditor to do okay well it
says all officers employees should be
obligated cooperate during the course of
an investigation and comply with the
request for information from the Ethics
Commission and state's attorney I guess
it kind of suggests that it's in our
bailiwick but it doesn't say
specifically that all complaints should
go you know should follow the processes
of the Ethics Commission ordinance and
you know maybe it's just some language
like that may specifically put it there
well I think the other item Mattoon like
you said about the assistance to you
again if there's neccessity of
independent legal counsel and as far as
communications that may need to be sent
by the ethics adviser which is I say
that again advisor and I I sent this out
way back when we started working on this
that I had difficulty with the
designation as advisor because again
that suggests that I'm going to be
advising as far as legal issues in that
I guess we call you well I you know I
don't feel like I put an administrator
investigator office I actually officer
you know ethics officer you know
something otherwise something that they
said I thought in one of maybe the first
copy of the Ethics Commission
where
there is the plaintiff file - we've got
an answer okay the the original ethics
ordinances was drafted as you heard by
the person who filed the first complaint
was it said the state's attorney is the
ethics adviser okay I asked to have that
changed because what if it was somebody
in the state's attorney's office had
filed the complaint it was provided back
to the individual who wrote the the
ordinance and they changed it well we
have since realized that the state's
attorney is not an employee of the
county and only ethics violations
against the state's attorney can be made
to the courts in Springfield and I may
be a little bit off on the specifics but
it has to be made with the other ethics
okay because they're not employee of the
county hence we're in this weird spot
right now and I think that's what
McCants talking about here and so when
we talk about ethics advisor
nine times out of ten and I hope never
again do we have to go through this but
if we do and involves the state's
attorney's office and requires an
outside counsel so I just want to
provide that how this all came about
because when we wanted to do this and do
the whistleblower and put it through the
county board it was the intent and
removing me and the state's attorney
from having anything to do with this
process but what we didn't realize and
we weren't advised by the individual who
wrote this was is that the state's
attorney is not subject to this ethics
complaint process here on the local
level only to what happens in
Springfield and I hope that makes sense
the way that I say that so another thing
that's contained in the ordinance at the
current time and I just recently
pass this on to mr. Quinn in the state's
attorney's office is all of those that
have served on a public body before
remember the nun statement that used to
file you know none there every answer
was no nun finance statement of economic
interests very okay the ordinance is
drafted at the current time says that
I'm supposed to review those hmm
I haven't seen one yet I believe they're
due May 1st and believe me I'm not
looking forward to sitting there I I
don't know where they're going at the
current time where they've been filed
previously okay and see right now it
says I'm supposed to be looking at those
I don't know if it's necessary I don't
know how many of you get but again I
think that's something that we need to
before apply any other answers the nun
yeah yeah so that's one thing is in the
ordinance of the current check out the
name you like the best
well I guess if if I'm gonna continue
looking at the nun statements and do the
investigation then maybe it should be
administrator there's kind of an
administrative type of capacity if this
if those things are gonna go by the
wayside someplace else and all and it's
gonna be more of Investigation then
maybe it's a six investigator I worry
about it the title investigator in terms
of your feelings about you know the law
license and all that you know but if you
like being an investigator I've never
been sworn in with them had a badge or
anything either of them so I mean an
administrators fine with me in that or
something of that nature
okay which kind of makes sense
ethics Commission administrator because
you're going to make the decision as to
whether or not the complaints should be
distributed to the rest of the members
right I perceive that probably in the
majority of instances of things that
have brought to me I mean if it's if
it's something I guess that's completely
frivolous you know I would report it and
probably not do much of anything with it
right but the vast majority I'm probably
going to be in a situation where we're
going to sit down and have this
discussion as far as complaints that are
filed and if they're a hefty complaint
it should be that we would get some kind
of legal counsel whether it was the
state's attorney's office or somebody
outside of there before we made a
decision because they think we have to
be very careful as since the complaint
was given to the reporter you know we
have to worry about and we're saying
that what was in it was not applicable
or whatever how do we protect the names
as people have been
spoken about although nothing has been
determined or even suggested that they
actually did anything truly wrong you
know so well just as and I'm not
suggesting that this is what's occurring
here yeah okay but just as I don't think
a newspaper reporter would want to be
used by someone to do their work for
them I don't think this Commission wants
to be in that position either as a
newspaper reporter I tell you that if
you get something in which you delve a
little bit or talk to the complainant or
whatever and you think that there's
something to suggest that it's not being
handled properly you would deal with it
as best you could but you know again we
don't want putting out people's names of
any kind either the point or the person
about to whom they're complaining when
there hasn't been any investigation into
it or any thing that triggers an
investigation and I understand totally
what you mean about being used because
God knows we get used I never did that
to you told me huh I never did that to
know but you do have people off the
street who you know have to tell you
about this terrible thing and it's wrong
and believe me I you know I through this
whole instance I have made every attempt
for both the complaint to feel that they
had been treated fairly
as well as the subject matter of the
absolute plant to be treated fairly in
that I I perceive it as trying to
fulfill my role just as I would have
attempted to fulfill it for the last 22
years while I was sitting on the bench
you know it's not me to make that final
decision in many of these cases it's for
somebody else to make the decision you
know if there's a jury there there has
to be some indication and and you're a
good person to make a judgement about
that and and this whole thing is
judgment unless it would go into a court
situation and it's obviously not in our
opinion meriting and a further
investigation
legal the last item as far as a concern
that I had that I had voiced way back
when when we were putting the ordinance
together is that the ordinance and I'm
sure this this wasn't taken out that but
provides that the ethics officer shall
prosecute the complaint and again this
has been my primary concern of that that
I think if we change the title to
administrator then it will be the ethics
officers duty to administer it well
let's see right now the way that is did
it's a section two - two five eight the
ethics advisory l'ainte before the
Commission and carries the burden of
proving the allegations against the
respondent by preponderance of the
evidence that again puts me in a
position as being an a prosecutor which
and I think in that it's referring to
the state's attorney well and but right
now it's the languages myself when I had
proposed clear back and I guess I sent
this to mr. doar do well several people
were involved in the communication that
but include mr. mr. Quinn and
interesting enough for the complaint but
I what I proposed was that prior I said
basically prior to the prosecution of
the complaint when we get to this stage
with as a prosecution of the complaint
it appears that the advisor officer is
expected to do all I'm expected to do
would be administrative review of ethics
statements which I previously discussed
or investigate the possibility that you
know a complaint should proceed I
suggested that an alternative approach
would be once the investigation is
completed and complaint has been allowed
to be filed the further procurement of
information and hearing and the making
of the record would be conducted by
members of the Commission after they
received all the information requested
to be a documentary evidence or live
testimony they would then be required to
issue the decision they would need to
conclude that the evidence had proven
the complaint by preponderance of the
evidence before they could take
disciplinary action against the
respondent so suggestion I made at that
point in time was that all right I've
done the investigation I feel that
further inquiry should be made with an
opportunity to be heard before the
Commission the Commission could request
additional people to attend could allow
for live testimony to be provided you
basically would be sitting in bunk
together here
what's being presented you would have
the investigative information that I
would procure you would allow the
complainant to come in if they wish to
do so you would you could call in other
people you would then make it a decision
so I don't know if there's really a need
to have somebody that's actually there
prosecuting the case right especially
when we feel if it gets to that point
we're going to have whatever legal
authority we need you know either the
state's attorney or outside correct and
but that's that's those are things that
have been there from the beginning that
I feel are still there as well as other
things that I feel have been brought up
right due to what has been about well I
think that's a that isn't a matter for
thought I think that your problems if
you have made those clear to Quinn right
yes and so he should be aware when we
notify him that we are going to have
this other meeting at which we're going
to talk about changes that we feel need
to be made revisions so what we need to
do then I do believe is establish a date
for another meeting
all right everybody pull out your
calendars
kind of timeframe do you think we look
at your going away right now the whole
county knows Toby yes I would suggest
probably you know you know I don't know
what mr. Quinn's workload is at the
current time and what his vacations you
know hopefully he's gonna have the
opportunity to have some summer vacation
and that too and that but maybe a 30-day
time frame I mean hopefully we won't
have anything else show up between now
and then but we'll do the best we can
yes in July so are we talking possibly
August something yeah okay can we talk
about it's a Tuesday acceptable to
people
Tuesday's I this seventh August 7 and
should plan on it being not a 15-minute
meeting right oh okay we can do it a
little earlier if we want to make it
let's find like I don't move much before
11:00 10 o'clock
yeah is that alright that's fine with me
yeah well that's true too I guess yeah I
think yeah that would be fine with me
and then at the current
and if by chance I give that comb and
find
yes something on another calendar okay
thank you good all righty anything else
that other business anyone have
additional business older new business
eyes I think the press time to speak if
they have the problem that's what I like
[Laughter]
okay then I think we can be adjourned
all we need a motion to adjourn
it isn't enough if I say no okay
choice got a motion to adjourn second
Vicki sounds second all those in favor
say aye
I put a motion to adjourn to was not
negotiable
you can't have an eye