1
00:00:04,080 --> 00:00:10,719
And uh we could have a roll call.
>> Commissioner Campbell

2
00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:12,719
» here.
>> Commissioner Elgy.

3
00:00:11,920 --> 00:00:14,400
» Yes.
>> Commissioner Yoder

4
00:00:13,840 --> 00:00:17,639
» here.
>> All present.

5
00:00:23,439 --> 00:00:33,200
I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic

6
00:00:29,840 --> 00:00:40,280
for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and

7
00:00:36,559 --> 00:00:40,280
justice for all.

8
00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:53,280
» Thank you.
I think I could hear everybody's

9
00:00:50,399 --> 00:00:58,399
individual voice on
on the pledge with so few of your

10
00:00:56,399 --> 00:01:00,559
» and if we're going to have a moment of
silence. It would be nice if you said

11
00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:05,119
that.
>> Did I not say that?

12
00:01:02,239 --> 00:01:08,640
» I just was
>> you just said let's do the pledge.

13
00:01:07,439 --> 00:01:13,920
» Oh, okay.
>> I just knew it was a

14
00:01:10,880 --> 00:01:16,920
» I thoroughly agree with doing that.
>> Yes.

15
00:01:17,119 --> 00:01:23,600
But I don't want to appear to be
>> the only one doing it. Just their

16
00:01:20,880 --> 00:01:29,119
district. Sorry about that.
>> So we have approval of agenda

17
00:01:26,640 --> 00:01:32,720
additions.
>> Make that motion.

18
00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:35,520
» Support.
>> Okay. All in favor?

19
00:01:35,119 --> 00:01:37,360
» I
>> I

20
00:01:35,920 --> 00:01:42,079
» I
>> opposed.

21
00:01:39,439 --> 00:01:48,880
any uh
declarations of uh conflicts uh before

22
00:01:46,399 --> 00:01:52,960
we determine what a declaration of
conflict is.

23
00:01:50,720 --> 00:01:59,680
» I'm a human being. Does that count?
>> That counts for everything. I think that

24
00:01:56,320 --> 00:02:00,880
that's important to to have.
>> Commissioner,

25
00:02:00,399 --> 00:02:07,360
» yes.
>> I'm sorry. Um

26
00:02:03,439 --> 00:02:11,280
I the the minutes were not on the
agenda. Um, they're on the

27
00:02:10,000 --> 00:02:15,280
» Oh, right.
>> I'm sorry about that. I meant to get

28
00:02:13,280 --> 00:02:20,000
with I meant to get with Jenny and
totally forgot until we just did that.

29
00:02:18,480 --> 00:02:24,319
So, whether you want to approve them
today or go to the next committee

30
00:02:21,680 --> 00:02:27,040
meeting, whatever you want to do.
>> You have four time.

31
00:02:25,760 --> 00:02:33,280
» Let's get her done.
>> I agree.

32
00:02:30,000 --> 00:02:38,000
» So, do we need to amend the agenda?
>> Yes.

33
00:02:34,480 --> 00:02:41,319
So I make a motion to amend the agenda
to approve.

34
00:02:41,680 --> 00:02:46,640
» Thank you.
>> Support.

35
00:02:44,800 --> 00:02:52,560
All in favor say I.
>> I. Oppos.

36
00:02:49,920 --> 00:02:58,239
» Pass unanimously.
Okay. So

37
00:02:56,560 --> 00:03:05,280
wasn't a whole lot of action but a lot
of discussion which I think is

38
00:03:01,200 --> 00:03:05,280
accurately stated here.

39
00:03:15,440 --> 00:03:26,959
I note the the uh uh
the part about having legal look over

40
00:03:23,360 --> 00:03:31,599
this and lest anyone think that some
legal mind

41
00:03:29,040 --> 00:03:35,680
here put finish put those finishing
touches on it legal. I thought Matt did

42
00:03:34,080 --> 00:03:40,640
a really nice job of
>> he did and I'm I'm seeing in the minutes

43
00:03:38,319 --> 00:03:43,120
um saying well we can approve the
minutes and we then we can discuss them.

44
00:03:42,400 --> 00:03:47,680
» Sure.
>> Should we have a legal review?

45
00:03:45,120 --> 00:03:49,920
» Yes.
>> Should we Yeah,

46
00:03:49,120 --> 00:03:52,640
» we already did.
>> Yeah, we did.

47
00:03:51,120 --> 00:03:54,879
» I did. I said so we
>> Oh, yes. I'm sorry. I didn't hear what

48
00:03:54,239 --> 00:03:57,879
you said.
>> Yeah.

49
00:03:58,480 --> 00:04:03,560
Um, I'll vote to approve the minutes as
presented.

50
00:04:03,599 --> 00:04:09,000
» All in favor say I. I opposed.

51
00:04:09,599 --> 00:04:13,319
I move to.

52
00:04:13,680 --> 00:04:21,280
Okay.
And did we already do declarations?

53
00:04:18,000 --> 00:04:26,880
Think we did. None heard, none
expressed. Since there is no public,

54
00:04:24,639 --> 00:04:33,919
it's kind of tough to gather public
comment.

55
00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:38,120
And now to the action in front of us or
the document in front of us

56
00:04:38,639 --> 00:04:45,120
and I'm someone never had a chance to
look at it. Do you want to start at the

57
00:04:42,400 --> 00:04:50,400
beginning or you want to just go through
questions uh that staff or and I

58
00:04:48,240 --> 00:04:54,639
consider staff
you know part of our part of our

59
00:04:52,720 --> 00:04:59,759
discussion here too. So feel free to
speak up. I have a question on section

60
00:04:57,919 --> 00:05:05,759
1A.
Um, I think that the term not for

61
00:05:02,800 --> 00:05:12,639
private or personal interest is
extremely general and open to

62
00:05:09,759 --> 00:05:16,479
misinterpretation.
>> Do you want to strike it?

63
00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:22,560
» I do.
>> Does anyone have a problem with it?

64
00:05:20,639 --> 00:05:27,039
» Can we address it? I mean, is it
addressed elsewhere?

65
00:05:24,800 --> 00:05:32,000
Well, it is because we talk about it um
advancing positions or

66
00:05:30,080 --> 00:05:35,720
um
the sections marked.

67
00:05:38,080 --> 00:05:42,199
That one is just so

68
00:05:43,440 --> 00:05:48,280
susceptible to individual
interpretation.

69
00:05:49,919 --> 00:05:56,000
» Is your concern? Yeah. Commissioner
Campbell

70
00:05:53,199 --> 00:06:01,840
promoting motions that deal with the
parks. Well, that's a personal interest

71
00:05:57,919 --> 00:06:06,720
of his. He's on the board and he likes
parks. I mean, of course you would do

72
00:06:04,560 --> 00:06:09,840
that.
Yeah, I'm fine with it just being a

73
00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:15,680
general statement. That's all it's
really meant as a way to get into the

74
00:06:13,919 --> 00:06:20,720
nuts and bolts of the whole thing.
>> You could almost argue that on page two

75
00:06:18,240 --> 00:06:23,680
down at the bottom E. Well, let's let's
deal with that one first. Everyone's

76
00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:27,919
fine with striking that.
>> Well, my point was just it almost covers

77
00:06:25,680 --> 00:06:31,199
it in E.
It almost work for the common good and

78
00:06:29,759 --> 00:06:34,400
not for private or personal interest.
And E, it says not engage in business

79
00:06:32,720 --> 00:06:37,919
transaction that may result in personal
profit due to the officers or employees

80
00:06:36,160 --> 00:06:41,199
official position or authority.
>> That's a better way.

81
00:06:39,120 --> 00:06:44,400
» So, it could it kind of covers itself
there.

82
00:06:42,400 --> 00:06:47,120
» So, I I wouldn't have a problem striking
it.

83
00:06:45,680 --> 00:06:49,840
» The whole sentence or just the last
part?

84
00:06:47,520 --> 00:06:54,479
» Just the last part. I mean, it just
makes a nice general tone to get

85
00:06:52,080 --> 00:07:00,800
started.
Ed, if I may, I wanted to

86
00:06:57,440 --> 00:07:07,680
start the discussion with
I just had some thoughts on the on

87
00:07:03,520 --> 00:07:14,080
finally getting some press or some news
attention to this and and I just don't

88
00:07:10,400 --> 00:07:21,520
want uh the general public to think that
this was this uh policy or a need to

89
00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:26,240
look policy was a result of of uh our
previous administrator or any individual

90
00:07:24,720 --> 00:07:31,840
deeds anywhere
>> and they absolutely did.

91
00:07:29,120 --> 00:07:37,360
» They targeted they they start they
decided to review the policy after

92
00:07:34,639 --> 00:07:40,319
administrator Dyer's I mean it was one
all in the same sentence.

93
00:07:38,960 --> 00:07:44,080
» Yeah. And and but
>> and it was not and that's not why we're

94
00:07:42,319 --> 00:07:50,080
doing this. So that really
>> that that would that's my statement is

95
00:07:46,319 --> 00:07:55,280
that that that's a misnomer or misguided
uh to believe that because we started

96
00:07:51,919 --> 00:08:01,039
meeting before while Mr. Dyer was still
employed and and I think have had the

97
00:07:57,919 --> 00:08:06,879
full backing on the of the county board
and it just I it's unfortunate that

98
00:08:04,879 --> 00:08:13,280
that's that's what happened but that was
not the intent of this. our current

99
00:08:09,599 --> 00:08:18,479
policy deals only with only with
financial

100
00:08:15,280 --> 00:08:23,440
um conflicts that might arise and we
wanted something that that went a little

101
00:08:20,479 --> 00:08:28,800
further. And truthfully, most of the
provisions that I saw in that article

102
00:08:25,919 --> 00:08:35,039
that they brought up were taken from
Grand Travers County which was kind of a

103
00:08:31,919 --> 00:08:41,039
kind of a basis for what we did. So
there's that's that was a link that did

104
00:08:38,959 --> 00:08:45,920
not exist in my mind and I think in
other committees or the or the county

105
00:08:43,200 --> 00:08:53,440
board's minds when we decided that our
ethics policy needed a review. So

106
00:08:49,760 --> 00:08:56,160
» So you I made a comment in the post.
>> Did you?

107
00:08:54,080 --> 00:09:01,440
» Yes. Okay. You can do that too.
>> Post that would help.

108
00:08:58,560 --> 00:09:05,360
» I'm not I'm not a commenter.
>> You could say that.

109
00:09:02,640 --> 00:09:10,000
» Yeah. I'll I'll look at doing that.
>> Say

110
00:09:06,880 --> 00:09:14,240
» I'll have my son tell me how to do it.
>> See, are you even me?

111
00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:17,600
» You know, all you have to say is I don't
agree with that interpretation.

112
00:09:15,680 --> 00:09:21,519
» Sure. I don't agree with that
interpretation.

113
00:09:18,800 --> 00:09:25,440
» Because we're endlessly beating someone
up and that's

114
00:09:23,120 --> 00:09:29,920
» Yeah. That this doesn't have anything to
do with past uh

115
00:09:27,839 --> 00:09:36,080
» that makes us look.
>> No, this is not retaliatory in any

116
00:09:31,839 --> 00:09:42,080
nature. Um this is just an a need.
Okay.

117
00:09:38,000 --> 00:09:48,279
Uh so we we cut down already. Our
editing has resulted in fewer words. So

118
00:09:45,040 --> 00:09:48,279
that's progress.

119
00:09:48,959 --> 00:09:59,399
And I'm on page two. Folks with me
there. Any other questions,

120
00:09:56,399 --> 00:09:59,399
thoughts?

121
00:10:01,680 --> 00:10:09,519
Okay, hearing none, let's look at page
three. On on page three on G.

122
00:10:07,600 --> 00:10:11,040
» Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Did you just go
ahead?

123
00:10:10,320 --> 00:10:13,200
» I did.
>> Still looking at my

124
00:10:12,240 --> 00:10:17,800
» Okay. I'm sorry.
>> I'm sorry. I didn't hear you say too.

125
00:10:18,079 --> 00:10:24,440
» Thank you, Tom.
Except for Steve Austin.

126
00:10:24,560 --> 00:10:28,839
» He's got to go catch his three-year-old.

127
00:10:28,959 --> 00:10:36,040
» Good luck with that, Dad.
farming duties today. So

128
00:10:40,000 --> 00:10:45,720
» I don't know what C I had yellow but

129
00:10:49,200 --> 00:10:54,600
benefits, privileges, favors position.

130
00:10:58,079 --> 00:11:01,880
That was tough.

131
00:11:03,200 --> 00:11:09,959
The performance of official duties
perhaps cleans well.

132
00:11:23,360 --> 00:11:29,720
Okay, I'm I'm good.
See, it's a little murky.

133
00:11:31,839 --> 00:11:40,800
» It's pretty tight. No doubt about it. I
mean, I understand what you're saying.

134
00:11:37,279 --> 00:11:46,720
Does it go too far and being so tight? I
I didn't mean to. Anyways, uh on page

135
00:11:44,959 --> 00:11:55,200
three,
um

136
00:11:48,640 --> 00:12:01,760
G goes right into uh the disclose.
Uh it says in discussion or action on

137
00:11:58,480 --> 00:12:06,240
the matter and I think it I think that
the intent of that is is strictly for

138
00:12:03,920 --> 00:12:11,360
public meetings.
Um

139
00:12:08,639 --> 00:12:17,920
it says disclose any
uh conflict before participating in

140
00:12:14,639 --> 00:12:22,720
discussion or action on the matter. I
think we all intended for that to be at

141
00:12:20,560 --> 00:12:27,040
a public meeting rather than you know
three people in a hall and talk about

142
00:12:25,120 --> 00:12:33,680
it. But
>> does that make sense to add add a public

143
00:12:29,600 --> 00:12:39,240
meeting in that sentence to you guys?
>> Sure. Where would it be added?

144
00:12:36,240 --> 00:12:39,240
» Uh

145
00:12:42,240 --> 00:12:50,600
uh probably sec right after disclose
disclose at a public meeting any actual.

146
00:12:51,120 --> 00:12:54,360
» Oh okay.

147
00:12:55,600 --> 00:13:01,200
» The next sentence said the disclosure
shall be made in writing before the

148
00:12:58,800 --> 00:13:07,000
meeting or orally on the record before
deliberation or action. Well, that might

149
00:13:03,760 --> 00:13:07,000
cover it.

150
00:13:08,880 --> 00:13:17,120
» Well, that first sentence leads I mean I
would rather have the at a public

151
00:13:13,760 --> 00:13:22,880
meeting first. So that sentence can't be
taking taken on its own.

152
00:13:20,000 --> 00:13:26,839
» I I kind of agree with you. Just just
make it clear at the beginning.

153
00:13:30,959 --> 00:13:42,079
Oh, and and uh I talked to Matt about
having more specific direction as far as

154
00:13:40,320 --> 00:13:48,160
at our board meetings how that would
handle. And so that's why this next

155
00:13:44,800 --> 00:13:51,519
paragraph or whatever the indented part
is there. Um

156
00:13:50,160 --> 00:13:54,519
» that's from that board.
>> Yeah.

157
00:13:59,040 --> 00:14:04,440
You guys are done with that one. I'd
like to talk about it.

158
00:14:07,440 --> 00:14:11,959
So that puts a little pressure on the
chair,

159
00:14:16,560 --> 00:14:26,399
but it also allows the county,
should there be uh

160
00:14:23,680 --> 00:14:33,160
uh some disagreement, that allows the
county board to step in and have a vote

161
00:14:28,480 --> 00:14:33,160
if they feel that that's necessary.

162
00:14:48,320 --> 00:14:55,519
is that okay the way he wrote that or
would you

163
00:14:52,959 --> 00:15:00,560
Yeah. The only thing that when I read it
originally was should it just apply to a

164
00:14:57,600 --> 00:15:04,040
county commissioner? Does that apply to
boards and committees?

165
00:15:04,880 --> 00:15:12,959
cuz isn't this policy pretty much
written up for any committee established

166
00:15:10,560 --> 00:15:16,160
through county board?
>> Correct.

167
00:15:13,920 --> 00:15:20,880
» So that was my only question if should
we limit it at a county commissioner or

168
00:15:18,320 --> 00:15:24,560
should it be
a little bit broader in the sense that

169
00:15:22,320 --> 00:15:30,240
it applies to committees, subcommittees
and all such things.

170
00:15:26,880 --> 00:15:36,639
and and later on it
authorizes the county board to take

171
00:15:33,120 --> 00:15:40,360
certain actions, but I think that's
that doesn't have

172
00:15:40,399 --> 00:15:47,760
I don't know how closely those two are
related. I mean, when you get way down

173
00:15:46,079 --> 00:15:51,759
the line when it talks about what county
board can do as far as censorship and

174
00:15:49,680 --> 00:15:56,639
stuff like that, I guess that's a
separate action though,

175
00:15:53,360 --> 00:16:01,600
» right? rather than when it initially
comes before a board or doesn't come

176
00:16:00,480 --> 00:16:06,000
before a board.
>> I just know in the beginning of the

177
00:16:02,800 --> 00:16:09,040
policy it states that
this policy applies to

178
00:16:08,240 --> 00:16:12,880
» commissioners,
>> commissioners, elected officials,

179
00:16:10,720 --> 00:16:17,120
» board appointees, employees, and other
persons acting on behalf of the county.

180
00:16:15,680 --> 00:16:20,880
» Right.
So I didn't know if we're talking about

181
00:16:19,040 --> 00:16:27,040
disclosing at a public meeting a
potential conflict and then that indent

182
00:16:25,360 --> 00:16:31,440
could read that it only applies to
commissioners and I think it should

183
00:16:28,959 --> 00:16:34,240
apply to any committee that's structured
within the county that falls under this

184
00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:38,000
policy
>> does officer.

185
00:16:36,240 --> 00:16:42,000
» So the way that it reads in the first
sentence says public officers and

186
00:16:40,480 --> 00:16:48,880
employees.
So we could say when a public officer

187
00:16:45,279 --> 00:16:53,279
or employee because public officer would
>> not be an employee

188
00:16:50,480 --> 00:16:58,639
» or a public officer would encompass
your positions as well as other

189
00:16:55,600 --> 00:17:03,600
appointed positions like leave.
>> But would it need to be employees here

190
00:17:01,199 --> 00:17:06,160
if this is strictly referring to a
meeting?

191
00:17:04,559 --> 00:17:09,039
» Cuz an employee wouldn't necessarily
have to vote at a meeting.

192
00:17:07,439 --> 00:17:13,000
» Yeah.
Could just say public officer.

193
00:17:17,360 --> 00:17:25,199
I'm fine with putting public officer in
there and then having uh having Matt

194
00:17:23,120 --> 00:17:28,240
think through that a little deeper than
>> but it should be then wherever it's

195
00:17:26,720 --> 00:17:29,840
commissioner in there should be changed
to public officer in there.

196
00:17:29,440 --> 00:17:33,360
» Right.
>> Yeah. And have Matt

197
00:17:31,600 --> 00:17:39,000
» just double check that I guess cuz maybe
I'm overthinking it.

198
00:17:34,880 --> 00:17:39,000
» No, I think you're right.

199
00:17:40,720 --> 00:17:47,120
For instance, if we have a department
head

200
00:17:44,400 --> 00:17:50,320
uh someone like that, they would be
under the same

201
00:17:47,919 --> 00:17:54,559
» well yeah like land bank brownfield like
she got elected

202
00:17:52,400 --> 00:17:56,960
departments that are you know and that
would fall within that scope I would

203
00:17:56,080 --> 00:18:03,440
think.
>> Um land bank G's not elected.

204
00:18:00,480 --> 00:18:07,520
» Oh well brownfield. Yeah
>> public officer though not an elected

205
00:18:05,440 --> 00:18:12,320
» construction code. She's not elected. I
mean, so I don't think if you want

206
00:18:09,840 --> 00:18:15,320
department, hence public officer isn't
enough.

207
00:18:16,320 --> 00:18:25,200
» But I think what Steve was saying is
that that like on building safety, Amber

208
00:18:22,080 --> 00:18:30,720
doesn't vote, Gail doesn't vote on the
committees that she coordinates,

209
00:18:27,360 --> 00:18:34,880
» right? So it wouldn't apply to them.
It would only apply to the individuals

210
00:18:32,480 --> 00:18:37,919
voting on a committee. And sometimes,
like for instance, Brownfield, isn't the

211
00:18:36,480 --> 00:18:39,120
treasurer the chair of that or
something?

212
00:18:38,400 --> 00:18:40,799
» No.
>> Oh, he isn't.

213
00:18:40,240 --> 00:18:45,679
» Land bank
>> or is or maybe it's land bank. Okay.

214
00:18:44,080 --> 00:18:47,679
» So then that would apply. Would that be
a public officer then? Right.

215
00:18:47,280 --> 00:18:50,480
» Mhm.
>> So that land but not brownfield,

216
00:18:50,080 --> 00:18:53,840
» right?
>> Brownfield has their own chair, but the

217
00:18:52,160 --> 00:18:56,960
administrator is a voting member of
Brownfield.

218
00:18:54,559 --> 00:19:02,640
» Right. No. So, I'm more like looking at
just focusing in on the individuals.

219
00:18:59,919 --> 00:19:08,559
Whatever whatever title they hold aside
from a committee

220
00:19:06,160 --> 00:19:12,720
doesn't really matter as long as they're
held to this standard when they're

221
00:19:09,919 --> 00:19:15,760
sitting on the committee. I guess was my
point.

222
00:19:14,080 --> 00:19:20,320
» And you're you're looking specifically
at voting members, which makes sense.

223
00:19:18,640 --> 00:19:23,960
» That's what this full right
>> provision is for.

224
00:19:28,400 --> 00:19:35,440
Well, he could say
voting member.

225
00:19:33,440 --> 00:19:40,120
» Oh, he could say I'm a voting member
rather than a public officer. He could

226
00:19:36,960 --> 00:19:40,120
say that.

227
00:19:40,480 --> 00:19:43,480
» Yeah.

228
00:19:43,600 --> 00:19:52,080
» Why don't I ask him about both and what
would be a more all-encompassing term

229
00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:56,799
» to place there? cuz I'm my guess is Matt
just and I can't put words in his mouth

230
00:19:54,640 --> 00:19:59,679
but based on what G is saying it kind of
looks like you know referencing the

231
00:19:58,559 --> 00:20:03,840
board of commissioners and that's
probably where his mind was going but

232
00:20:01,280 --> 00:20:10,400
this policy itself encompasses a lot
more than that. So

233
00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:13,840
I had that discussion with him as
between the last meeting and this

234
00:20:11,840 --> 00:20:20,880
meeting I had this revelation well are
we trying to do too much within this?

235
00:20:17,039 --> 00:20:25,679
Should we h this actually be too
which I know I've been a lot more work

236
00:20:22,720 --> 00:20:30,240
but I sometimes you know you you you
feel headwinds and you you question why

237
00:20:28,320 --> 00:20:35,760
do I feel these headwinds? Is it is the
structure proper? He said uh he's seen

238
00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:41,280
it both ways
um and he could understand uh the

239
00:20:38,720 --> 00:20:45,280
reasoning behind both ways but he was
very comfortable having this as all one

240
00:20:43,440 --> 00:20:51,440
policy
um and thought that be just one place

241
00:20:47,280 --> 00:20:56,799
for people to work. So
so I kept my mouth shut after that which

242
00:20:54,159 --> 00:20:57,919
might surprise me
just saying

243
00:20:57,360 --> 00:21:01,679
» shocking
>> shocking.

244
00:20:59,360 --> 00:21:06,880
» We need to know his secret. Don't tell
Mr. Walter.

245
00:21:04,799 --> 00:21:10,080
All right,
other questions on that particular page.

246
00:21:09,200 --> 00:21:15,000
H
>> HH

247
00:21:12,000 --> 00:21:15,000
» um

248
00:21:15,919 --> 00:21:25,440
I was really bothered
by the condemnation

249
00:21:21,760 --> 00:21:30,360
of administrator Dyer for being on a
board

250
00:21:27,360 --> 00:21:30,360
and

251
00:21:31,520 --> 00:21:41,760
when this came up he did become a what a
non- voting member but one of The

252
00:21:38,799 --> 00:21:47,679
reasons we
liked him as a hireer was he was very

253
00:21:44,960 --> 00:21:54,480
involved in housing and wanted to
advocate for it and had experience

254
00:21:52,400 --> 00:21:57,760
and he got here and he got kicked for
it.

255
00:21:56,320 --> 00:22:03,520
Um
>> well not for advocating but for his um

256
00:22:02,159 --> 00:22:07,919
» he was a voting member
>> voting member of

257
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:14,000
» but but
I I don't agree with that we want people

258
00:22:12,000 --> 00:22:17,320
who are involved in the community for
gosh sakes

259
00:22:17,520 --> 00:22:25,919
if it if we tell our administrator that
they can't be involved in projects or

260
00:22:24,400 --> 00:22:30,480
organizations
that are doing good things in the

261
00:22:28,159 --> 00:22:36,559
county.
Um, that's really limiting.

262
00:22:33,600 --> 00:22:38,400
Sorry. All you can do is this job.
>> I don't think that's what this says,

263
00:22:37,919 --> 00:22:43,280
though.
>> It says, yeah, not accept private

264
00:22:40,559 --> 00:22:45,760
employment or render services.
>> Render services

265
00:22:44,000 --> 00:22:50,799
» if it's in conflict with the proper
discharge of official duties

266
00:22:49,039 --> 00:22:57,919
» or would impair independence of
judgment. really broadly

267
00:22:54,400 --> 00:23:02,960
used to attack
>> and we have to be really very very

268
00:23:00,640 --> 00:23:06,400
careful.
We want an administrator who's

269
00:23:04,799 --> 00:23:12,960
interested in what's going on in the
county and involved.

270
00:23:10,400 --> 00:23:18,080
Obviously, he can.
It would be different than like starting

271
00:23:15,039 --> 00:23:20,320
a a a company on the side.
>> Yeah.

272
00:23:18,640 --> 00:23:26,159
» Where he's going to make a lot of money.
That's totally different. But just being

273
00:23:23,520 --> 00:23:29,600
involved in
something that is going to help the

274
00:23:27,760 --> 00:23:34,320
county.
I hope we want that.

275
00:23:32,400 --> 00:23:37,320
So I think we have to tread really
carefully.

276
00:23:38,240 --> 00:23:45,039
It's not like he was going to make good
gobs of money doing that. Wasn't going

277
00:23:42,400 --> 00:23:50,640
to make anything.
>> Well, I I mean, if you remove and which

278
00:23:47,520 --> 00:23:58,000
I think we should remove Mr.
Jim, from the discussion, this makes a

279
00:23:54,000 --> 00:24:03,360
lot of sense. Um,
I I think that was a, as you say, an

280
00:24:00,480 --> 00:24:09,919
unusual circumstance. And I think from a
myself from a 30,000 foot view, I don't

281
00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:15,679
have a problem with what's with what's
stated here. Truthfully, if there it's

282
00:24:13,279 --> 00:24:21,440
it's you can be involved in these
organizations. It's just if they're

283
00:24:18,400 --> 00:24:27,760
going to do business with the county,
um, you have to really be careful about

284
00:24:23,840 --> 00:24:31,760
which hats are being worn. Well, we have
to be very, very careful about how it's

285
00:24:30,000 --> 00:24:36,240
implemented
because

286
00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:40,320
in that case, this kind of thing was
used.

287
00:24:37,919 --> 00:24:43,200
Housing is not doing business with the
county.

288
00:24:43,039 --> 00:24:50,720
It's
>> rendering a service for the county. It's

289
00:24:46,320 --> 00:24:57,360
interesting with our our
the services we offer to the county. I

290
00:24:54,240 --> 00:24:59,840
hope it would. We offer services to the
county for the good of the county.

291
00:24:59,120 --> 00:25:05,520
» Well, it is.
>> And that they take advantage of it.

292
00:25:03,279 --> 00:25:11,440
That's what they're supposed to do.
I I think that the intent is not to

293
00:25:08,400 --> 00:25:16,559
choose whether we have good companies or
bad companies, but to look at the

294
00:25:13,600 --> 00:25:21,600
relationship between companies with the
county. Um I, you know, I I don't want

295
00:25:19,919 --> 00:25:26,960
to be in the position of saying, well,
this is a good company and this other

296
00:25:24,240 --> 00:25:33,120
company I I don't think uh someone
should be associated with either. It's

297
00:25:29,200 --> 00:25:37,880
kind of a black and white thing for me.
Not really sure where that fits it.

298
00:25:40,480 --> 00:25:48,240
» I I'm fine the way it is. Right.
>> Um,

299
00:25:45,120 --> 00:25:51,840
I guess the way I I understand where
Gwen's coming at with this, but the way

300
00:25:50,240 --> 00:25:58,640
I read it,
>> I guess for me, what I can tell you what

301
00:25:54,480 --> 00:26:03,679
I want what I don't want it to read and
I don't see that in here, but what I

302
00:26:00,400 --> 00:26:08,000
don't want it to say is that an employee
or an individual

303
00:26:06,080 --> 00:26:15,200
or anybody that's falls in this
parameter of this policy can have any

304
00:26:10,640 --> 00:26:18,559
outside private employment
that works for the county. I don't want

305
00:26:16,880 --> 00:26:20,799
to hinder that in any way whatsoever
because I think anybody should be able

306
00:26:19,840 --> 00:26:24,320
to do that.
>> Say that again. That works for like if

307
00:26:22,799 --> 00:26:30,159
you took a part-time,
>> let's say we Yeah. Let's say, you know,

308
00:26:28,720 --> 00:26:34,640
you got an employee here or somebody
that sits on a board, you know, or Yeah.

309
00:26:33,039 --> 00:26:39,679
has a full-time job at the county here
and has a side job on the side where

310
00:26:36,640 --> 00:26:43,360
they, you know, do a little farming on
the side or something like that

311
00:26:41,200 --> 00:26:46,000
» for a longare company for a longare
company that goes and works in the

312
00:26:44,559 --> 00:26:47,120
evenings. Like I don't want to hinder
that,

313
00:26:46,640 --> 00:26:51,520
» right?
>> You know, where they can do that or

314
00:26:49,279 --> 00:26:54,559
» get involved with a nonprofit that is
doing things in the community. Like I

315
00:26:53,120 --> 00:27:00,000
don't want to hinder that.
>> Yes, that that last one is really

316
00:26:57,360 --> 00:27:05,840
important to me. But I don't see what's
stated in here that hinders that, I

317
00:27:02,240 --> 00:27:09,279
guess, because it in essence says
um or in conflict with the proper

318
00:27:07,440 --> 00:27:13,440
discharge of official duties or would
tend to impair independence of judgment

319
00:27:11,360 --> 00:27:17,520
or action in the performance of official
duties.

320
00:27:15,440 --> 00:27:20,400
» Well, maybe what I'm really saying is we
have to be extremely careful in how this

321
00:27:19,679 --> 00:27:25,679
is interpreted.
>> I agree. And I think if this comes into

322
00:27:23,440 --> 00:27:29,679
question with something then that should
be a discussion that should be held by

323
00:27:27,279 --> 00:27:33,360
the committee or the board and have a
full discussion among the members as to

324
00:27:31,919 --> 00:27:37,679
the interpretation of that and whether
that individual falls within that

325
00:27:34,880 --> 00:27:41,919
conflict and that would clear the air on
that.

326
00:27:39,200 --> 00:27:45,679
But for as it reads right now, I don't
have

327
00:27:43,679 --> 00:27:51,360
I get it. Like it might have some teeth
in here, but I don't I don't read that

328
00:27:49,039 --> 00:27:57,840
an employee is barred from private
employment

329
00:27:53,440 --> 00:28:03,279
or being a member of a nonprofit or
any such thing. And it I don't see that

330
00:28:00,960 --> 00:28:08,720
as the way this reads that that would
bar them from doing that.

331
00:28:05,440 --> 00:28:15,159
I think where we're where it could be is
in conflict with the proper discharge of

332
00:28:12,159 --> 00:28:15,159
duties

333
00:28:15,440 --> 00:28:24,960
in conflict
tend to impair independent judgment tend

334
00:28:22,000 --> 00:28:29,039
to impair. Boy, is that a hole you could
fall into?

335
00:28:25,919 --> 00:28:34,080
» I I I agree. It's very broad here. I
think they leave it broad on purpose

336
00:28:31,840 --> 00:28:37,679
» so that there is room for interpretation
>> because I you know I would say that that

337
00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:42,720
if there is a confusion then it should
be brought in front of the said

338
00:28:39,840 --> 00:28:48,480
committee said subcommittee said board
to determine

339
00:28:45,440 --> 00:28:54,080
» and this board
decided that he couldn't shouldn't be

340
00:28:51,120 --> 00:28:58,640
involved with housing. I'm not sure we
ever had a broad motion. I don't know if

341
00:28:56,399 --> 00:29:04,799
there was ever really broad motion or
discussion necessarily any

342
00:29:01,520 --> 00:29:11,240
» but that was a music
stop.

343
00:29:07,600 --> 00:29:11,240
» I wish we could.

344
00:29:15,600 --> 00:29:20,120
We just have to walk very carefully

345
00:29:20,559 --> 00:29:27,200
when we're deciding whether something is
a conflict with the proper discharge of

346
00:29:25,679 --> 00:29:32,720
duties
and not let our personal priorities.

347
00:29:30,880 --> 00:29:36,720
» I agree. But that's where I think if
there is confusion or there is something

348
00:29:35,120 --> 00:29:41,440
in question then it needs to be brought
to the set boards and committees for

349
00:29:38,640 --> 00:29:46,760
clarification.
>> Could we say to

350
00:29:43,760 --> 00:29:46,760
Cuz

351
00:29:48,399 --> 00:29:56,720
what I don't want is an employee here
>> barred from being a member of Rotary or

352
00:29:54,720 --> 00:30:00,080
being a me, you know, that that's great
things in the community like that's what

353
00:29:58,240 --> 00:30:09,480
and so that's but I don't read that in
here that that would not allow that.

354
00:30:04,080 --> 00:30:09,480
How about putting her in clear conflict?

355
00:30:10,480 --> 00:30:18,559
Just just stress that it has to be very
real conflict.

356
00:30:16,799 --> 00:30:25,440
» Well, the throughout here the word
conflict is used.

357
00:30:20,080 --> 00:30:28,000
» I know, but that's clear conflict would
highlight this.

358
00:30:26,640 --> 00:30:32,799
» I don't I don't have a problem with
clear conflict if that puts your mind at

359
00:30:30,080 --> 00:30:36,960
ease. doesn't I don't see that alter the
sentence in any major way. So

360
00:30:35,200 --> 00:30:41,440
» I don't either and it would make me feel
better that

361
00:30:39,039 --> 00:30:46,640
that we have to that it has to be a real
conflict

362
00:30:43,840 --> 00:30:51,919
and not just somebody's opinion that I
don't like housing so much that you

363
00:30:49,760 --> 00:30:54,960
could argue that a clear conflict some
people are going to determine that is a

364
00:30:53,200 --> 00:30:59,360
clear conflict. So that's up to each
individual's opinion. And on the next

365
00:30:57,440 --> 00:31:02,559
page it says that too when we define
conflict of interest it could be a

366
00:31:00,880 --> 00:31:04,480
reasonably perceived.
>> Right?

367
00:31:03,200 --> 00:31:08,480
» That's pretty common language
throughout. It's just very open.

368
00:31:06,480 --> 00:31:13,760
» Very careful there too. Reasonably
perceived.

369
00:31:11,279 --> 00:31:19,039
» Um
two wanted to clear conflict.

370
00:31:17,039 --> 00:31:22,880
I it's I don't have any heartburn one
way or the other and it's I if

371
00:31:21,279 --> 00:31:25,600
» that would make me feel a little better
>> when is happy with that and it makes her

372
00:31:24,480 --> 00:31:30,960
comfortable then I am
>> doesn't get rid of your heart

373
00:31:27,200 --> 00:31:35,200
» comfortable I'm feeling
>> would you clearly be comfortable it's

374
00:31:34,080 --> 00:31:38,840
» I'm I'm fine
>> clearly will help

375
00:31:47,200 --> 00:31:57,720
And a lot of this is legal
avenue. Yeah, it is.

376
00:31:53,440 --> 00:31:57,720
You guys ready to go to the next page?

377
00:31:59,200 --> 00:32:04,279
Mhm. I am. Three.

378
00:32:19,360 --> 00:32:27,600
The only question I have is for the
section of definitions.

379
00:32:24,080 --> 00:32:31,519
I don't read very often in a ordinance
policy or anything that definitions is

380
00:32:29,360 --> 00:32:35,919
in the middle of a policy.
>> I always see it in the beginning.

381
00:32:33,760 --> 00:32:42,320
» Yeah. you did we didn't we talk about
switching uh one and two

382
00:32:39,600 --> 00:32:47,760
» I don't remember but I'm I've typically
seen definitions at the top of a policy

383
00:32:45,760 --> 00:32:50,799
or like maybe right under authority and
limitations just so that everything is

384
00:32:49,440 --> 00:32:54,720
defined at the top
>> that's kind of what I had in mind if we

385
00:32:52,240 --> 00:32:56,960
could just switch one and two that to me
would

386
00:32:56,159 --> 00:33:00,880
» be more
>> I'm sure we talked about that somehow

387
00:32:59,519 --> 00:33:06,080
» maybe I missed that okay
>> maybe I don't know anyways

388
00:33:03,519 --> 00:33:12,919
So guidelines are two.
>> Okay.

389
00:33:07,600 --> 00:33:12,919
» Uh and definitions are one.

390
00:33:13,519 --> 00:33:20,559
Still on page four.
Um I

391
00:33:18,320 --> 00:33:23,519
And maybe Allison can help on this. I'm
not sure there is a county seal. Is

392
00:33:23,039 --> 00:33:29,919
there?
>> No.

393
00:33:25,840 --> 00:33:37,279
Um the the seal that the our office uses
is a clerk seal and a circuit court

394
00:33:32,799 --> 00:33:42,399
seal. Um so that is the only one that I
know of but we do not have like a county

395
00:33:40,480 --> 00:33:48,559
issued seal. I mean, we have the county
logo and then we have individual

396
00:33:45,440 --> 00:33:50,799
um letterheads and um different
departments have their own letter

397
00:33:49,919 --> 00:33:55,279
department, but
>> but the seal would be within each office

398
00:33:52,799 --> 00:33:58,799
type of thing, not a county seal.
>> The only seal would be out of her would

399
00:33:57,440 --> 00:34:01,679
be out of the clerk's office.
>> So, that's the only seal that the county

400
00:34:00,399 --> 00:34:03,840
has. Period.
>> And it says,

401
00:34:02,320 --> 00:34:10,440
» but it it's the clerk's seal.
>> It says it says label county, but it

402
00:34:06,000 --> 00:34:10,440
also says 13 circuit court.

403
00:34:11,200 --> 00:34:20,240
and 13th Circuit Court has more than one
county,

404
00:34:16,800 --> 00:34:26,079
right? Yeah. So, uh, anyways, I don't
know if we need that or if we need to

405
00:34:22,079 --> 00:34:29,520
get a seal or
>> It would be kind of cool to have a seal,

406
00:34:28,079 --> 00:34:33,440
I guess.
>> Well, I mean, we have the logo. I don't

407
00:34:31,440 --> 00:34:37,480
know how
>> can turn that into our seal.

408
00:34:37,599 --> 00:34:42,159
We don't have a seal. I don't know why
we would get a seal. That's my personal

409
00:34:41,839 --> 00:34:46,399
opinion.
>> They look cool.

410
00:34:43,119 --> 00:34:49,520
» And if it will cost us money, then
>> I don't think it cost us that much.

411
00:34:48,000 --> 00:34:54,560
» Where where is that on
>> and

412
00:34:50,320 --> 00:34:59,280
» and we can we can leave it in in case we
eventually get a seal or we determine

413
00:34:56,639 --> 00:35:03,920
that we'd like a seal. It is nice for
official letters. I guess people don't

414
00:35:01,520 --> 00:35:10,000
look at them necessarily to see that it
doesn't say Leonol County official seal.

415
00:35:07,359 --> 00:35:14,079
Um, but when uh like for instance uh we
had those letters that we gave the

416
00:35:11,440 --> 00:35:16,720
tribe, it was nice having that that on
the top.

417
00:35:14,880 --> 00:35:20,079
» But that was just a letter
>> with the logo.

418
00:35:17,680 --> 00:35:24,480
» Yeah. It wasn't a seal.
>> I had one with a seal. You can actually

419
00:35:22,000 --> 00:35:27,760
put a seal on it, right? Like
>> we we do when it comes from Michelle's

420
00:35:26,720 --> 00:35:30,480
office. Yes.
>> Yeah.

421
00:35:28,800 --> 00:35:33,760
» That's for like legal documents and
stuff like that.

422
00:35:31,119 --> 00:35:40,800
» We even we stamp the same thing. That's
the same seal. If we stamp a um a

423
00:35:37,280 --> 00:35:49,800
certified copy for uh court records or
if we stamp a copy of um a resolution or

424
00:35:45,599 --> 00:35:49,800
something like that, it's the same one.

425
00:35:51,440 --> 00:35:55,920
» Well, my my thought is we can leave it
in there.

426
00:35:54,560 --> 00:35:58,960
» And if we don't have one, don't worry
about it. But maybe it's something we

427
00:35:57,599 --> 00:36:02,079
can
>> Doesn't create I don't think it creates

428
00:36:00,560 --> 00:36:05,079
a conflict with having it in there.
>> No.

429
00:36:05,119 --> 00:36:10,960
Okay.
>> You know, would that be a fun contest

430
00:36:08,240 --> 00:36:17,119
though for high school kids?
>> It would.

431
00:36:14,160 --> 00:36:21,520
» Oh, well, no, that may happen. I just
know we do have an official logo. Is

432
00:36:19,520 --> 00:36:24,240
that right, Allison? Our logo is
>> I don't know if it's copyrighted. I

433
00:36:23,040 --> 00:36:26,400
don't know anything about it.
>> Okay.

434
00:36:24,720 --> 00:36:32,079
» I don't know that it's a copyrighted
logo, but I do know that it was um

435
00:36:30,079 --> 00:36:36,480
intentionally created and that is our
official logo. Yeah. I mean, it was here

436
00:36:34,720 --> 00:36:40,480
in existence and I don't know where it
originated from

437
00:36:37,760 --> 00:36:46,680
» or how long ago.
>> Okay.

438
00:36:43,359 --> 00:36:46,680
Page five.

439
00:36:50,560 --> 00:36:59,839
» I don't have any more question marks.
>> I need to change G because it references

440
00:36:57,280 --> 00:37:04,880
section 1 C and that will need to be
changed to two. 2.

441
00:37:03,200 --> 00:37:08,880
» So, where are you? Cuz there are no
page.

442
00:37:06,560 --> 00:37:11,280
Oh, I'm looking at the wrong one. Page
five.

443
00:37:09,680 --> 00:37:13,839
» Mine
doesn't.

444
00:37:12,560 --> 00:37:18,160
» The final one will make sure that
there's a footer with page numbers on

445
00:37:15,440 --> 00:37:21,160
it.
>> Okay.

446
00:37:23,040 --> 00:37:27,839
» So, you made a change to C. I'm a little
behind because I just

447
00:37:26,160 --> 00:37:31,280
» No. On page five,
>> G,

448
00:37:28,400 --> 00:37:38,760
» letter G, it references section 1 C. And
that that will just be a clerical change

449
00:37:34,079 --> 00:37:38,760
» since we switched definitions and

450
00:37:38,800 --> 00:37:45,920
» guidelines.
And I'll look for those throughout the

451
00:37:42,160 --> 00:37:50,520
document. I don't have any.
>> Oh, right. There probably is more.

452
00:37:51,920 --> 00:37:54,920
Any

453
00:37:57,280 --> 00:38:03,160
other questions, thoughts, improvements
on page five?

454
00:38:04,560 --> 00:38:10,200
» Good, Gwen.
>> I'm good.

455
00:38:07,200 --> 00:38:10,200
» Good.

456
00:38:22,079 --> 00:38:25,880
So this is reporting.

457
00:38:42,240 --> 00:38:45,240
Heat. Heat.

458
00:38:57,119 --> 00:39:00,119
Heat. Heat.

459
00:39:35,680 --> 00:39:45,240
Do we want concerns involving a
countywide elected official reported to

460
00:39:41,680 --> 00:39:45,240
so many folks.

461
00:39:47,440 --> 00:39:54,599
» I'm on E on page
>> page six E.

462
00:39:55,359 --> 00:39:58,680
I mean,

463
00:39:58,720 --> 00:40:09,640
it's kind of like or another appropriate
authority kind of says anybody

464
00:40:04,960 --> 00:40:09,640
» depending on the nature of the concern.

465
00:40:11,760 --> 00:40:19,880
I agree. You got to have
>> depending on and limited by

466
00:40:16,640 --> 00:40:19,880
the nature.

467
00:40:19,920 --> 00:40:22,920
» Uh

468
00:40:29,839 --> 00:40:32,839
um

469
00:40:33,839 --> 00:40:39,440
board chair, county administer. I'm not
sure you have to have human resources

470
00:40:37,760 --> 00:40:45,920
director. You have the board chair or
the county because you're talking about

471
00:40:42,079 --> 00:40:51,920
uh complaint if you will filed against
the treasurer or clerk or the sheriff or

472
00:40:49,359 --> 00:40:57,200
whatever.
Um

473
00:40:53,520 --> 00:41:03,359
» I think it has to go to human resources.
Well, I'm not

474
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:10,720
» I'm not sure if it's if it's a treasurer
or if it's a I mean or if it's uh

475
00:41:07,680 --> 00:41:16,960
» depending on the nature.
>> I'm just saying there are a lot of

476
00:41:12,160 --> 00:41:22,560
folks. And then what is outside counsel?
I don't know what outside counsel is

477
00:41:19,440 --> 00:41:25,839
that our lawyer. Do we want
>> I don't know that it's referring to the

478
00:41:24,000 --> 00:41:32,800
county's lawyer. I mean, are we talking
about if an employee has an issue or if

479
00:41:28,960 --> 00:41:36,319
a member of the public? Maybe that's
something to keep in mind depending on

480
00:41:34,480 --> 00:41:41,240
the nature of the concern. It's a
personnel issue. There's a path to that.

481
00:41:45,440 --> 00:41:53,040
» I don't think you can. This is all
depending on the nature of the concern.

482
00:41:50,240 --> 00:41:57,000
So, it's not saying everyone on that
list is going to be notified.

483
00:41:57,599 --> 00:42:06,240
» It says may be reported shall be
>> it. This and this is only for county

484
00:42:03,599 --> 00:42:10,079
officials and employees according to the
>> okay

485
00:42:06,800 --> 00:42:17,440
» the beginning it's not
>> from citizens.

486
00:42:13,760 --> 00:42:21,839
Uh I I just I don't I don't know some of
the the people they would be reporting

487
00:42:20,079 --> 00:42:25,440
to. I don't even know who they are. What
is an outside counsel?

488
00:42:24,240 --> 00:42:30,800
» I have no clue.
>> I think that's just saying you can refer

489
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:33,440
to outside counsel. That's one of the
possibilities.

490
00:42:32,000 --> 00:42:37,760
» Well, they don't have any authority
within our county government if they're

491
00:42:35,280 --> 00:42:40,960
outside counsel. Not just an attorney is
how I

492
00:42:38,560 --> 00:42:43,920
» we've used outside counsel for some,
>> right? But that would have to be an

493
00:42:42,079 --> 00:42:47,359
action by the board. I mean what Alan's
saying it's just employee could just go

494
00:42:45,760 --> 00:42:52,000
to outside counsel. That doesn't hold
much teeth

495
00:42:49,839 --> 00:42:56,880
» unless it's approved by the board
>> depending on the nature of the concern.

496
00:42:55,040 --> 00:43:04,319
» Well, I'd like to get rid of outside
counsel. I mean, and it does not say our

497
00:43:00,000 --> 00:43:09,440
county attorney. Outside counsel is
>> ask the intention there was for it to be

498
00:43:07,440 --> 00:43:14,720
our corporation council. and should be
our personal legal counsel instead of

499
00:43:12,880 --> 00:43:21,920
outside counsel.
>> But do we really want people

500
00:43:17,520 --> 00:43:26,400
complaints if you will uh to by step to
to bystep everyone here

501
00:43:25,200 --> 00:43:31,599
» to go directly to our
>> attorney? We have a we have a policy

502
00:43:28,319 --> 00:43:36,800
about contacting legal counsel.
>> Well, then we should follow that policy

503
00:43:34,640 --> 00:43:39,800
rather than have this say you can go to
council.

504
00:43:43,920 --> 00:43:51,760
I'm afraid to put
limits around it because it says

505
00:43:48,880 --> 00:43:55,240
depending on the nature of the concern.
We don't know.

506
00:43:56,160 --> 00:44:05,079
I I just I I don't know. I think it's
bad practice to have

507
00:44:01,119 --> 00:44:05,079
uh have someone

508
00:44:05,359 --> 00:44:11,839
talk directly to our attorney about a
complaint if it's if it's that serious.

509
00:44:10,160 --> 00:44:20,480
I can agree that law enforcement should
be there, but you don't start a a a

510
00:44:17,599 --> 00:44:25,760
legal complaint with outside counsel.
You go right to law enforcement or I

511
00:44:23,280 --> 00:44:30,319
should say a criminal complaint. Any
response shall be consistent with the

512
00:44:27,680 --> 00:44:35,880
authority limitations stated in this
policy.

513
00:44:32,079 --> 00:44:35,880
Where does that take us?

514
00:44:35,920 --> 00:44:45,920
Authority limitations stated.
Well, this is response. So, you report

515
00:44:42,880 --> 00:44:50,119
it and then the and that deals with how
it would be responded to.

516
00:44:50,319 --> 00:44:58,079
But the first sentence just deals with
where it's reported.

517
00:44:56,480 --> 00:45:05,599
» Yeah, I have no issues with taking
outside counsel. It's kind of

518
00:45:02,000 --> 00:45:10,640
seems a little backwards.
>> Are you okay with that commissioner?

519
00:45:08,720 --> 00:45:13,640
» Or another appropriate authority. So
sure

520
00:45:14,240 --> 00:45:21,359
cuz if we come into a situation like
that then

521
00:45:19,119 --> 00:45:24,319
we have used outside counsel.
>> We have but it's it was with board

522
00:45:23,760 --> 00:45:26,640
direction.
>> The board had to hire the outside

523
00:45:25,920 --> 00:45:28,560
counsel.
>> Yes.

524
00:45:26,960 --> 00:45:31,760
» So you shouldn't just be any employee
shouldn't just go be able to get outside

525
00:45:30,079 --> 00:45:35,920
counsel and expect the county to pay for
it. It's not going to happen.

526
00:45:33,839 --> 00:45:41,440
» Well would
but yeah. So I would I don't think it's

527
00:45:37,680 --> 00:45:41,440
appropriate to have that in there.

528
00:45:42,880 --> 00:45:51,280
I I didn't say anything. You pay for it.
>> Well, who pays for it? Someone has to

529
00:45:50,160 --> 00:45:56,680
pay for it.
>> You're going to call a lawyer. You

530
00:45:52,960 --> 00:45:56,680
You're bringing up money.

531
00:45:59,599 --> 00:46:07,800
» And I do like that next sentence, you
know,

532
00:46:03,520 --> 00:46:07,800
innocent until proven guilty.

533
00:46:36,480 --> 00:46:44,000
So,
Then it says, "The receiving official

534
00:46:41,040 --> 00:46:48,800
may review credible complaints within
the scope of that official's lawful

535
00:46:46,000 --> 00:46:53,880
authority and may resolve them through
appropriate internal responses.

536
00:46:53,920 --> 00:47:00,160
» This is where I'd like to compare it
pretty closely to our non-union policy

537
00:46:58,240 --> 00:47:04,599
because we do have a complaint procedure
in there. Um,

538
00:47:06,160 --> 00:47:12,000
but that's for more
maybe it wouldn't relate because that's

539
00:47:10,400 --> 00:47:15,280
for
like staff complaints,

540
00:47:13,920 --> 00:47:18,839
» not ethics complaints.
>> Not ethics complaints.

541
00:47:21,680 --> 00:47:29,280
» Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And the next sentence
determines that it presents a conflict

542
00:47:26,800 --> 00:47:32,560
of interest. So it's it it doesn't apply
in the same way.

543
00:47:39,119 --> 00:47:51,520
Uh my uh I guess my question or or
reluctance on that is that if the

544
00:47:47,680 --> 00:47:56,160
complaint goes to a receiving official
who is

545
00:47:54,160 --> 00:48:03,440
inappropriate, if you will, to handle
the complaint, it should be transferred

546
00:47:59,920 --> 00:48:12,079
to uh an appropriate official to handle
one. If it's if it's an ethic ethic

547
00:48:07,359 --> 00:48:17,599
ethic complaint within the uh uh say the
clerk's office, well, the clerk should

548
00:48:14,560 --> 00:48:22,319
be the first one dealing with it as
opposed to the prosecuting attorney

549
00:48:20,400 --> 00:48:28,319
because we're not talking a violation of
law. We're talking about an ethics

550
00:48:24,480 --> 00:48:32,960
complaint, a policy violation.
>> Yeah. But if somebody has a complaint

551
00:48:30,400 --> 00:48:37,680
against their supervisor, they shouldn't
have to report that to the supervisor.

552
00:48:36,319 --> 00:48:44,000
» Well, there's a path for that. We're
talking about public officials on public

553
00:48:39,839 --> 00:48:46,640
bodies, not employees
with issues. There's a different path

554
00:48:45,599 --> 00:48:50,960
for employees.
>> Maybe I heard you wrong.

555
00:48:48,800 --> 00:48:58,800
I bet she's meant somebody in her
department reporting to the

556
00:48:55,119 --> 00:49:04,640
» that's well if it's an ethics complaint
within the clerk's within the clerk I

557
00:49:02,079 --> 00:49:13,200
and you know I use that as an example
within the clerk's office um

558
00:49:09,839 --> 00:49:17,720
» if it's within between two employees yes
go to the clerk if it's with

559
00:49:19,280 --> 00:49:24,640
supervisor,
>> they can have to go elsewhere.

560
00:49:22,800 --> 00:49:27,920
» Sure. Then then that makes a lot of
sense. But if it is amongst

561
00:49:27,440 --> 00:49:35,200
» Yes.
>> employees then it and if if they if the

562
00:49:31,920 --> 00:49:39,839
person individual go say they know uh
someone they know they know the chair

563
00:49:37,119 --> 00:49:45,040
really well so they go to the chair well
that's the chair is now the receiving

564
00:49:42,000 --> 00:49:54,559
official. So
they are put in in control of the of the

565
00:49:50,160 --> 00:50:00,400
decision making as opposed to the person
the elected official who probably should

566
00:49:57,119 --> 00:50:04,559
be the start of the process. So the
policy itself though we need maybe I

567
00:50:02,800 --> 00:50:11,119
need a little more clarity here because
in three reporting 3A

568
00:50:08,319 --> 00:50:15,040
it says employees may report concerns to
their immediate supervisor department

569
00:50:12,880 --> 00:50:18,800
head human resources administrator or
the elected official with authority over

570
00:50:16,960 --> 00:50:22,800
the employee.
So

571
00:50:20,319 --> 00:50:28,880
we have a non we we have a personnel
policy

572
00:50:25,359 --> 00:50:34,480
with complaint procedures
but this policy is not for employees.

573
00:50:31,280 --> 00:50:37,359
This policy is or is it for employees as
well?

574
00:50:35,040 --> 00:50:39,040
» It can be for ethic complaints.
>> Okay.

575
00:50:38,319 --> 00:50:44,319
» Not for
>> covers employees in the beginning there.

576
00:50:42,640 --> 00:50:47,760
» Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure
that it's nothing is in conflict with

577
00:50:47,119 --> 00:50:52,800
itself.
>> Yeah. No, that makes a lot of sense and

578
00:50:49,920 --> 00:50:57,040
it's it's easy to get wrapped up into
any complaint because we're dealing it

579
00:50:55,200 --> 00:51:02,480
just says complaints,
>> but we've defined what complaints are

580
00:50:59,200 --> 00:51:06,880
before. So, we have to it's tough to do
that to think only as far as ethics

581
00:51:04,960 --> 00:51:12,160
complaints
as stated and defined earlier.

582
00:51:09,920 --> 00:51:18,079
» Okay.
Am

583
00:51:14,559 --> 00:51:23,240
I overstating that or is that or does it
just need a clause that say the proper

584
00:51:20,240 --> 00:51:23,240
official?

585
00:51:23,359 --> 00:51:30,960
» Uh it does under reporting the first
sentence to the appropriate reporting

586
00:51:29,119 --> 00:51:34,480
authority commissioners, elected
officials, board appointees and

587
00:51:32,160 --> 00:51:39,319
employees. I see.
>> Report to the appropriate reporting

588
00:51:36,319 --> 00:51:39,319
authority.

589
00:51:42,160 --> 00:51:49,040
And then there's a different path for
each

590
00:51:45,280 --> 00:51:56,079
vein of this. So employees,
electeds, administrator, commissioners,

591
00:51:52,400 --> 00:52:01,599
» right? Where did you see reported ends
up with the uh appropriate

592
00:51:59,520 --> 00:52:06,359
» uh bottom of page five? The first
sentence under item three reporting.

593
00:52:20,480 --> 00:52:23,720
I see.

594
00:52:27,680 --> 00:52:33,240
And then my concern was when we had

595
00:52:36,880 --> 00:52:44,559
um
let's see

596
00:52:41,920 --> 00:52:48,680
that helps a lot. Yeah. So we're already
we've already narrowed the scope.

597
00:52:54,640 --> 00:53:01,559
So now we're on page seven. Is that
correct

598
00:52:57,920 --> 00:53:01,559
» as we move along?

599
00:53:02,079 --> 00:53:11,720
» You know what?
Took me back to five.

600
00:53:07,440 --> 00:53:11,720
» That was a mistake. Sorry.

601
00:53:12,960 --> 00:53:20,400
» Personal interest
means a non-financial interest,

602
00:53:17,920 --> 00:53:26,400
relationship or benefit
that could be expected to impair

603
00:53:23,200 --> 00:53:31,000
independence of judgment or create the
appearance of impaired independence.

604
00:53:31,040 --> 00:53:35,000
That is scary.

605
00:53:36,720 --> 00:53:46,720
So, let's say you're a conservationist
and you've been one your whole life and

606
00:53:42,240 --> 00:53:54,640
that's your overarching goal in life.
Does that mean you could never

607
00:53:50,079 --> 00:53:57,640
vote on some issue about preserving land
or

608
00:53:58,000 --> 00:54:05,920
that one's that one's
any interest? Well, I I don't

609
00:54:04,079 --> 00:54:10,319
» It could be expected to impair your
independence and judgment.

610
00:54:08,559 --> 00:54:13,119
» I I don't see where that reasonably
could be expected to impair your

611
00:54:12,000 --> 00:54:19,280
judgment.
>> I don't either.

612
00:54:15,040 --> 00:54:23,599
that pin that in the case brought up
that's your I mean any you could if you

613
00:54:22,240 --> 00:54:31,200
wanted to go that wide on your
interpretation any uh any

614
00:54:28,480 --> 00:54:35,920
political stance or personal belief
would I just I just don't think that

615
00:54:33,839 --> 00:54:43,319
rises to that level
>> personal interest yeah that sure could

616
00:54:38,720 --> 00:54:43,319
be grabbed and interpreted

617
00:54:43,760 --> 00:54:52,880
to impair dependence or judgment.
I think that could be used as a tool.

618
00:54:52,160 --> 00:54:59,280
» Well, I've seen
>> if you've been a builder your whole life

619
00:54:57,119 --> 00:55:03,920
» or an electrician,
does that mean you can never vote on

620
00:55:00,960 --> 00:55:06,880
anything with construction codes?
>> No.

621
00:55:04,319 --> 00:55:11,760
» Or or
>> the one example I'm thinking of actually

622
00:55:09,200 --> 00:55:16,000
is with Commissioner Campbell. you
abstained from the vote on buying the

623
00:55:13,760 --> 00:55:20,319
fish. You won't have a you don't have a
financial interest in it, but that

624
00:55:18,160 --> 00:55:25,760
project is of a personal interest and
you did step back from that.

625
00:55:24,240 --> 00:55:27,119
» And you could make an argument either
way on that,

626
00:55:26,480 --> 00:55:32,160
» of course.
>> Yeah. And I don't see

627
00:55:30,640 --> 00:55:38,800
on
I don't see that being an impairment.

628
00:55:36,160 --> 00:55:44,520
» No, but it was a personal interest. It
was

629
00:55:40,000 --> 00:55:44,520
» I think this could be used as a weapon.

630
00:55:45,119 --> 00:55:50,559
» We want people who have been dedicated
to things

631
00:55:49,599 --> 00:55:53,559
in their life.
>> Mhm.

632
00:55:56,079 --> 00:56:02,160
» Is personal interest referred to
anywhere in this policy? I mean,

633
00:55:59,920 --> 00:56:05,520
obviously, if it's a definition for it,
I guess we could look at where it's

634
00:56:03,839 --> 00:56:08,240
referred to in this policy and see if
that fits. I would have to do a word

635
00:56:07,599 --> 00:56:14,319
search.
>> How about just take out interest and

636
00:56:10,960 --> 00:56:19,480
relationship? Well, relationship
interest relationship and just leave

637
00:56:16,480 --> 00:56:19,480
benefit.

638
00:56:23,599 --> 00:56:34,520
I if I'm going to benefit, let's say,
so why don't I see if it's referred to

639
00:56:29,920 --> 00:56:34,520
in this way in the policy at all?

640
00:56:34,720 --> 00:56:41,319
Um,
>> my guess is that came from Grand

641
00:56:37,920 --> 00:56:41,319
Traverse County.

642
00:56:43,040 --> 00:56:49,119
» Cuz yeah, I mean, I can see to your
point this could be widely interpreted

643
00:56:46,400 --> 00:56:52,119
and taken and abused. So,
>> yeah,

644
00:56:54,720 --> 00:57:03,200
» generally the kind of people who decide
to do this are people who have been

645
00:57:00,880 --> 00:57:05,760
dedicated to things.
>> Mhm.

646
00:57:07,520 --> 00:57:10,920
playing cards.

647
00:57:13,040 --> 00:57:20,440
» Do you want to take out interest and
just leave relationship or or benefit?

648
00:57:21,760 --> 00:57:28,960
» That tightens it a bit. I don't like the
interest.

649
00:57:26,079 --> 00:57:33,119
» Let's get rid of the interest.
>> Which words are we removing? Just

650
00:57:30,960 --> 00:57:37,040
interest in
what would be

651
00:57:35,359 --> 00:57:39,599
uh one
>> just the word interest.

652
00:57:38,559 --> 00:57:44,480
» Yes.
>> Means a non-financial

653
00:57:41,839 --> 00:57:47,480
» relationship or benefit.
>> Okay.

654
00:58:06,480 --> 00:58:12,240
page seven, right?
>> Mhm.

655
00:58:10,720 --> 00:58:15,720
» Thank you for taking that off.
>> Yeah. No problem.

656
00:58:17,359 --> 00:58:20,359
Manager

657
00:58:36,079 --> 00:58:40,200
under C board review.

658
00:58:42,400 --> 00:58:50,160
I'm not sure
how something gets to the board when a

659
00:58:48,240 --> 00:58:53,520
matter is properly before the board of
commissioners.

660
00:58:52,160 --> 00:58:59,760
Mhm.
>> Um

661
00:58:56,319 --> 00:59:04,400
I take items that would come before the
board as right now for non-union.

662
00:59:03,440 --> 00:59:08,559
» Mhm.
>> It's it's an appeal process.

663
00:59:06,880 --> 00:59:11,920
» There's a polic there's a procedure to
follow with steps.

664
00:59:09,920 --> 00:59:17,839
» Right. And under this that would extend
to ethics violations that were

665
00:59:14,480 --> 00:59:22,880
determined to actually be violations.
Mhm.

666
00:59:19,359 --> 00:59:28,119
» They could appeal to the county board.
>> We don't have that detailed in here. The

667
00:59:25,119 --> 00:59:28,119
steps.

668
00:59:28,640 --> 00:59:37,119
» We have an effort to resolve it. But are
there other policies that would throw it

669
00:59:34,079 --> 00:59:41,920
to the board
that this would cover when it does come

670
00:59:39,599 --> 00:59:45,040
to the board?
>> For employees,

671
00:59:43,839 --> 00:59:49,680
» non-un employees,
>> non-un employees. that if it's non-union

672
00:59:47,760 --> 00:59:55,119
employees, then it would follow policy
1.07,

673
00:59:51,760 --> 01:00:01,920
the non-UN personnel policy. But for
members of a public body like parks and

674
00:59:58,319 --> 01:00:06,799
wreck, that wouldn't apply,
>> right? And and department heads wouldn't

675
01:00:04,160 --> 01:00:10,559
apply or no, it would apply. It would
for department heads but not for elected

676
01:00:08,480 --> 01:00:15,200
officials
>> under items covered in the non-personnel

677
01:00:13,520 --> 01:00:19,839
policy but
>> they may not be items I'm not sure how

678
01:00:17,680 --> 01:00:21,280
detailed that is as far as ethics
complaints.

679
01:00:20,559 --> 01:00:30,400
» It's not
>> right.

680
01:00:24,240 --> 01:00:38,720
So the going before the board uh is more
of an appeal process

681
01:00:33,599 --> 01:00:45,280
than it is a determination process
except for we have the exception earlier

682
01:00:42,079 --> 01:00:50,160
about uh voting again like that whether
you can vote or not

683
01:00:48,400 --> 01:00:55,440
» and it says that the board determines
the appropriate process

684
01:00:53,520 --> 01:01:00,960
» and
The goal of this is that the board

685
01:00:58,079 --> 01:01:08,079
doesn't that has a a clear path follows
a clear path the same time every time.

686
01:01:04,880 --> 01:01:13,520
» Um so that need I to me that needs to be
set up as as a more of a pee

687
01:01:11,040 --> 01:01:16,640
» which is which which isn't in this
>> I'm sorry what

688
01:01:14,400 --> 01:01:23,240
» the step if there was a step process
that that's not in here

689
01:01:18,000 --> 01:01:23,240
» right which I don't think it is. No.

690
01:01:24,640 --> 01:01:32,319
» What do you guys think about that?
>> Are you saying there needs to be more

691
01:01:29,520 --> 01:01:38,559
process laid out in here or taken out?
>> No. All I'm saying is that uh the

692
01:01:35,520 --> 01:01:43,920
board's role
um is more for

693
01:01:42,400 --> 01:01:50,319
uh
for issues that aren't just within the

694
01:01:48,079 --> 01:01:56,480
board. conflict issues within the board.
The board's role in dealing with issues

695
01:01:53,359 --> 01:02:00,160
with uh say
Brownfield doesn't a member of

696
01:01:58,480 --> 01:02:04,079
Brownfield doesn't like a decision that
was made

697
01:02:01,280 --> 01:02:09,839
» against them or a department head
doesn't like a decision made against

698
01:02:06,160 --> 01:02:15,119
them based on the definitions within
this policy.

699
01:02:11,680 --> 01:02:19,839
Um then there would be an appeal process
to the county board to take up

700
01:02:20,000 --> 01:02:26,240
So
>> Brownfield didn't like a decision

701
01:02:24,240 --> 01:02:32,400
that was made in Brownfield.
>> Yeah. No, the individual didn't like it.

702
01:02:29,440 --> 01:02:36,000
Brownfield voted to
I don't know Brownfield can censor

703
01:02:34,079 --> 01:02:40,559
anyone, but it was to not allow to
declare an interest a conflict of

704
01:02:38,160 --> 01:02:45,599
interest among one of its members. and
they took that wrongly and perhaps

705
01:02:43,920 --> 01:02:49,960
they're justified in taking that wrongly
so they could appeal the county court.

706
01:02:54,079 --> 01:03:02,160
» Usually all punitive actions have some
type of appeal.

707
01:03:00,079 --> 01:03:07,720
» Yes. And if there is an appeal process,
then there there should be steps laid

708
01:03:04,079 --> 01:03:07,720
out in this policy.

709
01:03:10,960 --> 01:03:13,960
Okay.

710
01:03:17,200 --> 01:03:25,920
So, somebody comes before the ground
and request help with a project. Request

711
01:03:23,680 --> 01:03:31,039
one help with a project. That's what it
always is.

712
01:03:28,240 --> 01:03:39,039
Um,
Brownfield acts according to state laws

713
01:03:36,319 --> 01:03:45,599
given to them,
handed down to them. They brownfield

714
01:03:42,319 --> 01:03:52,880
doesn't make up stuff. It it operates
with clear definitions of what a can

715
01:03:48,799 --> 01:03:56,000
cannot do in a group. If you have you
sat in a lot of brownfield meetings over

716
01:03:54,799 --> 01:03:59,520
the many years?
>> No. Okay.

717
01:03:57,200 --> 01:04:04,480
» Handful as well. Not even a handful.
>> No, I'm

718
01:04:01,359 --> 01:04:06,960
these poor guys end up taking taking a
lot of notes.

719
01:04:05,039 --> 01:04:09,440
» Not not for Brownfield. I have not. I've
only watched a few of them. I haven't

720
01:04:08,559 --> 01:04:15,520
sat through.
>> Yeah. No, I was just thinking if you'd

721
01:04:11,280 --> 01:04:19,839
sat in there for 10 years. Um,
so if it's not in accordance with this

722
01:04:18,240 --> 01:04:25,119
state,
they have a pretty tight wicket. They

723
01:04:21,680 --> 01:04:32,799
have to It's It's usually not an opinion
thing. is whether does this qualify

724
01:04:28,480 --> 01:04:36,720
and is there money. So I'm try I'm
trying to think of a decision that would

725
01:04:34,480 --> 01:04:40,720
come before the county board. I probably
used it for example as far as something

726
01:04:38,799 --> 01:04:45,760
that could be appealed. But what I you
what I actually what I talked about was

727
01:04:43,280 --> 01:04:50,400
an au
determination that the brownfield might

728
01:04:48,720 --> 01:04:56,880
have that there was a conflict of
interest among one of its members.

729
01:04:54,559 --> 01:05:02,720
the brownfield would be the first to act
on that and then the individual would

730
01:04:59,599 --> 01:05:08,559
have an opportunity to appeal that
decision

731
01:05:04,240 --> 01:05:12,240
uh to the county board
but not I'm not thinking

732
01:05:10,240 --> 01:05:15,839
» you're right that's not a good example
>> yeah and I'm not thinking in context

733
01:05:14,480 --> 01:05:18,480
» so I don't want to waste your time on
that one

734
01:05:16,400 --> 01:05:23,760
» okay and then on on page eight they do
we do talk about methods of enforcement

735
01:05:20,880 --> 01:05:28,559
which I know we're not there yet but
>> and I'm Not saying there aren't any good

736
01:05:25,520 --> 01:05:34,280
examples. Maybe Helen, maybe there are.
>> That's just that's just not a good one

737
01:05:30,559 --> 01:05:34,280
to go cover.

738
01:05:34,960 --> 01:05:38,920
just kind of get a little bit.

739
01:05:39,440 --> 01:05:48,559
» So, I don't know how easy of an affix
how easy of a fix that is cuz usually

740
01:05:46,559 --> 01:05:56,640
appeals
fall under uh a separate category

741
01:05:53,920 --> 01:06:03,039
rather than just being blended in with
whatever administrative review.

742
01:06:00,880 --> 01:06:09,160
So,
I don't want to skip ahead. Yeah, I

743
01:06:05,280 --> 01:06:09,160
don't want to get too far.

744
01:06:31,760 --> 01:06:42,559
Do we want to leave that with
as a an ask of Matt to

745
01:06:40,000 --> 01:06:45,440
uh to review this as far as having
appeals?

746
01:06:43,839 --> 01:06:48,240
» I think it would probably go under
section four because this is

747
01:06:47,119 --> 01:06:54,640
enforcement,
>> right? Well, this is

748
01:06:52,000 --> 01:06:57,640
administrative review
reporting.

749
01:07:02,480 --> 01:07:07,000
So, it's enforcement for each category.

750
01:07:08,480 --> 01:07:12,440
See if I got these in.

751
01:07:17,039 --> 01:07:22,640
This is on I got this under
administrative review. I got the wrong

752
01:07:21,359 --> 01:07:25,440
page.
>> Do you have the one that says draft on

753
01:07:24,079 --> 01:07:29,480
the top?
>> Well, I printed it out.

754
01:07:33,520 --> 01:07:37,960
» Section 4, page 8, enforcement.

755
01:07:45,280 --> 01:07:56,680
I I got four as enforcement and I've got
three as reporting. I was under

756
01:07:53,680 --> 01:07:56,680
AB

757
01:07:58,720 --> 01:08:07,760
a administrative review, B unionize
employee, C board review on page seven.

758
01:08:05,039 --> 01:08:11,680
Okay, I'm with you. Okay, that's what I
would where we were talking about board

759
01:08:09,359 --> 01:08:15,839
review.
>> Yes. But as far as an appeal, I think

760
01:08:14,079 --> 01:08:18,239
that would go in the next section,
right?

761
01:08:16,319 --> 01:08:22,159
» After enforcement, if it was not
resolved during the proper path of

762
01:08:20,480 --> 01:08:26,199
enforcement, then appeal would have to
go after that.

763
01:08:23,199 --> 01:08:26,199
» Sure.

764
01:08:28,640 --> 01:08:35,759
» So the first question is that do we have
an appetite as a board to hear those

765
01:08:33,440 --> 01:08:40,880
appeals?
I'm not sure who else would besides us.

766
01:08:38,799 --> 01:08:49,839
Um,
so we'd be hearing appeals of ethics

767
01:08:45,279 --> 01:08:55,279
of determinations of ethics violations
of this policy.

768
01:08:52,159 --> 01:08:58,920
» Would they come to this body first? You
>> no, not first.

769
01:08:59,040 --> 01:09:06,159
» Only during the voting part. If you know
if something comes before and someone

770
01:09:03,279 --> 01:09:11,120
declares then we have to make a decision
and if they vote

771
01:09:07,440 --> 01:09:14,319
» you know what so if it's an employee the
administrators in charge of the

772
01:09:12,719 --> 01:09:19,120
employees
not us

773
01:09:15,520 --> 01:09:25,279
» and that's in here under enforcement
>> I think it's gets appealed to the

774
01:09:21,359 --> 01:09:30,960
administrator right under enforcement
>> uh yeah it depends

775
01:09:28,960 --> 01:09:34,480
I don't think employee concern should
come to us.

776
01:09:32,880 --> 01:09:37,759
» They have to go through certain steps
that are in the non if it's a non-union

777
01:09:36,400 --> 01:09:44,239
employee, there are steps that they have
to take. If it's not resolved in each

778
01:09:40,400 --> 01:09:48,679
step, then you are the last stop.
>> In 5 years, we've never had

779
01:09:48,719 --> 01:09:53,319
» Might have one now.
>> We got one now.

780
01:09:54,000 --> 01:10:01,199
» Yeah. I mean,
but I think it's it's

781
01:09:59,040 --> 01:10:06,719
I don't know if it's required, but it's
very common to have an appeal proc. You

782
01:10:04,800 --> 01:10:10,159
got to have an appeal process.
>> And the union employees have one, the

783
01:10:08,480 --> 01:10:13,679
non-UN employees have one.
>> Yeah,

784
01:10:11,440 --> 01:10:20,440
» you're right.
>> I don't know who else would be the

785
01:10:16,880 --> 01:10:20,440
appeal process.

786
01:10:25,760 --> 01:10:33,600
So, under board review,
it says when a matter is properly before

787
01:10:31,840 --> 01:10:38,239
the board of commissioners. I don't know
how anything gets before the board of

788
01:10:35,520 --> 01:10:42,480
commissioners unless it's a review an
appeal.

789
01:10:39,760 --> 01:10:47,480
» But wouldn't that appeal happen with the
within each jurisdicting committee?

790
01:10:48,239 --> 01:10:53,679
» A committee. What's what do you mean by
committee?

791
01:10:51,840 --> 01:10:56,080
» Brownfield Lamb Bank.
>> Oh, okay. Committee commission,

792
01:10:55,280 --> 01:10:59,600
» right?
>> Well, they make it.

793
01:10:57,199 --> 01:11:05,199
» They have a process in place that if
there is an appeal there, it would come

794
01:11:03,040 --> 01:11:11,199
to the board where it doesn't have to be
outlined here. We just take it when it

795
01:11:07,280 --> 01:11:16,320
comes based on their policy or their
their bylaws.

796
01:11:13,760 --> 01:11:19,920
» So, what kind of I don't think they have
any

797
01:11:17,040 --> 01:11:22,880
» I can't imagine. I don't have any ethic.
>> No.

798
01:11:20,880 --> 01:11:29,000
» Yeah. I mean, this is going to cover
brownfield and plan commission and

799
01:11:25,360 --> 01:11:29,000
everybody like that.

800
01:11:29,199 --> 01:11:36,719
» They would make a determination and then
if you do have an appeal process, I

801
01:11:34,239 --> 01:11:40,159
think we're the only logical spot for it
to go.

802
01:11:38,000 --> 01:11:45,840
» And you're saying this, you want more of
an outline in here as to how we take it?

803
01:11:43,920 --> 01:11:50,320
» Well,
yeah. There is no explanation for how

804
01:11:47,840 --> 01:11:54,239
something properly comes before the
board. How does something properly come

805
01:11:52,640 --> 01:12:00,480
before the board? Well, you want to make
sure that first it goes through the

806
01:11:56,480 --> 01:12:04,159
proper channels and then upon appeal it
would go to the board

807
01:12:03,040 --> 01:12:08,400
» and we can limit what
>> so that can be easily added. So it can

808
01:12:06,239 --> 01:12:12,400
say like that can be expanded in this
first sentence

809
01:12:09,840 --> 01:12:15,199
» had that it can when all like if all
proper channels have been exhausted

810
01:12:14,480 --> 01:12:18,000
» that's yeah
>> then it comes

811
01:12:16,560 --> 01:12:21,640
» just one little statement in there to
cover that up with

812
01:12:22,239 --> 01:12:28,159
» I'm all for simple
>> I don't have any problem with that

813
01:12:26,159 --> 01:12:34,960
» yeah I think it should it just be a a
mere short statement in there as to

814
01:12:32,239 --> 01:12:39,040
agree
Yeah, when it properly comes before the

815
01:12:37,040 --> 01:12:42,080
board of commissioners,
you know. Oh, Lauren's better at writing

816
01:12:40,800 --> 01:12:47,520
something up like that than I am.
>> I'm I'm going to have legal write it.

817
01:12:46,159 --> 01:12:54,159
» But I think I know what you're saying.
>> Yeah, I would suggest we move that down

818
01:12:51,120 --> 01:12:58,400
then below investigations if it's the
appeal because you have to have the

819
01:12:56,159 --> 01:13:03,920
investigation before you have the the
appeal.

820
01:13:00,560 --> 01:13:10,600
So I would suggest making that D the
board review D in the investigation C.

821
01:13:07,040 --> 01:13:10,600
Does that make sense?

822
01:13:12,880 --> 01:13:19,760
» Although we investigate after it comes
to us too

823
01:13:17,920 --> 01:13:23,320
» in certain situations you do.
>> Yeah. Can

824
01:13:29,840 --> 01:13:40,600
you want to die in that cross?
>> I don't want to die in any crush.

825
01:13:36,400 --> 01:13:40,600
Someone already did that for me.

826
01:13:40,640 --> 01:13:45,840
» Okay. So, we're swapping investigations
and board review.

827
01:13:44,800 --> 01:13:50,800
» I just Yeah.
>> Mhm. And then I think the last one, the

828
01:13:47,760 --> 01:13:55,080
good faith stays is the last one. Makes
a nice patient statement.

829
01:13:55,199 --> 01:14:03,080
» Maybe I should say done on that.
>> I didn't know what you meant.

830
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:16,159
Well, I thought we were going to be able
to get this to the county board this

831
01:14:12,159 --> 01:14:21,760
time, but I'm kind of
asking for a lot of

832
01:14:18,719 --> 01:14:24,880
the only option would be if legal could
review it and have it back before a

833
01:14:23,920 --> 01:14:28,480
regular.
>> I think we could have a meeting before

834
01:14:26,719 --> 01:14:31,679
the regular. That's the only option I
see right now. But that would have to

835
01:14:30,000 --> 01:14:36,000
happen within the next 10 days.
>> Oh, I know.

836
01:14:33,440 --> 01:14:40,480
So, I don't know if that's possible. It
might put too much work on

837
01:14:37,520 --> 01:14:43,600
» I don't see any problem.
I think October.

838
01:14:43,120 --> 01:14:46,400
» Yeah,
>> it's not like we

839
01:14:44,640 --> 01:14:50,320
» we got a full agenda anyway, so might as
well that off.

840
01:14:47,440 --> 01:14:57,000
» No, you're okay.
>> No complaints for me.

841
01:14:54,000 --> 01:14:57,000
Okay.

842
01:14:58,560 --> 01:15:03,080
So, page eight, enforcement.

843
01:15:04,080 --> 01:15:07,800
Right.
>> Mhm.

844
01:15:11,040 --> 01:15:18,880
So, on E, I I wrote on my notes,
however, if a pattern is seen, but I

845
01:15:17,040 --> 01:15:23,520
think that's covered in good faith
report.

846
01:15:21,679 --> 01:15:29,400
There are some people we will just
complain about everything. That's just

847
01:15:26,080 --> 01:15:29,400
human nature.

848
01:15:29,920 --> 01:15:35,080
» I think good faith
>> Mhm.

849
01:15:31,679 --> 01:15:35,080
» covers that.

850
01:15:40,000 --> 01:15:47,719
» Well, you better have some receipts if
you're going to go through this process.

851
01:16:02,960 --> 01:16:08,520
And the next paragraph covers
>> Yeah. Ellis.

852
01:16:11,920 --> 01:16:14,920
Heat.

853
01:16:31,760 --> 01:16:34,760
Heat.

854
01:16:42,480 --> 01:16:52,480
Not sure why it's the commissioner who
is a subject of the whatever censor

855
01:16:49,360 --> 01:16:57,920
uh may abstain from voting were
permitted by law. That may be some law

856
01:16:56,080 --> 01:17:04,480
or jurisdiction that I'm not aware of,
but you would just think they would be

857
01:17:02,080 --> 01:17:08,040
that that would be a conflict from
having them vote.

858
01:17:09,199 --> 01:17:14,600
I think that just covers all situations.

859
01:17:15,760 --> 01:17:19,000
And you know,

860
01:17:22,719 --> 01:17:27,520
» you see what I'm saying though?
>> You in essence vote against your own

861
01:17:25,440 --> 01:17:31,280
censure.
>> Yes, that's saying.

862
01:17:28,640 --> 01:17:35,000
» That's what that's how I get it. You
start off one zero.

863
01:17:36,960 --> 01:17:43,640
» I mean, if if you don't mind, would you
mind asking Matt if we could change that

864
01:17:40,080 --> 01:17:43,640
to will abstain?

865
01:17:43,840 --> 01:17:53,280
There may be a reason that that he asked
Maine. I I don't know.

866
01:17:50,080 --> 01:17:57,320
I mean, Maine doesn't mean anything.
Might as well not have a sentence.

867
01:17:57,920 --> 01:18:03,840
I'll just put Will with a question mark.
I He may have a reason for that. There

868
01:18:02,480 --> 01:18:08,000
may be some kind of
>> Mhm.

869
01:18:05,120 --> 01:18:13,360
» uh precedence that
allows that.

870
01:18:11,440 --> 01:18:16,920
That was page eight. Any other questions
on page eight

871
01:18:17,679 --> 01:18:21,159
thoughts, improvements?

872
01:18:26,560 --> 01:18:30,280
On page nine,

873
01:18:35,040 --> 01:18:41,360
um
says a county administrator found to

874
01:18:39,199 --> 01:18:46,880
have violated this policy. may be
subject to corrective or discipline a

875
01:18:43,679 --> 01:18:50,199
action and I think it should say by the
county board.

876
01:18:51,040 --> 01:19:02,360
I think it's pretty obvious by the
county board, but it takes away any

877
01:18:57,600 --> 01:19:02,360
it just kind of completes the f

878
01:19:08,719 --> 01:19:18,239
and underneath that board appointees da
da da may be subject

879
01:19:15,760 --> 01:19:25,679
as determined by the county board to
corrective action. And

880
01:19:21,199 --> 01:19:31,360
again, um I think it's obvious, but it
just doesn't doesn't state that

881
01:19:29,440 --> 01:19:34,640
» any removal or disciplinary action shall
be conduct conducted in accordance with

882
01:19:33,040 --> 01:19:39,360
the legal authority governing the
appointment

883
01:19:36,159 --> 01:19:42,239
with you and any applicable procedural
protections.

884
01:19:41,199 --> 01:19:50,520
» Where are you at?
>> It's at the bottom of that sentence.

885
01:19:46,159 --> 01:19:50,520
» Board appointees. the last sentence.

886
01:19:51,600 --> 01:19:57,159
» Yep. It says board rule, but

887
01:19:58,640 --> 01:20:05,520
» yeah, it to me it should it it should
just say right there by the county

888
01:20:03,040 --> 01:20:09,840
board.
>> It says by the legal authority governing

889
01:20:07,679 --> 01:20:16,280
the appointment.
>> I think that's better.

890
01:20:13,280 --> 01:20:16,280
» Mhm.

891
01:20:19,600 --> 01:20:23,239
That covers it.

892
01:20:35,679 --> 01:20:41,120
» It doesn't say who's taking this action
though.

893
01:20:39,440 --> 01:20:47,480
» The legal authority governing the
appointment.

894
01:20:43,760 --> 01:20:47,480
That covers us.

895
01:20:49,520 --> 01:20:55,120
» If you
>> you're on you're on C, right?

896
01:20:53,520 --> 01:21:00,560
» If you get
>> So like NA, they can they they govern

897
01:20:59,520 --> 01:21:04,400
their own.
>> We make we make some of the

898
01:21:02,480 --> 01:21:08,000
appointments, but they can decide.
>> No, thank you.

899
01:21:06,400 --> 01:21:11,760
» That doesn't automatically come back to
you.

900
01:21:09,679 --> 01:21:18,560
» Yeah, we don't. Let's go back to
Brownfield again. Yeah. Their own body.

901
01:21:15,040 --> 01:21:23,440
» Yeah. So, I just think that covers if
you if we get too specific there, Alan,

902
01:21:20,800 --> 01:21:28,159
then we're going to run into some
situation where

903
01:21:25,679 --> 01:21:34,640
it's the governing board.
It's it's kind of the same issue that we

904
01:21:30,080 --> 01:21:40,080
ran into before with the appeal thing.
Um, I took this to mean more of of an

905
01:21:38,159 --> 01:21:43,600
appeal.
um

906
01:21:41,920 --> 01:21:49,679
which would put it in front of the
county board. Are we going to have an

907
01:21:46,080 --> 01:21:56,159
appeal process where someone uh action
is taken uh about an ethics violation by

908
01:21:54,159 --> 01:22:02,320
the planning commission that the that
the individual who is the center of the

909
01:21:58,960 --> 01:22:07,040
the action can appeal that to the county
board or is the planning commission in

910
01:22:05,199 --> 01:22:10,400
charge of
I mean

911
01:22:08,639 --> 01:22:12,800
» it depends on the board. I wouldn't say
the planning commission is that the

912
01:22:11,679 --> 01:22:15,679
county board is in charge of the
planning commission.

913
01:22:14,159 --> 01:22:17,520
» The county board is not in charge of
other things.

914
01:22:16,239 --> 01:22:21,199
» But the county board is not in charge of
brownfield or like we're not in charge

915
01:22:20,000 --> 01:22:24,960
of that.
>> But they have well they have to follow

916
01:22:23,280 --> 01:22:26,960
our policies
>> and

917
01:22:25,360 --> 01:22:31,440
» they have their own bylaws and their own
policies.

918
01:22:29,360 --> 01:22:34,480
» So you're just talking about an appeal
comes here. But let me discuss.

919
01:22:34,000 --> 01:22:37,520
» So
>> I don't think we should get too

920
01:22:35,840 --> 01:22:40,560
specific.
And are you really going to over like

921
01:22:39,199 --> 01:22:44,560
let's think about the other side like
are you going to override like if we

922
01:22:42,239 --> 01:22:48,719
have someone on
>> area agency on aging or senior services

923
01:22:46,880 --> 01:22:51,600
advice like you're going to override
that?

924
01:22:49,440 --> 01:22:56,400
» Probably not. However, that person will
have felt like they've had their due

925
01:22:53,760 --> 01:23:00,000
process.
>> That's a whole another issue.

926
01:22:58,239 --> 01:23:03,120
» Well, and that that's part of the appeal
process, but that's not covered under

927
01:23:01,600 --> 01:23:09,760
this. That's covered in the part we
talked about earlier. Let's say we

928
01:23:05,440 --> 01:23:13,840
decided to take somebody off area agency
on Aging.

929
01:23:11,520 --> 01:23:15,600
They could come to us and go, "You don't
have that authority."

930
01:23:15,199 --> 01:23:19,760
» Well,
>> we can make all we can make all the

931
01:23:17,440 --> 01:23:22,880
judgments we want, but
>> Well, if they violated our ethics

932
01:23:21,360 --> 01:23:25,520
policy,
and that's that's what we're talking

933
01:23:24,080 --> 01:23:29,360
about. We're not talking about just
removing for political reasons.

934
01:23:27,600 --> 01:23:35,440
» Why do you want to put the board there?
Any governing the appropriate governing

935
01:23:32,000 --> 01:23:35,440
authority covers it.

936
01:23:35,520 --> 01:23:43,159
I I would feel better with an appeal
process to the county board. I mean, I

937
01:23:43,440 --> 01:23:52,320
I'm more than willing to be overruled on
that. I just think it's better policy to

938
01:23:49,760 --> 01:23:58,159
uh have someone have an alternative
means to express their defense.

939
01:23:56,719 --> 01:24:01,480
» I think you're talking about a whole
another step.

940
01:24:02,000 --> 01:24:08,159
But let's say somebody comes to us and
says, "We I don't like the fact that I

941
01:24:05,840 --> 01:24:12,400
was kicked off Brownfield." We have no
authority there.

942
01:24:10,639 --> 01:24:15,280
We can't they can't bring an appeal to
us.

943
01:24:12,719 --> 01:24:17,440
» I don't think they can kick anyone off
Brownfield.

944
01:24:15,920 --> 01:24:22,719
» Well, that's the thing. This stuff never
happens. But even if it did, they they

945
01:24:20,880 --> 01:24:26,719
can come and appeal to us and we'll go,
"Oh, we're really sorry."

946
01:24:24,560 --> 01:24:31,199
» Well, they can censor someone from
Brownfield, I think. I don't know that

947
01:24:29,520 --> 01:24:39,120
for sure.
um they should be able to vote to uh uh

948
01:24:36,000 --> 01:24:45,679
require someone not to vote to declare
someone um has a conflict.

949
01:24:43,040 --> 01:24:49,560
Does this get where we want to go? If
that's a concern of ours,

950
01:24:50,080 --> 01:24:55,000
quoting what the legal government told
you,

951
01:24:56,480 --> 01:25:03,960
» where were you reading that? I'm sorry.
the last sentence of C board appointees.

952
01:25:00,960 --> 01:25:03,960
» Okay.

953
01:25:05,760 --> 01:25:10,000
» Yeah. I just I think
>> I don't know that you want all that

954
01:25:08,639 --> 01:25:12,960
coming back to the
>> governing the appointment covers

955
01:25:11,679 --> 01:25:16,159
everything
>> that goes back to the root.

956
01:25:14,560 --> 01:25:20,639
» If it's your committee or commission, it
will come back to you. If it's somebody

957
01:25:17,760 --> 01:25:24,239
else's, it goes through their process.
>> Yeah.

958
01:25:22,639 --> 01:25:29,760
» You're talking about a whole another
step. if there's an appeal.

959
01:25:26,960 --> 01:25:34,159
Well, some I
>> but I don't like for other things

960
01:25:31,760 --> 01:25:37,040
» put put the airport authority on that.
They're their own authority. We have no

961
01:25:35,679 --> 01:25:40,880
jurisdiction over that.
>> You make our multi-county authority. So,

962
01:25:40,400 --> 01:25:44,560
» but
>> we make our recommendation for an

963
01:25:42,480 --> 01:25:47,600
appointment and that's the end of it.
>> But let's say one of our members gets

964
01:25:46,239 --> 01:25:50,560
censored on there and they want to come
to us for an appeal. We can't take that

965
01:25:49,280 --> 01:25:54,800
up. We're they're we're not their
authority.

966
01:25:52,960 --> 01:25:59,400
That's what it's referring to. the legal
authority governing the appointment. So,

967
01:26:00,239 --> 01:26:06,880
yeah.
>> Well, it's the legal authority governing

968
01:26:03,920 --> 01:26:10,960
the appointment. We are the legal
authority governing the appointment.

969
01:26:09,760 --> 01:26:14,760
» No, we're not.
>> Yeah, we are. We appoint.

970
01:26:14,960 --> 01:26:21,600
It's not the legal authority of the
board. It's the legal authority of the

971
01:26:19,040 --> 01:26:28,400
appointment and we make the appointment.
And I I'd like to call a question.

972
01:26:25,360 --> 01:26:31,800
» I don't You're right. I'm I'm out
somewhere out

973
01:26:31,840 --> 01:26:38,400
» like a dog on a bone. Alan,
>> well, we we can ask we can ask Matt,

974
01:26:37,600 --> 01:26:43,120
» I have a note.
>> Is that Yeah. Is that directed at the

975
01:26:40,800 --> 01:26:48,000
county board or is that directed at the
individual boards?

976
01:26:45,040 --> 01:26:54,800
» Because I I I just read that that we're
the appointing legal authority.

977
01:26:51,520 --> 01:26:58,000
Yeah, but a board has the authority
to dismiss somebody.

978
01:26:57,280 --> 01:27:01,920
I don't think so.
>> They and they often appoint their own

979
01:27:00,239 --> 01:27:04,480
people too.
>> I don't think they do. It all comes to

980
01:27:03,920 --> 01:27:08,960
us.
>> No, there are there are independent

981
01:27:06,639 --> 01:27:13,760
people who are on beta. There are
independent representatives that we have

982
01:27:11,360 --> 01:27:19,040
appoint.
I think that's a big fight

983
01:27:16,320 --> 01:27:25,520
that the basis of the legal
>> an area agency on aging NMCA they have

984
01:27:23,120 --> 01:27:31,280
» they have just
>> well let's get some clarification not

985
01:27:28,400 --> 01:27:38,880
appointed by anyone
>> Renbach was on NMCAA for years and years

986
01:27:35,360 --> 01:27:44,880
she's moving to Trevor City NMCAA
appointed her to take Tony and Sord's

987
01:27:41,199 --> 01:27:50,560
place but has nothing to do with us. I
mean, with their board,

988
01:27:46,800 --> 01:27:55,679
» I I agree other than I think there is a
that was a reason for our lawsuit is

989
01:27:52,560 --> 01:27:59,760
that they changed their their uh
constitution to say that they could

990
01:27:57,600 --> 01:28:04,639
appoint people and Grand Traverse County
did not like that they different.

991
01:28:02,560 --> 01:28:06,800
» You'll get all of this in your
>> um

992
01:28:05,120 --> 01:28:08,800
» completely different issue. I was on the
way.

993
01:28:08,320 --> 01:28:11,840
» Anyways,
>> we're talking about different numbers.

994
01:28:10,239 --> 01:28:15,600
» Well, maybe you can inform me on what
that lawsuit was. I thought that was it.

995
01:28:14,000 --> 01:28:21,360
» You have an update coming
>> different members.

996
01:28:17,840 --> 01:28:25,440
» Uh anyways, uh
uh

997
01:28:22,880 --> 01:28:29,440
I think we're just dealing with strictly
county

998
01:28:26,960 --> 01:28:34,480
uh county commissions and committees,
not multi-count

999
01:28:31,280 --> 01:28:38,000
committees and commissions of which we
were appointing board.

1000
01:28:35,679 --> 01:28:41,719
» So I have a note to ask about about
that.

1001
01:28:38,719 --> 01:28:41,719
» Okay.

1002
01:28:41,920 --> 01:28:49,600
Do I need to call the question then? I
just don't think

1003
01:28:46,880 --> 01:28:52,080
» we're going to ask the jury.
>> The juror. The

1004
01:28:50,560 --> 01:28:57,520
» juror.
I just I think it's very dangerous to

1005
01:28:54,480 --> 01:29:03,120
get too specific and assume that we have
all this power

1006
01:28:59,920 --> 01:29:08,080
as a rule of thumb.
>> Well, yeah. Just asking who if if one of

1007
01:29:05,679 --> 01:29:12,239
our appointed committees can kick
someone off their own board. I think

1008
01:29:10,159 --> 01:29:16,360
that was a question.
That's what you stated.

1009
01:29:16,400 --> 01:29:21,080
» Let's not go into it again.
>> Okay.

1010
01:29:21,840 --> 01:29:26,120
» Okay. Countywide officials.

1011
01:29:32,560 --> 01:29:40,960
I think he's he took this from
someplace. I I don't know where, but

1012
01:29:51,520 --> 01:30:01,480
The only question I had on that was who
would determine that we would take up

1013
01:29:57,040 --> 01:30:01,480
the issue of a public sensor.

1014
01:30:01,760 --> 01:30:05,800
I mean, is that something that

1015
01:30:06,800 --> 01:30:12,560
» I haven't walked through that. I don't
know. I would imagine it would be you

1016
01:30:10,639 --> 01:30:15,440
» as a board
>> vote to put it on the agenda. We'll put

1017
01:30:14,560 --> 01:30:20,800
it on the agenda.
>> Would that be in close session? I hope

1018
01:30:19,440 --> 01:30:27,199
» typically not.
>> I think that's true.

1019
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:30,199
» Well, I hope it doesn't come down.
Um,

1020
01:30:30,480 --> 01:30:34,760
that was my only question I know.

1021
01:30:47,360 --> 01:30:52,719
Um, under ethics policy violation
reports involving employees.

1022
01:30:51,920 --> 01:30:58,679
» Where are you?
>> I'm down to the bottom of page nine.

1023
01:30:58,960 --> 01:31:05,679
And uh
I think they should be provided to the

1024
01:31:03,520 --> 01:31:11,199
board of commissioners as appropriate
and consistent with

1025
01:31:08,639 --> 01:31:17,280
these.
>> I think may is a better word.

1026
01:31:14,320 --> 01:31:20,719
» Well, I think we're better off knowing.
>> You know what that's again? The

1027
01:31:19,120 --> 01:31:24,400
administrators in charge of the
importance. We aren't.

1028
01:31:24,000 --> 01:31:28,960
» Well,
>> we're the administrator reports to us

1029
01:31:26,719 --> 01:31:34,719
but not the employees. and it only gets
to you as a lastditch effort.

1030
01:31:32,560 --> 01:31:40,560
Um,
yeah.

1031
01:31:36,560 --> 01:31:48,560
» So, I think the word may is important.
Only is appropriate and consistent.

1032
01:31:44,400 --> 01:31:52,239
» Yeah. Cuz I don't I don't
if everything comes to the board, it

1033
01:31:50,639 --> 01:31:55,840
could potentially get political. I don't
want that.

1034
01:31:53,120 --> 01:32:00,400
» Well, this is actual violations.
So this has already gone through the

1035
01:31:57,679 --> 01:32:03,920
process. This isn't just a complaint.
This is if there is an actual violation,

1036
01:32:03,120 --> 01:32:12,960
» right?
>> Um so if there is an actual violation of

1037
01:32:09,360 --> 01:32:18,159
uh uh an elected official, a department
head, someone like that, I I don't want

1038
01:32:15,840 --> 01:32:21,600
to hear about it going down the street.
I want to know about it.

1039
01:32:19,920 --> 01:32:27,600
» Yeah. Now, for non-union, there is a
reporting to the BOC procedure where you

1040
01:32:24,960 --> 01:32:33,199
would be notified of of things that are
going on. But as far as like ethics,

1041
01:32:30,080 --> 01:32:37,520
policy, violation reports,
it's contingent on the what what is

1042
01:32:35,760 --> 01:32:43,040
listed below, confidentiality,
personnel, privacy,

1043
01:32:40,560 --> 01:32:46,800
applicable law,
>> but I don't why is collective in there

1044
01:32:45,679 --> 01:32:51,040
when that's non.
>> Yeah, I don't think that should be in

1045
01:32:48,159 --> 01:32:53,840
there.
Yeah, cuz

1046
01:32:51,840 --> 01:32:56,840
» but again I think the word may is
important

1047
01:32:57,199 --> 01:33:02,600
» because the administrator is in charge
of the employees

1048
01:33:05,199 --> 01:33:10,120
may leaves the door open if it's
appropriate.

1049
01:33:22,719 --> 01:33:29,239
Everybody good with page nine?
>> Mhm.

1050
01:33:31,440 --> 01:33:41,159
» During our
marathon session,

1051
01:33:36,239 --> 01:33:41,159
how you doing timewise, Dad?

1052
01:33:42,239 --> 01:33:47,760
» Got a few more minutes.
house.

1053
01:33:45,520 --> 01:33:52,159
» Should we need to be
>> should we stall or move

1054
01:33:49,520 --> 01:33:57,760
» faster? Move on.
>> Uh,

1055
01:33:55,120 --> 01:34:04,520
okay. So, last page. Uh, enforcement
considerations.

1056
01:34:00,000 --> 01:34:04,520
Just kind of cool. I like that.

1057
01:34:16,560 --> 01:34:23,400
This is a good sentence. Clearly written
by an attorney

1058
01:34:23,440 --> 01:34:31,800
» or stolen from another county. One of
the two and their attorney.

1059
01:34:27,600 --> 01:34:31,800
» Yeah, their attorney wrote it.

1060
01:34:34,320 --> 01:34:42,239
» They've been trying to cover all bases.
And the only other thing I have is under

1061
01:34:39,199 --> 01:34:48,080
questions. Again, we have this
open-ended

1062
01:34:43,760 --> 01:34:52,960
uh ability to question legal counsel
and I think they should go through the

1063
01:34:50,400 --> 01:34:58,560
board chair, the response elected
official as it but I I don't want folks

1064
01:34:56,159 --> 01:35:03,560
to just be able to go to our legal
counsel.

1065
01:34:59,679 --> 01:35:03,560
» You want me to take that out?

1066
01:35:03,600 --> 01:35:10,159
It says as appropriate to the position
and they should

1067
01:35:06,800 --> 01:35:16,880
» and again we do have a policy as as
pertains to employees on the proper

1068
01:35:12,239 --> 01:35:21,040
procedure for contacting legal counsel.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And I just don't the way

1069
01:35:19,040 --> 01:35:27,520
this leads employees decide if they want
to contact legal counsel

1070
01:35:25,440 --> 01:35:34,440
and you can interpret as appropriate to
the position and issue involved is

1071
01:35:30,400 --> 01:35:34,440
doesn't say anything actually.

1072
01:35:35,679 --> 01:35:42,719
» Are you guys okay with just not having
folks have the authority to call our

1073
01:35:40,960 --> 01:35:50,159
legal counsel every time they have an
ethics? How about or legal counsel

1074
01:35:46,880 --> 01:35:54,960
with appropriate permissions?
>> Or

1075
01:35:52,560 --> 01:36:02,840
that get that gets weedy.
>> Why don't I ask our legal counsel?

1076
01:35:58,480 --> 01:36:02,840
» Yeah, that's a good one to answer

1077
01:36:05,280 --> 01:36:14,840
because what this is just saying is that
is a possibility.

1078
01:36:10,560 --> 01:36:14,840
doesn't mean hey just

1079
01:36:15,760 --> 01:36:24,719
» I would rather have the board chair
authorize them to or to go through a

1080
01:36:22,080 --> 01:36:30,040
channel before they can directly contact
legal counsel

1081
01:36:26,159 --> 01:36:30,040
» on an ethics complaint.

1082
01:36:30,080 --> 01:36:33,400
Let's see.

1083
01:36:37,440 --> 01:36:41,239
Outside your authority.

1084
01:36:43,679 --> 01:36:51,280
Actually, again, it's the county
administrator that would give somebody

1085
01:36:48,080 --> 01:36:57,159
that permission if it's just one of the
employees.

1086
01:36:52,880 --> 01:36:57,159
» He's in that lineup, isn't he? Nice.

1087
01:37:00,239 --> 01:37:05,639
» Unless it involves somebody outside
there.

1088
01:37:06,719 --> 01:37:09,199
» Elected official.
>> Elected official.

1089
01:37:08,960 --> 01:37:12,199
» Yeah.
>> Yeah.

1090
01:37:18,719 --> 01:37:26,800
It's pretty open. It sounds to you like
an employee can

1091
01:37:24,320 --> 01:37:31,679
call the attorney
without going through any channel.

1092
01:37:29,840 --> 01:37:36,239
» If there's a lot of options before legal
counsel, human resources administrator,

1093
01:37:33,920 --> 01:37:40,239
board chair, elected official or legal
counsel,

1094
01:37:38,000 --> 01:37:46,560
» you could ask him about that. how we can
limit that or or phrase it so that

1095
01:37:44,320 --> 01:37:51,159
people know they don't have they can
just pick up the phone call.

1096
01:37:56,800 --> 01:38:02,800
» All right. Not as simple never, is it?
>> No.

1097
01:38:00,000 --> 01:38:08,320
» As envisioned,
>> but we're looking at finishing up

1098
01:38:05,760 --> 01:38:13,040
and having this on the October agenda.
>> Great. Great.

1099
01:38:09,920 --> 01:38:18,800
» So these actually if these changes are
made and it's sent to us

1100
01:38:17,119 --> 01:38:23,199
» you can't do business outside of the
meeting

1101
01:38:19,360 --> 01:38:26,080
» to actually get together.
>> Well, I'm sure we want to look at some

1102
01:38:24,639 --> 01:38:29,440
of the comments provided to us from
legal and some of the stuff. That's what

1103
01:38:27,920 --> 01:38:31,679
we're asking.
>> Okay.

1104
01:38:30,080 --> 01:38:36,480
» So
just trying to get you out of another

1105
01:38:33,280 --> 01:38:38,880
baby. I know
>> I'm curious about some of this stuff.

1106
01:38:38,159 --> 01:38:41,880
So,
>> okay.

1107
01:38:44,000 --> 01:38:51,440
» It's hard to sum up everything that we
talked about. A lot of it had to deal

1108
01:38:48,800 --> 01:38:57,320
with uh
process on how things get to the county

1109
01:38:54,000 --> 01:38:57,320
board level.

1110
01:38:58,159 --> 01:39:06,480
I didn't see any
I mean we're in the weeds in this but I

1111
01:39:03,520 --> 01:39:11,840
didn't see any major
major changes or or uh discussion points

1112
01:39:10,800 --> 01:39:15,280
really.
>> Yeah.

1113
01:39:13,440 --> 01:39:21,280
» Yeah.
But I like the I like I think in

1114
01:39:19,360 --> 01:39:26,080
something like this that affects
everybody, you got to get in

1115
01:39:24,400 --> 01:39:29,960
because so many different situations
could come before us.

1116
01:39:30,239 --> 01:39:37,080
Any other discussion items, guys? What
are you thinking?

1117
01:39:33,679 --> 01:39:37,080
» Not for me.

1118
01:39:38,239 --> 01:39:46,280
» Steve wants to talk. I know him. He's a
big loud mouth. Go ahead, Steve.

1119
01:39:43,119 --> 01:39:46,280
» Move on.

1120
01:39:47,119 --> 01:39:56,080
Okay.
Public comment. I hear none. Uh board

1121
01:39:52,960 --> 01:39:59,480
member comment. We will repeat and uh
turn the meeting.