Ethics Policy Review & Meeting Rules Committee

ETHICS POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE Conference Room 302A 10 N. Division Street Battle Creek, MI 49014 April 13, 2010 5:30 p.m. Committee Members Present: Commissioners Hersha, Gray, Sullivan and Simmons Committee Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Eileen Wicklund, Michelle Reen Call to Order: Commissioner Hersha called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. Public Comment: There was none. Approval of Minutes: A motion was made by Comm. Simmons, supported by Comm. Gray, to approve the July 7, 2009, meeting minutes. All yes. Motion carried. Discussion: Comm. Hersha reviewed the minutes of the prior meeting and action items discussed. Comm. Simmons said the minutes were very helpful in reminding him the status of the committee discussion. City Attorney Eileen Wicklund said she happened to do a presentation at Michigan Municipal League meeting in November of last year on issues related to enforcement of ethics policies and this may be background useful if the committee wants to discuss enforcement. Comm Hersha said he would welcome thoughts from the new members on where the committee should go from here. Comm. Gray said it would be logical to begin with a review of the code, as is required annually. She noted action items in the minutes and asked if those were completed as an alternative place to start. Comm. Hersha suggested that a review of the policy be done first as it is the main purpose of the committee. Then suggested members consider issues to be discussed further at future meetings. He said this committee was created to provide an annual review of the code in order to make suggestions to the commission. He said he also believed that there was an intent for the committee to provide orientation to the Commission when newly elected. He suggested that the committee consider what the role should be of this committee. Comm. Simmons recalled discussion at the last meeting about whether this committee would serve as a review board, but issues regarding sanctions, which would require entire board commission action or possible membership conflicts arose. Comm. Sullivan said she personally would prefer discussion and a committee level prior to commission meeting discussion if an ethical concern arose. Ms. Wicklund said that if the committee does want to talk about enforcement or sanctions she can provide information. Comm. Simmons said he feels that the entire board should be involved in any discussion about violations and this will require an open meeting. Ms. Wicklund said the MML has an ethics handbook, which includes examples of ordinances. She said the City of Battle Creek is ahead of many communities because it already has an ordinance. 1 Comm. Hersha said consensus appears to be that future discussion of Section 15 (Compliance and Enforcement) should be put on a future meeting agenda. Comm. Simmons concurred and added that the idea of including the full commission in a survey. He said this survey could be as simple as letting the commission know that the committee is meeting and asking for any comments or issues the committee should focus on. Comm. Gray suggested that the code be attached to this message. Comm. Simmons said this could be attached to a message from the committee chair. Ms. Wicklund cited a June 5, 2007 City Commission Action Summary created as part of a resolution 161 that appointed a commissioner to the committee and expanded the scope of the committee to prepare a Commission Orientation Handbook. She requested that this be included in the minutes. Comm. Gray asked whether the intent was to create a new handbook. Deputy Clerk Michelle Reen clarified that at the time the resolution was passed, there was not a handbook for orienting commissioners. Comm. Hersha said that while staff did create the handbook, he does recall commission involvement. Comm Hersha led the committee through a section by section review. A typo was noted in Section (a)(3) and flagged for correction: Commissions should read Commission. Ms. Wicklund said that the codification company would be notified to correct the typo. Comm. Simmons said he has noticed some issues related to Section (b)(4) Conduct of public meetings, in particular to conduct during meetings and unrecognized speaking. He said he has noticed that there are some snarky comments being made and that reminding commissioners they need to be recognized in order to speak may prevent this. He said following Roberts Rules of Order should address this, but perhaps this should be highlighted. Ms. Wicklund said she intends to send an email to the Commission reminding them of this rule. She also clarified that there has been misuse of the Call to Question, which is not intended to be a process for interrupting discussion. Comm. Gray asked for clarification on Point of Order, which is to clarify business process. Comm. Simmons said maybe it was not necessary to change the code, but maybe clarification could be made. Comm. Hersha said perhaps at the end of the process reminders or suggestions could be made to the Commission, even if the Code is not actually ordered. Comm. Sullivan said that Section (6) has clear wording, but that the line has been hard for her to determine. Ms. Wicklund said commissioners can contact her in any specific questions about conflicts as sometimes there can be an appearance, but not technically there is not. She added that there is a duty to vote, unless there is a conflict. Comm. Hersha said the code does not address that issue. Ms. Wicklund said there is not a black and white standard, but each situation needs to be considered on its own. She said there are three statutes that apply; each are in the handout she provided the committee. The consensus was to review the language in this section for more clarification about when commissioners should recuse themselves. Comm. Sullivan asked for future discussion on Section (7)(b)(1.) and the monetary limit on gifts. Comm. Simmons said his previous experience was that the limits for gift value were much smaller and that he feels $100 is high. Comm. Sullivan asked for this to be a topic of future discussion. Comm. Hersha said the amount is high and also too restrictive because the language may exclude professional work done for the community. Comm. Simmons excused himself for another meeting at 6:25 p.m. He said he would continue to review the code. Comm. Sullivan asked for more clarification on Section (14) A and what constitutes a positive work environment. Comm. Hersha said he will add this to the list. 2 Comm. Hersha said future discussion could be had on Section 8 and what constitutes confidential, but he is not adding it to the current list. Comm. Sullivan asked for more discussion on Section (10) Representation of private interests. Comm. Sullivan said she needed to leave. Each commission agreed to review the Code sections further. Comm. Hersha said he would contact the rest of the commission for feedback and work with the City Manager’s office to schedule another meeting. Adjournment: Commissioner Hersha adjourned the meeting at 6:30 P.M. 3