Code of Ethics Adjudicating Body - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. And I'd like to start by welcoming our new member, Member Fanning. How are you doing? Thank you. If you could please kind of do a little introduction of yourself, we'd appreciate it. Can you introduce yourself to the other members? Give us a little bit about yourself.

My name is Kathleen Fanning. I've lived in Riverside for about thirty eight years now. I came out here, was at March Air Force Base for two years on active duty. And afterwards, the base closed, obviously. I'm a physician. I work at Kaiser. Work in the hospital and still working part time. Although life is beginning to interfere with my retirement.

So, it's going

to stop. I have a husband, three kids, born and raised in Riverside. Went to the public schools. Doing this because I've got the time and energy to give back. Haven't been able to do that up until now. I've done some ethics work. There was obviously medical ethics work, but it's an interesting field to me. So I thought I'd give this a try and tribute.

Thank you. And we appreciate having you. Alright. So let's move on to public comment. Can is there any way can they please play the recording?

Public comment is now open for this item. Call (951) 826-8688 and follow the prompts to access the meeting. To request to speak, press 9. When called to speak, press 6 to unmute. You can also join via Zoom. The meeting ID can be found on the agenda.

Mr. Chair you have one speaker in chamber and no speakers online. We'll call up Mr. Earl Koschowicz.

He's my favorite, see? Can I use the overhead projector guy? I wanted to ask a know it's very small. I wanted

to say something about ethics.

Ethics is supposed to be honest and truthful but our city has not been honest and truthful basically for nothing. What makes you guys have any power to do anything with our city council and our city manager? They have committed fraud, they have lied, we don't even have a budget, it's all directly coming from the US Treasury, so we need to have some power so you can oversee some problems that I'm having. I can go through with how should I say this, their fake budget, their money laundering over a billion dollars. I'm gonna put it up here real quick, that's what I wanna say right now.

Now I wanted to talk to you guys about the hiring practices for vendors. Now vendors has a major issue right now. I've been requesting public records for, I don't know, twenty five years now here in the city of Riverside. They've committed everything, they've lied, they've committed fraud, they're buying votes, but I requested a vendors list right now and I just finally got it back a five seventy four pages. I can sit down with any of you and go through it.

We need some accountability for all the money that they're buying votes and vendors. It needs to be put on the website so the public can have access to see what they're doing and who they're hiring. It's insanity you guys, but I got the five seventy four pages, we have 19,000 transactions, 19,000 transactions since January. Now I have all the wire transfers, I have the checks are coming electronically, funding transfers, checks directly from the city to people. We need some accountability guys.

I hope you guys can have some power. The public has the right to see what the city's done and doing. We got a lot of problems, A lot of problems and you guys need to step up. It doesn't matter about party affiliation here, they are criminals, okay? And we have to have some accountability. The taxpayers should have that right to see what they're doing, okay? That's what you got to step up for, the taxpayers. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments. So the next item is the consent calendar. So request a motion to pass the consent calendar. Does anybody have any with the consent calendar?

I move that we approve the consent calendar.

Is there a second?

I can second.

I second.

Okay. You have a vote.

Motion carries. Unanimous.

Then the next item is the discussion calendar. Can we go ahead and play the audio, please?

Public comment is now open for this item. Call (951) 826-8688 and follow the prompts to access the meeting. To request to speak, press 9. When called to speak, press 6 to unmute. You can also join via Zoom. The meeting ID can be found on the agenda.

We have no speaker cards for item number four and none online. Okay.

So the item in the discussion calendar is regarding the membership updates for the ad hoc committee for potential ballot measure for consideration by the charter review. Originally, it was you know, last time it was me and miss Gichenstein, and I know that you probably wanted to be part of it. So we wanted to see if, you know, you wanted to join the ad hoc committee. I know it's more of a technicality, but, obviously, we didn't wanna throw you in there without your permission.

I'll I'll be willing. Alright.

So member Vega would like to be a part of the ad hoc committee. The next is the preconference item. So next is item number five, pre conference hearing. If we can go oh, I'm sorry. Member we have to address member Vega's absent last meeting. Was given the opportunity to volunteer. Okay. I'm sorry. Okay. This is alright. The next one is item number five, the pre conference hearing. Can we go ahead and play the audio please?

Public comment is now open for this item. Call (951) 826-8688 and follow the prompts to access the meeting. To request to speak, press 9. When called to speak, press 6 to unmute. You can also join via Zoom. The meeting ID can be found on the agenda.

Okay. So the pre conference is to hear the matter of the code of ethics and conduct complaint by Eric, I hope I'm pronouncing his last name right, Magnafisi against council member Hemingway.

Vice chair, we have one speaker in chamber, Earl Koshowitz. No those speakers with hands raised online.

Okay. I'm gonna go ahead and start it then.

Thanks, guys. I just wanted to make a comment actually on this about the Brown Act too also. The Brown Act is it protects city employees, it protects everybody, that Brown Act is in violation of actually public records. Everything that you guys have been putting behind closed doors should be put out in the open for public. That's why I want you guys to get some power.

We need some accountability back to the people. We need to see what you guys are doing, what they've done and everything else. Everything they shove behind closed doors now has to be made on the public. That's what I'm concerned about. Everything is it's just crazy right now with the Brown Act. The Brown Act protects the city employees, protects the mayor, protects everybody. That should not be allowed and that has to be that power has to be taken back and given to the public to see what they're doing, okay. That's all I wanted to say and I'm glad it's out in the open and you can see it. So thank you very much.

Now we can go ahead and move forward with the preconferencing. K. So the first order is to have let's go ahead and have the complainant identify themselves, and then go ahead and come up and identify themselves. Are they here?

Good evening. My name is Eric Magnifici.

I guess for me

Excuse At this moment, at this part of the pre conference, it's just the identify that you're here present and we'll call you

up. Just to identify. And then can the respondent identify themselves, please? So as a board of ethics, we must review the complaint and determine if the complaint with all of the procedural complies with all of the procedural requirements of the code of ethics and conduct. I will now ask the board of ethics to determine whether complaint procedures of this chapter have been followed.

Complaint is against a public official. Complaint alleges a violation of one or more of the provisions of the prohibited conduct section, and the complaint does not restate allegations of violations that were subject to a previous complaint.

Do we make a motion about that or?

No, it's just for discussion.

That matter before you is to determine whether or not the

Did it meet all these standards?

And a motion? Okay.

Yeah. You want to make a motion? Then you want to second the motion?

I second the motion.

Put it up for vote. Yeah. That's all that.

Is it within our jurisdiction? Right.

She get Yeah. As a new member. I don't know that she got that.

So as part of your packet, you have On the agenda. The complaint. And the first question to you, the matter before you now is whether or not the complaint requirements. And the requirements were as the chairs mentioned previously and we'll go through it again. The requirement is whether the complaint procedures of this chapter has been followed.

The complaint is against a public official. The complaint alleges a violation of one or more of the provisions of the prohibited conduct section and the complaint does not restate allegations of violations that were subject to a previous complaint. You would find those answers to the complaint on in your packet on page ten eleven and twelve.

Did if you received it electronically through the agenda, did you not have the opportunity to review it? Yeah. So it does if if you check if you go if you were to go through the packet and and look at the agenda, by the the packet in the agenda, it it does comply with all of these. The complaint is against a public official. Complaint alleges a violation of one or more of the provisions of the prohibited conduct section, and the complaint does not restate allegations of a violation that were subject to a previous complaint.

If if it were if it were to restate a previous complaint, I believe the city clerk would let us make us aware of that. Right? And

That is true, mister chair. Right.

Mhmm.

The motion carries five affirmative votes. One abstention, board member Fanny.

And now I now call for a motion to determine if the complaint does or does not comply with all of these requirements.

Didn't we just do that?

Oh, sorry. Yeah. No. Does comply. Okay.

So the next one is

The second one.

Right. Right here. I will now ask the parties if there is a desire to engage in settlement discussions. So this is a much yes or no. Do they wish to engage in settlement discussion?

And if so, we would allocate some time for them to discuss it. No? Okay. I guess, ten we'll give them about fifteen minutes to, discuss, settlement agreement. So we'll reconvene the pre conference hearing in fifteen minutes.

I believe so. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

We a lesson going to take you longer than fifteen minutes.

Wondering. You

may. I don't want

to stand up a bit.

Baker, where are you going? Okay.

Tell you what the

settlement because yeah. Because it yeah. Because right here, it's like it's a

question. Yeah. Yeah. So we could we could just ask how the settlement be

reached. Yeah.

Let's change it. That's right. Has the settlement been reached? Yes or no? That's the first time.

It'd be nice if they reached the settlement. Then we proceed. Yeah.

Is it easy for you to find parking? Nope. Oh, that's good. Yeah.

There's something going on.

The festival, yeah.

There's there's an event also at the NCR.

Thank you. You know, and and because I I I was like touring around. I I thought it was because of the light festival lights but but I was here earlier because I had a dream. So so I'm going I went back to my area.

Thank you so much.

Yeah. I wanna go see them. They they've gotten fancy this Yeah. Oh, yes. Oh, yeah.

No. They need to invite us

because it's

So now that the the individuals have come back, we can go ahead and proceed. Has there been a settlement reached?

Mr. Chair, I see nodding in the affirmative from both parties.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

Yeah. After speaking to mister Hemenway and further understanding the situation, I think with the history, I feel comfortable with withdrawing my complaint. Okay. Thank you. Thank Thank you for your time.

Thank you both for coming here tonight. We appreciate both of you coming here and even more so being able to discuss it and come to an agreement. Thank you very much. So with that being done, let's go ahead and move on to item seven under communications, ad hoc committee updates, new method of public education for public outreach. No. That has to do with the pre conference hearing. Okay. Right.

So, number six is is routine in the event that if you do have a preconference if you were gonna proceed with the preconference, you would determine whether or not you, like, want like to seek outside counsel, because that matter. Well, I guess it it is left up to the board to determine whether or not you like to take up that issue. But I believe, it was the chair's intention that because you're not moving forward with the pre conference, he maybe thought that you don't need to address that matter.

Would you like to address number six? Alright. Okay. So as I was saying, item number seven, ad hoc committee update, creating method of public education and public outreach. Chair Newman, Vice Chair Hernandez and member Foreman. To my knowledge, we haven't met and there's no update. There's that. So with that, let's go ahead and move on to item number eight. Brief reports on meetings attended by board members. Is there any board members that want to report on any meetings that they've attended?

Yes, I have a meeting to report on. Is that okay?

Yeah, go ahead. Great.

Thank you everybody. So I wanted to take a moment to provide a report and make comments on the governmental processes committee meeting that was held on November 18, which I attended on behalf of the Board of Ethics. And I have notes here to help keep me on track, friends. So first I wanted to acknowledge and thank the city clerk for conducting the presentation of the recommended updates to the code of ethics and the conduct through the annual review process to the governmental processes committee. Now the GPC ultimately agreed to the recommendations presented with the exception of our proposal to extend the statute of limitation to two years.

During the discussion, the GPC members also expressed concerns regarding the board of ethics processes for handling ethics violations complaints referencing the most recent November complaints as an example. Specifically, they suggested that the current pre conference procedure which evaluates whether a case meets the necessary requirements to proceed to a full hearing should be revised. Council member Condor stated and I quote, no one on the board of ethics was smart enough to ask the right questions. He went on to suggest that this board does not understand the Brown Act and that the most recent pre conferences should not have resulted in matters being advanced to full hearings. He intended to illustrate his point by saying that anyone could have an ethics complaint hearing if they checked all the procedural boxes even those alleging that they saw him quote unquote kick a unicorn on the corner.

Now I have since taken time to reflect on those comments and speaking only for myself as a brand new member of this board, I would suggest that if city council expects volunteer board members to begin their service already fully versed in city codes, regulations, and procedural complexities, then council may wish to incorporate more substantive vetting during their appointment process to ensure that candidates meet that expectation. And lastly, I want to state very directly and very clearly that for as long as I serve on this board, I will never support creating additional barriers to filing pre conference or hearing procedures for ethics complaints. I would rather review numerous complaints even those that may be perceived by others as frivolous than deter or even prevent a single legitimate case. We must consider that a complainant alleging something as improbable as kicking a unicorn could be facing language barriers, cognitive challenges, or even other obstacles. The full hearing process is ultimately elevating the facts through a fair process.

So ensuring open and equitable access to the ethics complaints process is essential to not only public trust, but transparency and accountability. And I remain committed to upholding those values even if doing so results in me asking imperfect questions. So I'm happy to share these comments directly with the GPC but I wanted to make sure it was on the record here. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else have any?

I would just like to thank Member Kelsenstein for doing that for us and giving such a thorough response and very well thought out and for being there to represent all of us. I don't appreciate us being called stupid, perhaps maybe uninformed or unaware of certain things might be a better way to put it. But yes, thank you for reporting on that. And just months ago when I complained about the fact that we have to take the complainants as truth no matter how ridiculous it is. I use the example of they saw an alien come down in a spaceship and give a big bundle of money to a council member.

Wouldn't that be too ridiculous? And I was told, no, you kind of have to consider it. So, yeah, kicking a unicorn, aliens with spaceships and money, you know, I'm glad they are going to revisit that and perhaps change it to where if there's like compelling evidence to the contrary we are allowed to consider that as well. That's what I would like to see.

I just wanted to you know state to the fact too that this is an opportunity for the public to come in. And it this is this is not something well, you know, in the in the council member or the council person making a comment saying that, you know, we're stupid. You know, that that really kinda contradicts the whole purpose of why we're here as, you know, as a ethics board. And, you know, we talked about this before and I think in the future we're gonna have to talk to. And I think this this moment here, I hope we, you know, make sure we put this in record because this issue is what I was talking about earlier.

And it's very important even now that the ethics board be considered as such. And I want to state this right now. We'd be independent and show, you know, that we do have some power and some, you know, leeway in terms of representing our public of, you know, to the best of our ability.

Any other comments? Yes.

Just to add to, board member Klichtenstein's, comments that, part of your annual review, it goes through a cadence. Part of that is going to the governmental processes committee. And then by the end of the year the final recommendations, will go to the full council that is agendized for this coming Tuesday as part of a public hearing at 06:15 I will I encourage you to go look at the the agenda for that meeting on our website if you're available perhaps you may want to participate in that public hearing process on Tuesday at 06:15 or maybe, nominate a proxy to participate, if you're if you're all not able to be there. But the presentation will be as per the the code. The presentation will be presented by the chair of the governmental processes committee, which is council member Falcone.

And in addition to your, recommendations that you submitted forward to the governmental processes committee, three additional changes were included, some language changes, relative to the presentation of evidence. And so, I encourage you to look at those recommendations by GPC because they will be taken up for consideration by the city council.

Pardon me. Have a question. Please forgive me. Do I'm Okay. Go ahead.

So a couple of things. I think I heard somebody say something about you don't know what the Brown Act is. Is there enough education? Is there enough onboarding of us to know what we're talking about? Need to look up Brown Act frankly.

I've read as much as I can that I was given. So is there room for more education? I don't know all the details of what happened but I have a good feel for it. And the question I would have is there a way to resolve these issues a little bit quickly, more quickly rather than having the members or the city the employees who whoever they are, the elected officials, hang for such a long period of time with these allegations over their head. Because if you ever had to do that, that's kind of rough.

It messes with your brain. When you've got something, a dagger hanging over your head, you know you didn't do anything wrong, but you're going to have to put up with this. So is there a way to speed up the process so that things don't have to go so slowly that people are tortured by this and these accusations? And I guess the last thing I really need to say is that I'm a little distressed that the city council is going to be voting on this but this is all about them.

That's right.

Exactly right. What's up with that man? Yeah.

That's exactly right.

So they're voting on the this thing that it could they're gonna be sour grapes.

So we have to be careful what we talk about at this current placement on the agenda. We are at announcements. But if there if there's a desire by the board to, agendize perhaps training, the board, the Brown Act training or any other, topic that you deem necessary, we could certainly agendize that for your January meeting, so that way miss, excuse me, that way board member Fanning can be brought up to speed. But right now at this moment we I want to caution you on how much we discuss that's not on the agenda.

Thank you. Sorry. The question to follow-up with that you had mentioned the Tuesday meeting where they're gonna be presenting it. Would I need to be there as a member of this board or would I need to be present as a city resident? Can you clarify that, please?

So that that's totally left up to the board. The board can determine whether you want to identify a proxy to address questions that are asked perhaps by the city council if anywhere to come up or to make any comments on behalf of the board of ethics that will have to be determined by you to to decide if you want to do that. You're more than welcome to attend the public hearing as a resident and make your comments as a resident, but you'll just have to delineate your comments aside from the your your representation of the board of ethics.

Thank you.

So I'd like to add to the comments that, you know, I I do I at least appreciate Jim Perry's comments understanding why we went forward with, the hearing. But the reality is that the way, the code is written and the directions are written for the Board of Ethics and the pre hearing is it's not up to us to determine who's right, who's wrong. You know, it doesn't matter how we feel about certain council members or any individuals. The point of the pre conference hearing is just for us to determine whether they brought enough evidence that determines whether we should move forward with a hearing. It doesn't it's not a conviction of anyone.

It's not you know, they did something wrong. It's merely a prehearing. And the fact that it's been politicized, you know, so much is is kind of ridiculous. Again, it's just a prehearing. Hearing.

It's just should we move forward? Is there enough evidence to move forward? Now, can there be changes made that determine whether like the respondents can you know, they should be able to, in my opinion, maybe submit some evidence contrary to the fact. But, again, it's it's not up to us to, like, say, okay. You know, when we brought when we had that evidence brought before us, there was a lot of evidence and it seemed like something that should have been considered even further at a hearing.

That's all that was. It's not, you know, someone's right, someone's wrong, none of that. So that's something and I agree with the other members that the GPC shouldn't be, making recommendations to city council since it is city council members that are being affected by this and its city council members that are presenting it, it should be the board of ethics that should be presenting those changes. Should they make recommendations to us to, again, in my opinion, what changes should be made and whether we bring those recommendations to the governmental process committee is a different story, but that's my opinion.

So again, I wanna caution you on what you we're at announcements.

It's just a a comment.

You do have an annual review

Yes.

Of the code of ethics. And at that time, during your annual review or before, whenever you decide to agendize it, you can make recommendations to the governmental processes. But there is a cadence in our code currently that, establishes the process for code amendments. And right now, during the annual review, all boards and commissions submit their recommendations to the board of ethics. The board of ethics will consider those and make your own recommendations.

All of those recommendations compilated together will then go to the governmental processes committee. The governmental processes committee make their recommendations. Well, they take the boards and commissions recommendations under advisement, then they make their recommendations and they proceed to the public hearing which is what we which which is what will take place on December 9 at 06:15 p. M. That public hearing.

And so the matter before you just in in in light of, board member Klitschinsteins comments about her participation at the, governmental processes committee meeting, Do you want to establish do you want to, elect a board member to represent the board of ethics at that public hearing on Tuesday, or will you just attend as residents? That's something you would have to decide to do.

Does that take like a motion or do we just discuss it and informally decide?

You, you can informally decide, as long as it's discussed and it's noted by the members that ex board member is going to attend the meeting on behalf of the board of ethics.

Pros are that we express our opinion and the cons are that, they're unhappy with them. That's pretty much it.

My question is what are the pros and cons of somebody attending as an individual resident versus as a representative of this board.

It's just that you're officially representing the board of ethics at that city council meeting versus it's just basically we've officially chosen someone to represent us at the city council member versus you just being a resident making a public comment?

I would think she's asking about pros and cons. A pro would be that if we have an official representative it makes it more A con might be what if let's say that member Kilchinsteins decides to be, you know, what if she's representing us? What if she says something we don't like? What if she misrepresents us in a way we're unhappy with? So, that's the con. The pro is that it looks more official if we have somebody representing us. So, would be my contribution to the conversation.

I appreciate that. And I wanna I mean, I fully agree. And I think that that's why I asked that question because I feel like as a brand new board member, I don't know if I would be completely comfortable being the one designated to speak on behalf of this board especially because as the city clerk had just mentioned, there's recommendations for them to change the language. I haven't even looked at it. This is the first I'm hearing about it.

So like I don't know what our reaction would be, like what our, as a board, we would come together and say we're in agreement and this is what it should be. But at the same time, I think somebody should be there. I would love to go and be able to even give comments like as a resident, but I agree with the pro of like having it on the record, being able to speak to it. But like will we have enough time to really review? And I think again, I might not understand the Brown Act because I asked dumb questions.

Right? But like how what can we get together separately and figure it out? I don't think we're able to do so because of the restrictions of the Brown Act unless I'm misunderstanding. So I don't know what to say to that. I think there should be somebody on the board that goes and speaks on behalf of our board. I don't know if I would be the right person to do it just because I'm new and I don't know but I still would like to go.

Once again, on Tuesday, what is exactly gonna happen at that point?

They're going to make recommendations to city council as far as some of the changes that we recommended, but also that the governmental process committee is making as well as far as some of the changes that they recommend to city council. I believe some of the What were some of the changes that the governmental process committee recommended?

So this is the Okay. So this is completely off topic but just really quick. The, changes are in the report and I can let you know what those are. So aside from

The recommendation.

The recommendations by the board of ethics, the two additions the well the three additional changes were like I said related to the pre conference proceedings regarding evidence and they're recommending amendments to two point seven eight point zero five d five through seven on five instead of it saying if taken as true more likely than not shows that there may be a potential violation of the prohibited conduct section of this chapter it would just read that including whether the complainant has shown that the evidence more likely than not shows that there may be

violation of the prohibited conduct alleged in the complaint and then they're also recommending in subsection six that you add language to read that the evidence more likely than not shows

that that there there may may be a potential violation of the prohibited conduct alleged in the complaint all evidence submitted by the complainant and public official shall be taken in its totality with equal weight given to both parties and then on subsection seven they're recommending that it reads if it is determined by the board of ethics that the evidence shows that it's that it is more likely than not that there may be a potential violation conduct. They're striking out section of this chapter and adding alleged in the complaint has occurred. So those are the three recommendations that they're recommending and it's just related to the evidence presented during the pre conference.

That doesn't sound bad. Yeah. That doesn't that doesn't sound bad at all. I find that there's no problem with that pretty much. You know, I kinda agree with it.

The only thing is that their comment about we not being briefed or trained in the Brown Act. Those of

us who've been here for a little bit, know, we'll tell

you because you are new and you're new, haven't had the chance or the opportunity to get the training. But we all did. And we all and for the last, well, a couple of year well, the years that I've been here, we've always gone from you, you know, the the training. So the I I think the the the I I take I take offense of the comment, really. That's that's what's happening. Is that they're using I think they're they're they're they're using that comment there for some some other purpose because we all have that training and they do too. You know, they have that same training we do. So

Is there a way we can add an agenda item next month that is would allow us to continue this kind of conversation which I know is not appropriate for right now but

I don't Yes, know what for the section.

Yeah. I don't know what that would be. So, So, are we ready for the next section?

That depends. Is there any other comments?

These comments should be germane to board member announcements.

Right. The meetings. Went. Any previous, any meetings, anyone else? No? Okay. So let's move on to agenda item nine, which is items for future for future board considerations as requested by the board of ethics members. Only items that fall within the powers and duties of the board of ethics as set forth in the city charter and or the Riverside municipal code will be agendaized or for future discussion. So is there any Could

we have, I know we were mentioning doing adding agenda item for talk about training. But so that's a good one, I think, to talk about what training. But also to discuss things like if we didn't understand the Brown Act and how it applied to that complaint, it would have been nice if somebody at some point, one of the four council members who were here, could have said, but that's not what the Brown Act means. If somebody had said that or if I don't know if you're allowed to. I don't know if you're allowed to interject and say, but you guys are not understanding the Brown Act. I don't know if that's but if someone had, that would have helped a lot. We you know?

Mostly, I can respond to questions. So But when I interject, it's it will it's more looked at that I'm swaying the

Right.

The board.

Could we discuss things like I'm not sure how we would word that agenda item but like how we can better handle complaints or better be not just with training but at the time. Like, is there a way that we can get more guidance if going off track? I don't know what we went off track on with the Brown Act. If there had been four members at that meeting I think it would have been the Brown Act violation, right? I'm asking a question. Okay. I guess I can't discuss this now. So, if we could put this on the agenda to discuss this kind of thing like how can we do this better? So,

first of all, maybe for us newbies, maybe there could be a topic of training at each of the meetings. Just teach me about this or that and it's not that I haven't looked these things up because I have but tell me tell me a little bit about the Brown Act. It's just part of the agenda because education is good for everybody. And then the other thing so I wonder if the city attorney can't weigh in during the These

are items that this is why we can agendize it so that we can discuss that at the next meeting. So that's the whole point of we just right now we're just determining what you want to discuss in So the next if we want to add some discussions about training at the next meeting.

And then the other suggestion I would have is we maybe there's a dissection of a case afterwards. So something that because just kind of a

We kind of want to sum it up into what the discussion is gonna be about.

So the discussion would be about learnings from prior ethics complaints, adjudication or something like that.

Thank you. And I want to add to that. I think that if we could have the city council involved in the training considering that they were the ones that gave us the feedback that we weren't smart enough to ask the right questions, I would love to have them be part of it to help us be fully trained because I feel like this is not possible without their support and ability to coordinate and collaborate with us and to help ensure that we're the most effective board and that we have all of the right information available. So I would like to, yes, have training on the Brown Act, other lessons learned from other hearings, specifically hearing from city council so that they can give us guidance on how to make sure that we're able to properly answer or ask appropriate questions. Thank you.

Just a quick question so we're all on the

same page, sorry.

Did because I remember I went through, like, an online training.

Yeah. Okay. There's this

is like, all over and, like, kinda it goes into detail. And then we did, like, another refreshing training also too.

I mean, those two hours that you had to sit at the computer. So Mhmm.

Okay. In our next discussion, what we'll do is, like, you know, we have that as another resource that we can do at any time as, like, as a refresher. Like, maybe that'll be a part of, like, our discussion is, oh, this link's available if you need a refresher instead of just a one time link. Maybe that'll be something good to have as part of the discussion.

Right. So is there any other items that anybody would like to add to next to board meetings?

Do we have two now? One is training and as a broad thing, could be a broad discussion on training and my idea of how we can, like discussing how we can better understand things like, you know, how did I put it before? While we're having a thing, is there a better way we can, if we're going off track, is there a better way we can be told, you know, you're misunderstanding this or whatever. I I don't know if I'm putting it right but that's not really training. That's just like on the spot as we're going.

Right. But that would be during the discussion of of the training.

Does it have to be though? Because that's not really training. It's it's it's like if during that meeting with the four complaints, if somebody it would have helped if somebody had said one of the four council members who were here had said, but that's not a Brown Act violation because the Brown Act blah blah blah. No. Nobody did. So could we discuss how maybe we can avoid that sort of complete misfiring or whatever they're saying it was? I don't think that's really training. I don't know what we would call that but you know.

Someone keeping us in track to resolve the matters that are brought

I to don't

know. Looks like you wanted to say something.

Asking more questions during that time period, but we can have maybe somebody brought up just different subject matters. During if there's a particular area of the Brown Act that there you guys may have a question of, I can always prepare a presentation or I can just pick different areas and present it, do a five minute presentation at the meeting. There's

Well, their their comment was we were too stupid to know what questions to ask. We did not know what questions to ask. Okay, maybe help us along then.

May I interject just really quick? I do like the idea of training perhaps maybe understanding what all of the prohibitive conduct matters are. Like, maybe at each meeting, over two or three of the prohibited conducts. What examples are those? Which governance you would rely on to determine whether or not it was violated.

Perhaps we can walk you through that beforehand so that way you have a a good understanding of what governs each prohibitive which prohibit each prohibitive conduct. For example, tonight, it was the Brown Act. Right? I mean, it was, excuse me, the government code related to finances.

Right. It was

And so the new, the recommendations by counsel I think will help lead you in that way in terms of making the correlation between the evidence that's submitted versus what the prohibited conduct that was selected, do they match? So just really, maybe going through a training session on looking at the evidence submitted, what the prohibitive conducts was selected, and going doing a deeper dive of each pre conference. Because I feel like every time we go through a pre conference, it's like new information. And maybe if we can all get comfortable with the complaint itself, then we can, start from that place. And so maybe we can't take all of them in one meeting but maybe with the city attorney's support and help, we can maybe attach, review two or three at a time and maybe in three months get through all of them.

Okay and this is the kind of thing we can discuss next month when we have that on the agenda. All these things.

And I think for discussion purposes I think it might be good to discuss maybe setting up maybe perhaps a special meeting prior to the pre conference hearing for something like that because sometimes we get new members. Right? And even though we've gone through the training, there may be a new member, like, for example, miss Finney. Right? Right?

Is you know, even if we had the training, you wouldn't have been a part of it. So maybe if, again, just for discussion, the possibility of maybe having a special meeting prior to the pre conference so that we can break down what you were talking about as far as the prohibited conduct, things like that.

So you know how that you when you go to a you're on jury duty, the judge gives you spiel about the law and all that before you go and you deliberate?

Mhmm. If

the city clerk and city attorney know which part of the government code is being alleged to have been violated maybe that is the focus of the training that night so that we understand this so just to laser focus because if we have the training and then we apply it it's going to be better in our brain and hopefully we can carry it forward.

I think we have, enough information to properly agendize the topic so you can just discuss it during your meeting in the New Year in January. Also note that there will be another training. The annual training will take place in March for everyone to attend, and that is, presented by the city manager, the city attorney, and myself, the city clerk, going over, all things related to your membership as a board member. And last year's training is also available online if you want to revisit that. That's always available for you as a tool.

And beyond that, we'll just make sure that you have the right items on your agenda to discuss

training that you're presenting in March, that includes the city council too as well and all members, you know, that's involved in government per se?

They're invited to the training. Whether or not they attend is, something different, but they are invited to the training.

Any other recommendations for? No? Okay. So before we end the meeting, I want to thank Denisha and Eva for making the agenda and the information large print for me. I really appreciate that. I know we were kind of scrambling at the last minute to kind of move things around and make it make sense, but I really appreciate you guys doing that. So thank you. And with that being said, we'll go ahead and adjourn this meeting.