Good evening.

I call the order of the ethics committee meeting for the Indianapolis City County Council to order.

It is 5 34 on Thursday, July 23rd, 2026, and we're in the room 260 of the city county building.

I'd like to begin by asking my colleagues on the committee to introduce themselves and then we'll introduce our guests starting to the left.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Josh Bain, District 21.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Michael Paul Hart, District 20.

And our guest on the right.

Thank you.

Madam Chair for accepting this guest and for uh accepting meeting.

Thank you for that.

Justin Brown, District 13.

Uh I've been late myself, so we're all there.

Uh and I'm Jessica McCormick for District 16, your chair for ethics committee.

Uh, I'm gonna start today with a statement, uh, opening remarks about we move into today's agenda.

Uh, I want to thank everybody for being here today.

I appreciate you taking your time to come in and participate in today's conversation uh to help set expectations for the meeting.

I'd like to take a few minutes to explain the purpose of the uh of the conversation, what we're hoping to accomplish, and what everyone can expect as we move through the agenda.

Our so first uh I'd like to briefly explain the jurisdiction and scope of this ethics committee.

Our committee's responsibility is limited to ethic ethics matters involving members of the Indianapolis City County Council, specifically the body of 25 counselors.

Our role does not extend to city employees, the executive branch, or other elected officials.

This council ethics committee is charged primarily with reviewing violations of the council ethic council's ethical standards as described in revised code chapter 151 division two that have been filed by another counselor by a counselor against another counselor.

Uh the council's standards for ethical conduct are spelled out in revised code chapter 151 division three, and the purpose of that is to ensure that counselors maintain public trust in the handling of public affairs of the city and county, and the current ethics standards cover conflicts of interest, the duty to disclose employment and material business interests, as well as the duty to act in the public interest.

So the second charge that we have as the committee is to is that the it's our job to review the standards of ethical conduct for counselors and devise or propose any amendments to the council's ethics ordinance.

So that component is what we are here for today.

Uh today's the purpose of today's meeting is to be an information gathering and clarification discussion.

We have no voting items on the agenda.

We are here to better understand several ethics-related topics that have come before the committee over the past several months, gather information, and identify areas that may warrant additional review or future committee work.

Some of these topics grew out of ongoing review of our current processes, others came from ideas and questions that have identified opportunities for us to review those processes and improve.

Rather than trying to solve everything tonight, the goal is to gather information, as clarifying questions, and make sure we have a good understanding of these topics before determining the appropriate next steps.

What today is not is and is not is we have no ordinance amendments are before the committee today.

The items we'll be discussing are intended to help us gather information again and better understand the topics.

No uh there is no proposal drafting that has begun.

Uh, and today's discussion is not to intended to reach any conclusions or determine what changes, if any, should be made.

So as we move through each topic, uh my goal is to keep the discussion focused on understanding the issue, asking clarifying questions, and identifying areas where our work can continue.

As we move into budget season in a couple weeks, we will have the time to digest today's conversation, um, continue reviewing these topics, refine areas that should move forward, uh, work with council's general counsel to determine where our scope of work falls in jurisdiction within these items.

Um, and then reconvene for additional committee discussion before any proposal is introduced to the full council.

And with that, because today's meeting is focused on information gathering and clarification, and we are at the first very early stage of the process.

We will not be taking public comment tonight.

We first need to understand the ideas that have been presented, ask our clarifying questions and complete a necessary review.

There will be an opportunity for public comment at a future community community committee.

Sorry, committee meeting before any proposal is addressed to the council, and I encourage anyone with an interest in these topics to participate at that stage of the process.

After we've all had the are we okay?

That's okay.

I uh you'll see you'll see me like swiveling around here too.

Um so I encourage anyone that with an interest in these topics to participate in that stage in the process after we've all had the opportunity to better understand the issues and narrow the concepts under consideration.

So first off on the items is a governance disclosure framework that I've been discussing with my colleagues on the council for several months on an individual and just um basis to get understanding.

Uh again, not a proposal, it's a framework intended to begin a conversation about whether there are additional governance related disclosures.

The committee may want to consider in the future.

The current ethics disclosure form already requires certain information regarding officers, board members, and similar positions.

This framework uh expands on those existing disclosures by considering whether an additional appointed or elected governance roles, particularly those involving voting or decision making authority within a body.

Um, if we should also uh so to add to should all sorry, so if there's voting or decision making authority, that should also be declosed to provide additional transparency.

So we have have the wording in front of us.

The changes um would be to so shift down here.

Um additional tra.

So what we want to find out here is if we want additional transparency to provide right regarding these appointed or elected positions, nonprofit or other organization, organizational boards where a counselor, their spouse, or their dependent, which is the way it's already written, has voting or decision making authority within a body that does uh business or seeks to do business with the city, county.

Um so this framework is intended to supplement existing disclosure items and make those make those board positions and those roles more obvious.

Currently, let's see.

Uh currently it asks for a name of an organization and the address, and so you uh there is not an identifier in there listed to say um what the role title is, the nature of the organization, and the duties and authorities that the counselor holds, whether it's voting making, whether it's budget related, um, if there's any fiduciary, whether it's appointed or elected to those bodies.

So again, this is any organization outside of the city county.

So I think that was sort of a brief overview.

Counselor Bain, I know we had discussed this before.

Um, I didn't know if you have any comments before we ask our colleagues for more.

Yeah, we'll appreciate the opportunity to chime in on this and think it's a really good idea, appreciate the work you've uh put into this over the past several months.

Um I know when we updated the ethics proposal back in 2024, we specifically looked at um disclosing the total dollar amount, like rounded to the nearest five thousandth.

I think that might just be one addition that we could add here because I believe right now it doesn't just ask if you have if your nonprofit has received more than five thousand or something like that.

Maybe we could disclose what that specific dollar amount is.

So the clarification on this, and I maybe missed that in my wording, which I apologize.

These are non-compensated roles.

Okay.

So this is there's no money that income that we are receiving, so they're non-compensated roles.

So these are all our any service or voluntary work that we do, um whether or not and if it has that decision making authority.

No, well, I guess there's the dollar amount would be was in the our employer's area.

Yes, the dollar amount that we added in 2024.

So I guess that makes sense.

Well I can see the reason why it's tractor like this, so that way we are encompassing and we have to disclose the boards that we sit on that do not receive compensation.

So I guess that would just be something that I would throw out for consideration then.

Um as an additional topic would be um transferring that five that same like nearest five five thousand dollars if I can speak um that we have for our own and comp for our own compensation and make sure that that's also on the boards as well.

Okay.

So if there's a uh can I ask Council Pierce, do we know?

I guess we if we have employment and compensation, any any entity that we receive compensation from should be reported either in the self-employment or the employment compensation.

So on this, it's that under personal information, it's that section, and then the second area is spouse, the third area a spouse employment, then the third is dependent employment.

Um there's officer equity interest direct indirect compensation, and this is the officer and board member is what we're looking at.

And then the self-employment would fall under our employment and compensation.

So this there would be no dollar amounts to represent in this section.

We wouldn't receive money.

The only dollar amounts that would be potentially included would be what we added, which is how much are the contracts within the city.

Is that what you're talking about?

Yeah.

Sorry.

Okay.

That's my misunderstanding.

So yeah, so we would need to list that to that $5,000, what the contract is.

Uh, one of the discussions was if they are seeking to do business with, which is a broad topic that we as employees of places may not know.

Um, but that's something that we discussed.

So there could potentially not be a contract as well, depending on how that conversation goes and with that legal review with council.

Yeah.

Yep.

Okay.

Is there anything else, counselor?

Okay.

Counselor Hart?

Yeah, good question.

Okay, thank you, Minim Chair.

So I'm just looking at this, and I guess for clarification purposes, we look at the nature of the organization.

Does this include like political boards too?

And I'm just thinking about like my time in the past, you know, running like a GOP club.

I was a president on that board, non-paid volunteer.

Is that included in this type of that's what we would want to discuss further and see if we can include it with it?

I know there are we have our campaign finance records, um, and so this is not supposed to duplicate that.

This is supposed to be a separate entity from that um as far as the employment.

So I think we would list that, write that down as one of our questions looked into further, is if we can how broad that needs to go and what we can do, right?

Like if I sit my kids' preschool has like a parent board meeting, or I'm on the PTO, right?

Like, do we include that?

So these are sort of the things, right?

Like I if I'm the treasurer for the PTO organization, money comes through my hands, but they don't right.

And does the school district get funding?

So those are the nuances that we need to bring up.

We can bring up to then under look into and understand, but there's not gonna be an answer, but I think that should be added.

Yeah, and the other thing I'd add just for the sake of the record is you know, to what extent on the individual, right?

Because I know we've got spouse, dependent child, or you, right?

But I mean brothers, sisters, you know, in um in-laws, aunts, uncles, and this can be.

So I guess where does it stop, right?

We this was I do not recall.

We brought it was brought up in 2024 when we made some changes.

There was a discussion um and I think some legal analysis on that.

I had not asked our council to review that prior to this, but we'll look.

So I don't know how far we can go broadwise.

Can you um I because the form does have spouse partner or and children, but parents are not listed, siblings are not listed, and so on, and so I don't know what that breadth of extent and far reaching we can go.

Okay, my guess is it's maybe written in some area.

Yeah, there's some guidance from that from the state, maybe um, or other areas.

So we will add that to our legal questions.

I'm sure council Pierce um her list is see how many lines it is by the time we finish tonight.

Because that's sort of the point is to get that, yeah.

Okay, that's all okay, wonderful.

Do you have anything on this, Council Brown?

Yeah, just briefly run the thank you for the work on this for the last few months, and um, yeah, I'm I'm of the opinion I'm the type of person who I want to have the hundred emails in my inbox, even if I don't have time to read them, just like in search for them when NF comes up.

And so, you know, for example, I serve on the board of the Indianapolis Community Land Trust, which doesn't currently have any business dealings with the city, but I think it could come up in housing related conversations, and so yeah, even these like non-compensated roles.

I think it is important that we are pretty transparent with constituents so it doesn't look shady.

Um but yeah, I think that that's in line with what you're proposing here, and so thank you.

And this does touch on one of the items that you'll talk about as well.

And I think the thing one of the as we oh frame this and talk about is what is sorry, uh, and I always say burden isn't the right word.

What is the responsibility on us as counselors and the time it takes to complete the forms, not saying that we want to have them shorter because we don't want to take the time, um, but how much what is the depth of research and active stuff that we have to do for this, and then also what is the ask of staff once we do that as well.

So there's a trade-off there of staff and the capacity to do this, and would it require an additional uh full-time employee or someone else to do review and analysis?

So we have no budget, there is no budget for us in the ethics, and so we would have to work with council on that too to make sure we have the capacity.

So there's where I am completely, the more transparent we can be, and the more information we can share, balancing that with that um that as well.

Okay.

So thank you all.

Uh we are gonna jump to the next item.

Uh is discussion materials that contain contain recommendations that my colleague counselor Jesse Brown received from constituents.

Uh the list that he sent um was not organized in this way, but to help with the discussion.

Uh we group them into recommendations by topic and groupings by topic.

So the wording has been preserved.

I made no changes, and then any contextual information has also been included in some bullets and may have not been a constituent submission.

So I'm gonna ask Counselor Brown to briefly explain the reasoning and context behind each topic or learning the why to understand it better.

And then um if it makes sense for you to discuss multiple bullets at the same time together, you're welcome to do that.

And then after your comments, um after each section or multiple bullets, I will open it up for clarifying questions before we move to the next.

So counselor Brown.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And uh you gave a great overview of this.

Essentially, I think in light of, you know, like Mirror Indy and Indy Star have had, you know, the Mr.

Clean, uh, we've we've seen the OP OPHS uh issues, and so I think ethics and transparency are at the top of mind for a lot of constituents.

And it is a little confusing about you know, is the ethics committee the the investig or you know, was this committee referenced in that recent story from a week ago, and the answer is no, right?

It has nothing to do with the commission where you know there were board members who didn't know um they were on the board, etc.

So I think constituents just were a little confused about you know what the purview of the committee was, what the council's role is and kind of checks and balances.

And um, you know, in light of that, I just kind of asked both in a few um meetings and on social media, you know, what would you like to see the ethical rules for your counselors be?

And um, yeah, try to just not not filter them through.

I think that's reasonable or not.

So some of these I think are a little intense and some are are very straightforward, I think.

Um I had something else I was gonna say.

Um but yeah, so just I I thought I'd just give kind of like a paragraph or so about each of the um numbered points you have.

So, like number one, disclosure and transparency, because like you, my mind was to look at okay, here's requests.

What is the why behind that request?

And even if these particular solutions aren't the appropriate ones, maybe we could help brainstorm what is the council's authority, what can't be, what could be with municipal code changes, et cetera.

So the first uh numbered point you had grouped under disclosure and transparency, which I thought was appropriate.

And uh my read of these constituent concerns, you know, my attempt to group them together and say why, you know, which again, this is me, not constituents at this point, is that constituents were expressing concerns around uh perceived or real conflicts of interest in politics.

And there was a fear that we counselors are personally profiting from city contracts and policies, uh, either via direct gifts, uh bonuses at your day job, maybe if you secure a contract, uh new paid positions given on the basis of counselors' access to policy making and budget decisions.

And you know, constituents believe that lobbyists and you know connected organizations have outsized influence over elected officials and our policy choices.

And I think they in many ways look at us and think about Congress, right?

And so, yeah, some of some some of this is just straight up inaccurate.

I had somebody just swearing up and down that all of us counselors get our own government issued car, we don't have to pay for gas.

News to me, I don't know why I ride the bus or a bike so often.

Right.

So some of it is just uh a lack of understanding from counselors.

But they see uh Congress people have their net worth increase rapidly while they're in office.

There's this thing, the personal gain index from about 10 years ago where someone studied that.

I think it was Ballopedia did that.

Uh they fear the same is true at a local level.

Um, and unlike Congress people, we don't have to have any personal financial information disclosed, and then people assume that we're all you know, multimillionaires profiting uh you know, twelve our mustaches on this.

Um and then finally the last bullet point here, the the letter um refers to just making an easily searchable database of financial disclosures.

Um, I think that as we have like more and more industries focus on improving the consumer experience, uh people used to just being able to hit control F and search for something rather than click through 25 PDFs per year, you know, to find everything.

Uh I want to give a quick shout out to Emily Hopkins from Mirror Indy, did this with uh Mayor Hogsett's campaign contributions to make it easier to read than our city database did.

Um and so I just think that like having easy to use tools and searchable databases would look more upfront uh and make it you know look less like we're trying to hide something.

Um so yeah, I said that as as consumers are used to this ease of access, the difficulty of comparing and searching ethics disclosure forms uh becomes less and less acceptable for constituents.

And so again, like the the bulleted points.

I don't know if you want me to read them or if we all want to read them together.

Um these were the recommendations from constituents, and yeah, I have my own thoughts I could lead with or or wait for the actual committee members.

So if if you would like to read them, I say just read them out so folks know what we're looking at, and then we'll can move into the clarifying questions.

Sure.

So the first one was uh counselors should need to disclose any stocks or other ownership benefits held by companies or organizations who do business with the city or lobby the city.

And uh just want to give a quick shout out that you know, two people here in this room, Counselor Bain and Councilor McCormick uh did introduce that actually in 2024, and it got voted down at the full council and amended out.

Um but that is something that constituents were asking for.

Uh the B was counselors should need to disclose any travel meals or entertainment they receive that's funded by or provided by companies or organizations doing business with the city or lobbying the city.

C was counselors should need to disclose their annual salary, consulting or contracting profits and any fringe benefits on their ethics forms.

D was counselors should be required to report all ownership stakes and companies, uh, which we've just mentioned, all gifts and perks provided by any organization to counselors or spouses, even organizations not directly contracting with the city.

Uh E was should be required to disclose this gets to Councilor Hart's point to disclose any board memberships for themselves, spouses, siblings, parents, children, grandchildren, cousins, nephews, nieces, uh, including boards that don't pay board members, including boards that don't directly contract with the city.

Uh F was counselors should be required to disclose all financial institutions where the counselor and spouse carry accounts.

And I did ask a clarifying question, and they said, like, I would want to know I've got a check and account at Huntington.

Uh and then G was the council could should create an easily searchable database of financial disclosures rather than maintaining separate PDFs for each counselor, which I mentioned above.

So those were the points that came up from constituents that they wanted to see on this topic.

Thank you.

Clarifying questions, any further information on this?

The either, yep.

Council Bay.

Thank you, madam chair.

For item B.

We already have a local lobby registry.

Isn't that correct?

Um would that already need to be disclosed?

When we have on our disclosure, and again looking to increase transparency and improve our process.

We do have on our form a gifts or other items of value.

Travel is not listed on this, um, as are some of the um other items, and so and clarifying better what should be included, right?

Like so uh what the gift is, what it's not, right?

Sort of thing.

And then again, looking at that, is it on our campaign finance a campaign finance records and disclose there, or is it would it be disclosed on this?

So there's some of that.

But that is something that we have in there, but the scope I think can we can look at that and see if there's wording change or clarification or additional information we can.

Okay.

So we do have that component.

I just do feel like our local lobby registry is probably an underutilized tool.

And uh it's obviously perdent upon anyone uh um trying to influence the city to know that that's out there.

But I think we would probably be surprised about the amount of people that don't know that that's there, especially people who do try to lobby the city, might not even be aware of that.

So um I think some public awareness on that, and then on point A, uh, I would just like to confirm.

I do still agree with me that we should do um that we should have to disclose uh any stocks that we owned.

And the reason I think it maybe got a little overcomplicated is because people just kept going down all different kinds of rabbit holes.

So I think it would be prudent if we just clarified it's individual stocks, it's not mutual funds.

Um it's not blind trusts.

I also don't think you should be required to put money in a blind trust when you get elected to a local government that's supposed to be a part-time job.

Um so um that being said, uh it's obvious that we find out information long before it becomes public, and that's what led to me introducing that in the first place.

Okay, wonderful.

Yes.

Thank you, madam chair.

I've got I got through G at least, so I might need a little bit more time.

But uh, I'll at least kind of go through some of the things that came to mind.

Um, when we talk about like where to get the information, I think it even in our form, it may be beneficial to link two, and that just may be you know the the easier thing because if we were balancing what you said earlier on where the burden lies, you know, if we've already got the law, I mean, because I can imagine I'm just thinking about like the pacer games and those sorts of things, right?

Like talk about visit Indy, right, or whoever that's that's doing that.

I would imagine visiting is going to the database and putting in there, or they should, right?

Right.

Um to where that part's logged.

The other thing is I believe the clerk's office requested funds to do a modernization of campaign finance.

Um so I think that satisfies a lot of counselor Brown's concern about trying to click through and find these things.

Because it is there's a lot of things on there.

So I know I think some of these are being satisfied through existing needs or things that are up and coming.

Um as well as other parts parts on here, I I just think are are prudent to to call out that the city council doesn't approve contracts, those are approved by boards.

So every division, whether it's DPW, ISA, uh BNS, they all have an appointed board that has members appointed by the city council, members appointed by the mayor's office, and they are the ones that are approving these contracts, not us.

I think that's really important, um, at least to state it for the record.

Um the other thing I think was where now we're some of my why questions come in.

You know, first on the number on on letter A, right?

I'm counselor Bain makes the biggest point that you know I have concern with is the index funds of all of it, you know, trying to go through one of those and listed every single one.

So if that's not the intent, that makes that uh pretty straightforward and simple.

But I guess when I look at you know letter C, I underline the words here annual salary and you know fringe benefits.

I mean, some of these things I think like how you define fringe is gonna be very difficult, right?

Um contracting profits, you know, and I I think there's in here, I guess the words the what's what's the rationale behind this one?

Yeah, for that specific one, I think someone said, Well, how do I know you know you're not doing a small subcontracting uh job for a client and you get a bonus based on whether something passes at the city county council?

Um I could understand at least where they're coming from.

And I think we're you know, if if that's you know the the rationale, I think the important thing to my understanding at least is this is about us doing city with business with the city.

So if in that regard, if I think it'd be very hard to distinguish, even I mean, outside of the annual salary or contract or anything of those natures, if a counselor was tied to a contract that was with the city, they would certainly have disclose it already today.

But I think one of the things that's in that's you know, as part of our disclosure here is if it's it's impossible to identify if a counselor is doing business with a business that does business with the city that right, and that I think that's where it starts to become a slippery slope, because then you've got I mean, pick all the employers that by 25, pick all the companies within the city of Indianapolis, and then line them up.

I think you you just set it up, it's just it becomes a slippery slope of understanding and trying to find where those things actually line up.

I think you would spend hours trying to find that.

Um I could jump in real quick.

So on that, um maybe the question could be towards, and we would have to look it up because I don't know that I'm saying this right, but is their compensation bonuses?

Something I'm thinking kickbacks, right?

Related to your role, right?

So if I got a bonus from a company, like I would have to report that income.

And the question is, so let's see, I'm trying to think about I will use uh IUI, so uh Indiana University in Indianapolis, right?

So they have majors across the board, they have athletics, they have research, they have their foundation.

All most of that is all when it comes to approved in any allocations by the board of trustees for Indiana University out of the entire institution from Bloomington, the entire campus institution across the state.

And so, and I use this for as like for uh employee in education.

I work with this group of students and this major, and I work with them.

I have no idea what athletics or other is doing, and so there are questions about how do we know that, and if it's there, there's no relation to my role.

I there's no oversight.

So I think if we can look into like clarifying how that works and if there's any tie-in, but as an employee, now the example I used was a public institution, right?

So not a private organization, but if we're looking at a private organization, they don't have the responsibility to tell us things, right?

We can ask them as counselors how much contract work did you do with the city and what was that amount, and they could tell us we're not gonna tell you.

And they could tell us we're not going to tell you.

So right, we can't force our employers to do anything.

We do have the city contract database to look up what that is.

So for the example I had before, you would could search any like IU board of trustees to see what those contracts are.

And when you look at it, um likely if it's especially if it's a large employer, like there's not a relation necessarily.

So that's one area.

Um, but as a private employer, they wouldn't have to tell us.

So we can utilize the tools that we have to find information in the contract database would be our best place for that if they're not willing to provide it.

And then the secondary is what else are we going to ask them from?

Because they like again, if the network is large, they're not going to tell us what organizations they're dealing with and other things.

If I'm in sales and there's a production group working on a new contract for an assembly line, they're not going to tell me who they're working at to buy something from.

So there's those networks that we have to figure out how can we make all of these what ifs or these possibilities work within the framework of what we have in the scope of what we can do.

So those are good points to bring up.

And I like that idea, like the link to them.

That was something that I sent out to the uh counselors when we had the updated disclosure.

Uh, I put a link into our city's contract database.

So if you have any questions or issues, this is a place where you can get that information.

Okay, more.

It don't you want to can we finish or do you what I had was specifically related to that.

So I think that's fine.

Yeah, appreciate you yielding.

Um, just wanted to say where I think I would personally like to see more transparency on this.

Obviously, if you work for a nonprofit and it receives a grant from the city, that's obviously reported right now.

Um, but we have a lot of pass through agencies here in Marion County.

And we award a lot of money to pass through agencies.

And what happens when a counselor gets a grant from a pass through agency, and you have that little bit of separation there, but let's be honest.

We we all know that that's um uh as counselor brown would would say shady.

So uh I think it would be appropriate for us to take a deeper dive into that as well.

I think I think there are ways that we can look into see where that chain is, those connections are, but not bringing in every possible connection that there is.

I think we can add that to our list.

So we'll get with counsel on that as well.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, good problem.

Good point.

Uh I'm just going to like go to F where counselor should be required to disclose all financial institutions where the counselor and spouse carry accounts.

Why?

Yeah, pretty much why.

I asked a couple clarifying questions, and I still wasn't 100% sure.

My thought was they also actually wanted at least some rough dollar estimate of that, so that you know you could see if on a counselor's ethics form, it's like, oh, I had 5,000 the Huntington account this year, 125,000 next year.

It's like, oh, that seems interesting.

Uh but you're right, that just the name of the financial institution was what they said.

I don't see how that could benefit public trust.

So uh so then I'll just go down to 4A here.

He's gonna I think he's gonna read those.

Oh, yeah, we've got the right thing.

Yeah, so we're just yeah, we're just to G.

So you're gonna go good, are you?

No, you got to the right point.

Okay, so if we're done with that section, Counselor Brown, you can continue on.

Yeah, I just also wanted to on E.

I would, for example, have a problem with that, not to TMI here on the board meeting, but like I don't have close relationships with some of my family members, so I don't know what board positions they they have.

Um, I think we also probably all here might have this situation, you know, and in modern America, we also probably have family members who are close biological family members who we do not agree with on politics and would not help you know get a new contract anyway.

So I think um I don't know, but even that you could still put it out there and then explain that to constituents who had questions.

Um but I did have concerns about what if you don't know all the details about your your cousin or something like that.

Um so anyway, I just want to call that out and just say that would be difficult, I think for me.

Uh but anyway, so on to the second um Council Brown, I could say real quick and uh to throw in there, um, like one of the things to consider is not all blood is family, right?

So I may not have close relationships with my family.

I love y'all, I promise.

Uh, but like if I didn't have close relationship with folks, I would have my my homegrown family, right?

Like, so not that blood related.

So I think there are things there that we just will not be able to capture everything, and we can look and see what the guidance is at what point we are required to stop and where that makes sense.

Um I think with salaries and incomes, so to clarify our council roles are part-time.

Uh so we the majority of us need full-time jobs to be able to support ourselves.

It's actually written into our chapter 151 that we have these part-time roles, and that uh we know that our council stipends would not cover uh household needs or anything like that, right?

So it is not something that we could use to live live off of as a full-time um responsibility, and so it is state, and that is state statute that sets that.

That is not something that we do here in the city or county.

We did not set that we are a part-time body, that was step by set by state statute.

Um, and so that is determined by them.

And so when we think about that, there's no, I don't want to say no way, because I know some don't, but there is very difficult for a one of us to not have a full-time job and to be able to support ourselves.

Uh so I wanted to make sure that was clear.

So when we talk about the income and other things, we we're gonna have it.

There's no way not to have that essentially.

Um, and just something to think about.

Yeah.

Yeah, I actually had a point on that that I forgot to mention, which is that I think to constituents it might look like, oh gosh, it's such a benefit for a company to have a counselor, you know, they they must just go easy on us at our day jobs.

And I know you know when I was running for office, uh yeah, I was working a whole lot of hours trying to run for office and probably did a pretty poor job at my day job.

And so a lot of times it's like allowing one of your employees to spend all this time outside of work is is a hard thing already for employers, and so um, you know, uh to uh Chairwoman McCormick's point, if we're also going to our employers and say, also we need to fill out this 30-page form about this, they might just say, you know what, you can't work here anymore.

Um so that is a concern that I had as well.

Um, I just had one point about the uh the lobbying um portal.

I I noticed that I'm trying to remember the specific uh call out, and I didn't have time to look at it again before this meeting.

But I remember a year or so ago, I looked into the lobbyist portal and I noticed that, for example, Thomas Cook was not listed there, even though he was the main person lobbying over the professional sports development area map.

And then I saw I believe the the reason why is that attorneys don't need to fill out the city's portal, and there are a whole lot of attorneys who do lobbying.

Um, and so that seemed like a pretty big loophole, which is probably outside of our purview, but is still something I just wanted to mention.

Um with your permission, I'll go on to uh number two.

So number two was just one item uh which we categorize as conflicts of interest and recusal.

And uh what I wrote was that constituents have noted that um counselors do recuse themselves in terms of abstaining on specific budget items, and people have noticed you know, when we pass the city's budget, though you know, 1.7 billion, we often have to cut it into seven, eight different pieces because uh people will refrain from voting on any aspect of the budget that could touch their day job.

Um but counselors right now just say I'm abstaining from this part without saying why.

Um and so um and and the constituents aren't sure whether or not this was because of a perceived conflict of interest or an actual conflict of interest, and constituents also were unsure about how much um those counselors were refraining from participating in the debate over those issues.

So maybe they're abstaining at the very end of it, but if you've been pushing hard and lobbying to try to get something passed that could help your employer constituents felt that that um might need a little bit stronger language here.

Uh and then also constituents felt that um not just for employers but for major donors, uh counselors should consider recusing themselves uh when major donors have a strong position on an item up for vote for a vote.

As a recent example, earlier this month, you know, we had two counselors voting to support the interests of a person who was there in the council chambers who testified as part of a public hearing.

That person was the largest individual donor in 2020 to both of the counselors, and so constituents felt you know that's that looks pretty bad.

Um so the actual bullet point that the uh constituents suggested was counselors should be banned from lobbying the city or participating in deliberation or votes involving their employers, major donors or organizations that have provided the counselor major gifts or in-kind support.

Uh and I I mentioned here, you know, that does that prohibition does already apply to employers.

You are expected to abstain if there's not just a conflict of interest, but even the perception of a conflict of interest.

Um, but so the constituent recommendation is to consider whether to try to broaden that to also apply it to major donors or people who are giving you large gifts as a counselor.

Okay, thank you.

Clarification questions?

Thank you.

Um Madam Chair, just to clarify.

So on the local lobby registry.

Just want to make sure I heard you write.

Attorneys do not have to fill that out, even if they're lobbying the city.

I'm about 95% sure about that.

I haven't again it's been a year, and I meant to look at that today and had some stuff come up that I couldn't.

It would be nice when you get some clarification on that because if that's true, that should probably be fixed like next month.

If it's within our jurisdiction, I mean we can make it our jurisdiction.

Unless we're superseded by state.

I would find it hard to believe that the state says that you can have a local lobby registry, but on your local lobby registry, attorneys don't have to that sounds like a weird thing that would be in state law.

Something to look into for sure.

Yeah.

Okay.

Anything else on this one, counselor?

I would just mention um, you know, with some like a lot of these things I look at, and there's like the adjective, right?

When you look at like major, how do you define major, right?

And I think some of these things are eat, I mean, it is law, right?

So anything that's passed is law, so anything can be picked apart like that, and I think that's where some of these things fall apart.

Um because one major means something different to everybody.

Um then I think in some of these other things too, right?

Like, you know, we probably spend more time, at least I know I spend more time talking about land use that I do most proposals that come through us.

I tell everybody else, I'm half our job is is land use.

Right.

Um we don't vote the MDC, we don't vote at the BZA.

So I mean, right, when we're generally recruiting or recruit recruising yourself, it's from a vote.

Um, and so just something else to take into consideration.

Wonderful.

Okay, good.

Um I think my comment you touched on my comments is uh like what I was going to get clear clarification on is that perceived and actual.

Um, and some of it is it could be a spouse or a child or dependent that's listed on this as well.

I recuse myself because my spouse has a role in a job for this contract or this budget item or whatever it is.

So it's not again not just us.

Um, and throughout the budget process, since you mentioned that, that's what came in my head as we do split the question, and folks recuse themselves because they work at a nonprofit or their employer or something.

Um, and we can look and see if we can require or ask for more clarification, and I think part of this is our body is to write the rules, but as individuals, it's our job to make sure we're providing the right information, and so we cannot force, and we're gonna get to that I know, but we like forcing folks to fill it out and um or to recuse and things, so it's that perceived versus actual.

So actual conflicts they have to perceived is by the base of the counselor, I think in that, and then going back to subjective to what is your interpretation of uh majority or large number, right?

So those adjectives that you were talking about.

Uh same with I think folks, or I know folks would want uh, you know, as a body, and we talk about ethics, we expect folks in public service to ask that with um and um with moral and ethical character, and that's what we would expect, and we know that not everyone does.

Um writing the rules to fit again every option that there is, then takes out folks who really want to do good work and can't do good work and are willing to serve because the burden to get there or to be able to do it is too high, too, right?

So there's these things that we have to talk about, and I just put that comment out there.

Um your great words made me think of something else.

Um especially on um two here.

I think I want to go back to one of the points I was making earlier about counselors don't vote on contracts.

Yes, and uh, this is extremely applicable to this section because we're not voting on things that involve our employers at the council level.

I mean, there's things that could eventually get down the line, far down the line, but if this is applicable, it would be applicable to the people that were appointing to boards.

And so if we're worried if if the worry is about the people who are approving contracts, what is the standard that we set for the appointees on disclosure?

And that would be to try if you're trying to if this is what the the goal is to solve, because I mean, again, I as the minority we don't really put a whole lot of people on these boards, right?

Um if you've got a neighbor or a cousin or a friend of a business down that line, right?

Trying to make those connections out on that board, there's more harm out of that opportunity than there is for anything that you would ever see on a counselor's disclosure form.

And so I think the intent of what this is trying to get really isn't aimed at counselors, it's the folks that are appointing dollars that are actually coming out of contracts, and those aren't counselors.

Right.

Uh so it sounds like the why is actually not geared towards the body of 25, it's geared towards what I think would fall under maybe the commission, the ethics commission and that area and organization, which they do cover boards and appointed positions.

Um so I think that would be something that we can look at and figure out if that's maybe the area.

So that's chapter 293 in the revised code, um, is where it talks about like the commission and those sort of things.

Um that one are we ready to go to the next.

Go ahead, counselor.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, yeah, and I certainly agree.

You know, I I think in a perfect world granted the whole give and take of how much time do we want to spend in meetings as counselors, uh, yeah, but I would love if we had competitive um board nomination processes, you know.

Right now it feels like you know, the person comes in front of us for a public hearing, but they're basically already they've already got the nod behind closed doors, and you might ask a few questions, but there's not really a how do you compare to the other candidate for this position?

So I think that would be a benefit to constituents, even though it would also be um a big administrative burden for staff and for counselors alike.

So something that we'll try to figure out how to get there.

Um so number three, uh, we had gifts and benefits, which was just another one item.

Uh and you know, constituents notice that on existing disclosure forms, uh, there's no standardized level of detail in reported gifts and benefits.

And so one person specifically mentioned, you know, they're like, well, I saw this photo showing multiple counselors at you know, a pacers game paid for by downtown Indy.

And some counselors put that on their forms and some counselors didn't.

And it's like, you know, it's a pacers game.

Counselors might not even know how much the tickets are worth, how important that is that, but to the constituent, it you know, just showed that like what does this even mean if there's not a standard definition of gifts, which I think gets to your point about major or not, you know, it's like we should try to set some sort of a level.

Um, you know, constituents just want to be able to trust that they know you know what people are receiving, and or some people just said, I don't think you should ever be able to accept any gifts at all.

Uh and so the the bullet point that was actually um from a constituent was counselors should either be prohibited from accepting gifts of any amount or required to report all gifts at all gift givers.

And I even asked clarifying questions.

I was like, so somebody buys me a cup of coffee.

You think I should have to report that?

And I said, yes.

And uh, you know, that that did seem a little um intense to me, but I I will say um there were a couple colleagues uh or I guess fellow um elected officials, a couple socialists from Wisconsin who were in town for a conference, and we went to Lochmiller's and I was like, Oh, let me buy you guys a beer because you're from out of town, you know, it's the nice thing to do.

I'm hosting, and they said no, we can't.

In Wisconsin, they literally cannot accept any gift, including one round at a bar.

Uh except that Wisconsin is a bunch of alcoholics, so they can uh specifically it's carved out in the state law apparently that if someone else buys the first round, they are allowed to buy the second round or vice versa.

So uh, but but they really do, and they said it works, and they you know are actually audited at times and and people do uh ascribe to that.

I know I very frequently will buy a constituent a coffee or vice versa, and so that would be like a big administrative burden to me, but I would do it if that's what constituents wanted.

Uh but yeah, just wanted to put that you know out there for us to discuss.

Um thank you.

And then so just for some clarification on our forum or disclosure the gifts or other items of value, it does talk about dollar amounts.

Um, and again, this is outside of campaign donations subject to the Indiana code there.

Um so gifts from persons, including family members with whom you have an ongoing social relationship not related to service on the council, so except for those, so except for the campaign finance documents and family members or people you've had an ongoing relationship with.

So if I like I don't know my college roommate ended up getting something and got me a gift and ends up now being in that area where they would be prohibited, they wouldn't have to do it because they were my college roommate and we've known each other well outstanding prior to this per uh responsibility as a counselor.

So that um, but it says uh did you receive any gifts or other items valued over a hundred dollars or in the aggregate over 250 dollars in the prior, and this is all prior year, but in the prior year from persons or a firm that does business with or seeks to do business with a city county, or seeks to influence council action.

Um so there are some dollar amounts in there, and I I think like how tedious do we want to do for us as counselors and tracking?

I lose my work receipts sometimes.

And so if you want like keeping track of every type, right?

So I'm buying a coffee or I run into somebody.

Um so yeah, so there is that level there.

Um, but I wanted to make sure I clarified what our current disclosure says.

Comments, anything there?

Clarifying questions.

Um I do agree with the suite, like with the seats.

One of the things is the city does have um has there's a city suite, so there's times where we may go and actually be at the city suite, so it's not a gift because it's part of this.

I would think I'd have to clarify, but I think that would not be considered a gift because it's as the city role, and we're not going to some other organization suite, whether it's I know visit Indy has been mentioned or the chamber, the this or that.

So I think there would be some differentiation between the city suite versus others.

Um go ahead.

I thought the city I may be dead wrong on this, but I thought the city suite was paid for by the mayor's campaign finance.

The food and the food and FYI for folks, all of the city suites in any of the venues.

There's no alcohol allowed, it's strictly prohibited, so there's never alcohol there.

That said, any of the food or drinks that would be provided, those are from what I understand.

Come we have to confirm covered by uh campaign funds, but the tickets are part of our um with oh my gosh, I'm blinking.

Uh the Muni Corps, the yeah, so the CIB.

So that is part of like that agreement, is the city has that as part of that.

I think it's written into somehow.

I do not know, but I believe it's written into there, so the city has that approved.

Yep.

Is there anything else on this item?

Not jump on.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh, number four, we had categorized a few bullet points, uh, four bullet points as just the ethics process and accountability generally.

Um, you know, there were I'm aware of at least two constituent uh attempts to file ethics complaints about counselors, not realizing that's not how this works.

There are no direct constituent um complaints about counselors.

Um, you know, and and some of the behaviors constituents are complaining about, uh, you know, including about me sometimes are you know, like they might consider it unethical, but it's not covered under the ethics disclosure form or ethics committee processes, and so um these these fall into that category.

So uh the first A was constituents should have some method to lodge complaints about counselors publicly.

Um they were frustrated that uh you know it takes another counselor to lodge an ethics complaint.

B was counselors should be barred from signing non-disclosure agreements ever.

Uh C was counselors should be asked to abide by a code of conduct that would include respectful treatment of constituents.

Um they specifically called out there's been a few times when in the public assembly room, you know, things got a little heated, and maybe people were yelling from the crowd and counselors yelled back, and uh, you know, people had a problem with that.

Uh and then D was counselors should be able to be censured if they lie to their constituents publicly.

Uh constituents felt very strongly that that had happened earlier this year uh with another counselor not in this room.

Thank you.

Um a couple items to note.

Uh we have to think about this is our role as counselors versus an employee somewhere else, a parent, a spouse, a child, right?

So we have other hats we wear, and what are we doing at that time?

And going back to interpretation, what is a lie?

Right.

Uh we also have, even though we are elected officials, we still have our own first amendment rights that we need to make sure we look into, and that's something that I know I've discussed with council uh with council's council already about making sure that we're not infringing on any of that as well.

Um the NDAs, so does it so uh clarifying would that mean as at my full-time job that I cannot sign an NDA?

I would assume that's not what was meant, but that is the way they said it.

So yeah, so that would be like an NDA with council work specific.

So like we would need to make sure there's clarification and touch on that and cover all those bases.

Um I think those were my biggest notes on that one.

Um and I guess I know I have so the current process for complaints um for counselors to bring one up, and I have um I'll touch on it later, is it's brought forward by another counselor.

We've talked about improving our processes and ways that we can um increase our transparency, and that's one of the things that came up is how do we uh look at our process as the committee.

Our responsibility is to review the code, the disclosure form um by March 31st of every year.

Um, and so individually, so I email the committee members and I ask them if they have any comments for uh suggestions for comments or changes or anything they like to bring up, and if there is none, then we don't have to have any business.

Uh what we can do is look at that process and see how can we ensure that folks know if this is the pro so this is our calendar, we have January 1st, it starts.

If there's anything that counselors would like to ask their constituents or otherwise, like what would you like to bring up, a way to kind of see if there's anything that is there from not just the our body of six on the committee, but the rest of the council plus constituents depending and figure out how to get that and we review and so we have a timeline so then we don't come back throughout the year with little minor changes, it's all done once in the year in the process that will help us with um getting our forms in on time and getting them on the website, which is a newer process for us as well, having them posted on the website, and so having that cadence throughout the year so we can make sure we're doing it all at once and only hearing stuff outside of that window for emergency or like uh pressing matters.

Um, and then we would only change we wouldn't change the document multiple times in one year, and anything decided in that process would probably be updated for the next year.

So that's I think a more detailed example than folks probably want, but we've had conversations about that process and what we can do to make sure that we are uh communicate to the public and to constituents this is what we're this is what we're doing, this is where we're out in the process, and this is where you can be involved, essentially.

So I think that covered the kind of what I said there.

Okay, yeah.

Council, thank you thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh I've got two on this one, and I'll start with A and then go to B.

Uh on A, I think one of the things that just to be cautious of on this, and maybe one of the reasons why counselors have the ability to do this is because there is a risk of perjury.

On this in my statement later, yeah.

And you know, that could just open up a lot of risk, right?

And so when you have one counselor doing the representation, they've got the responsibility to look into those details, ask those questions and things of that nature to figure out whether they they really do believe it's an ethical you know conundrum or not, right?

And I think if you start opening up to the public and you've got 15 people who don't have access or or more, right, to be able to just walk over.

I mean, we're all readily accessible to everybody, each other very easily to ask questions.

Um it it opens up a lot of legal potential legal um potential issues for the for the public in that regard.

Um if I could jump in for a second.

Certainly.

Uh one of the things actually I greet the good point, is and I I'm going to try to use an example that's sort of in line of things.

There has been a complaint that the counselor's cell phone number is not listed on their email signature, and I can only I only have the council, right?

Um I saw my I saw my counselor at the grocery store, shop grocery shopping with their family, and I wanted to ask them the question, and they wouldn't answer me there.

They told me to they told me that they needed to reach out to me via email or contact me like in another way because they were with their family.

Like I that I that was a violation, right?

Or I saw them at this department store and they're you know they bumped into me with their cart and they apologize, but still like they tried to like they tried to run over me with their cart.

Like again, those aren't exact ones, but those are sort of in line with some of the emails and the complaints because our council office, our staff do receive complaints, and are they within the scope and are they actual complaints and the perjury is a good point.

So when we as a counselor bring would bring a complaint forward, we have to sign that it's penalty under perjury if we're providing any false or inaccurate information.

Uh so for us to bring this forward is a big deal.

Um, and there are we would need at least one full-time staff person if we went in and said everyone can come can submit complaints, right?

Anybody, because we would not just be talking about the folks in Marion County, we would need to be able to take complaints from anyone anywhere on this.

We couldn't we wouldn't be able to do that.

And so that volume.

Now, is there a way for um to engage the public to get comments on how we should do our business?

Yes, but as far as actually submitting complaints, there are some restrictions or some um hurdles there that being able to let someone submit a complaint.

There is a process um that is um there is a process you can submit for anyone, and I'll get to that later.

But the counselors, we as counselors don't fall under that jurisdiction for some of the items, and I know I think maybe it's the best way I can say that.

Um, but I do, yeah.

So bringing it forward, so and again, it's another council brings it because you don't like the color clothes that I'm wearing.

Um, or like again, there are some things we take everything seriously and we would review everything if we have that come in, but there are some items that would just not be able to be touched.

Um, and if we address those and did the back and forth, right?

If we did emails back and forth, that would be a full-time staff person just to address those with what comes in.

Um I don't know that that's the best use of taxpayer dollars to for someone to spend a 12 hours emailing with someone who was upset that their cell phone counselor's cell phone number wasn't listed or whatever it was example.

So that clarifies a little bit there too.

Sorry, thank you, Crazy.

One more thing on the NDA stuff.

Um this has only come up a couple times in my time on the office.

Um it came up on the first data center ahead in my district.

Um, I think they're the worst possible things for any type of development, right?

Um, but I'll tell you, I did sign it the first time, and I'll tell you why.

It was because for me to represent the public, I felt it was necessary to be a part of that conversation.

Now, in the second data center, I didn't have there's no NDA, so that wasn't an issue.

But honestly, from a land use perspective, it was probably the worst thing they could have ever done for themselves.

Um the other point, uh, I think there may have been one with the soccer stadium.

Maybe, maybe not on that one, but I remember that one being potential when MLS was trying to come to town, if if there was potentially surprise me.

Um in either case, I voted no when there were NDAs, right?

I mean, that's just the the track record there, but just things that to be considered about when considering them, if we we have to be the ones getting this information at the end of the day to make a decision on is it right for Indianapolis?

Is it right for the district?

And if we are barred from signing them, we are barred from being a part of that conversation.

And I think that completely alleviates the point of representation.

I think it you know it's a double-edged sword.

I don't think it helps with transparency at all, but that's the way that I've looked at it when they've been presented to me.

Council brand, anything on that one?

No, okay.

Go ahead.

A couple um, yeah, I thought excellent points from colleagues here.

Uh, you know, and I think that you know, as a super anti-NDA person myself, I do think that there's uh you know some some wisdom there in what you said, Kazahart, just because even if we adopted this rule, because the council only has authority over counselors, right?

And so the IEDI or the IEDC do use non-disclosure agreements very frequently.

And so whether we like it or not, there will be secret economic deals being discussed and debated.

And so, you know, if we have the authority to say no one is allowed to use those, you know, you can't use taxpayer dollars at all with those, then I think that they're you know, then it's like, well, now that even playing field, no one's using NDAs, and so it doesn't put you at a loss.

Um, but there is uh, you know, we're we're to that extent a small fish in the big pond where other people are using these tools, whether we like it or not.

Um, so that is something I think worth considering.

And yeah, I mean, just wanted to um validate.

I know for a fact that council staff has had uh multiple complaints submitted about uh tweets that I've made, for example.

So um, you know, I would sign a code of conduct that says don't mean tweet at people, but that does seem like a waste of time for taxpayers.

Um, but yeah, so just wanted to put that up there.

Uh number five was public reporting and engagement.

It was just about um this one item, you know, a lot of people liked this idea, and I I have questions and issues about it, but you know, trying to put myself in the constituent shoes.

I think constituents are reporting frustration about how little information is publicly available about counselors' schedules, activities, work behind the scenes, um, you know, to chairwoman McCormick's point, we're all part-time counselors, and I know I'm one of the crazy people who is just broken so doesn't have a day job, and even I feel like almost every email I send starts with, I'm so sorry for the delay, because I don't I'm not getting to people's emails nearly as quickly as I think they deserve.

Um some people get frustrated about that, and uh they know that sometimes our committees meet very infrequently just because there's no business in front of them.

And so, you know, putting myself at the constituent shoe, it's our bosses, the constituents want to know what we're doing for our salaries.

So the actual thing they requested was counselors should be required or at least encouraged to report to the public on the work that they've done every month or quarter.

Uh and I know at least many of us in this room do that in constituent newsletters, you know, weekly or monthly.

Uh, but they had an example like I want to know, like I attended X meeting for the council this week.

I responded to Y number of constituent emails, and I spent time working with Z department to try to get a policy changed.

Um, which again, I think sounds pretty reasonable.

And um who polices that could I just say, yeah, I respond to 6,000 emails, prove that I'm wrong, right?

And now it's a council staff's position uh to try to report out.

So you know, I do see some some big hold in that idea, but you know, did want to put it out there for us to discuss.

Yeah, um, thank you.

And I I think uh attending meetings, that is public record, right?

Our attendance at our committee meetings.

Um that's something that maybe we can look into having a dashboard, like we talked about dashboards earlier, a way to see, like, right when we appoint folks to boards, we know what their attendance was, and maybe there's some sort of tracking that can be done there.

But I think that actual council work meetings, so our full council and our committee meetings, outside of that, it's hard and it's all discretionary, right?

And it depends on your district.

So there might be some districts where um I so there are some counselors who have active HOAs and neighborhood associations, and they maybe have a dozen groups that meet monthly.

And then there's some of us who maybe don't have as many, and maybe only have a group or two that meet once a year and nobody meets monthly.

And so it would look like one counselor's not doing the jobs, but it's not that they're not doing it, it's just that part of the job is not there.

The full-time job, I mean, are you and are we gonna ask for hours?

Right, like right, like do I need to say like how late I'm sending emails?

Well, you can see how late I'm sending emails.

Um, but right, like those sort of things in that work, and I there that's our there's some arbitrary there, um, and some it's hard to figure out how you would do that.

I can see what they're saying is like, are you working for me?

Is the question, I think.

And how do we answer that without a the burden on us?

Because if I had, I mean, I don't want you, you don't need to see my calendar, I promise.

There's four of them overlaid.

Um, you know, with the with the different hats, and right, and so that sort of thing, and then also the burden on staff to figure out how to do all of this, right?

And so there's that tracking.

So I think there's some questions there about why, why, how much work are you doing for me as you know, your boss, your constituent, but then how do we track that and what are actually those variables that we're looking at?

So I think that's sort of my comment on that.

Counselors, do you have anything else?

Always okay, let's go.

All right.

So, you know, where my my two cents lies, right?

On the reporting, and one, this is just as somebody who spends a lot of time writing a weekly newsletter and reporting pretty much everything that I do.

Um, Michael Paulhart.com, Sunday Post.

Uh, but you know, I'm proud of that.

And I I I enjoy it.

Uh I like to highlight people, and I think you know, it to me it sets the standard of what good looks like, right?

I think you should be doing that.

Some are better at social media, some are not.

Like I'm terrible at social media.

I'm just not a fan, but I'm good at that newsletter, right?

So I think everybody's a little bit different.

But the thing I really want to call out on this one is I think maybe it's a a structural understanding of what the city council is from wherever this came from, right?

Versus versus state legislature versus Congress, even.

And you know, we have less than two percent of the entire city-county budget in in the city county council office.

We are one third of the entire government, right, as the legislative branch, and we have less than two percent of the entire budget for the city.

And so what that means is we have great staff, but it is it is thin, right?

And in a ratio, and so if you look at the state house and you look at, I mean, they still share liaisons and things of that nature, but much bigger budget.

I mean, we're even talking about things like constituent mailers, which I think is a piece like this that fits into their.

I've been talking about that for years and haven't seen them done.

But a lot of it comes back to being budget, and then you go up to Congress, right?

Where most people I think have their interaction with government, and you see all these staffers like I even try and call some of our congressmen sometime, right?

Even on my own party, and I've got to talk to this field guy or field lady, and I'm thinking what is going on?

I've explained myself ten times to try and just get a hold of the senator, right?

Um, and that's not like that here for us.

I mean, you send me an email.

And I'm speaking for myself, right?

But um, I think it's it's understanding that there is a little bit of staff, but it's really a big email box at the end of the day for us, right?

If you email the city county council that gov versus you know, going to my website, contact me, right?

Michael Paul Hart, you'll find it.

Um so I just look at that.

I think it's I don't know if there's anything we can do in an ordinance that's gonna satisfy this.

I think a lot of this is just an understanding of where it is in local government, what our budgets are, um, you know, and I'll continue to put continue to push for mailers that potentially help on some of these things.

And I I would agree, I think that our municipal government and staff are very different than the state and the federal level, as well as some of our peer or sister cities.

There's some counselor, like some councils in other states would be full-time.

I had a meeting with a counselor from another state who was working on something.

I was like, I would love to model that.

Let's meet.

Found out they have they share, they have a 50% staff person that they have to themselves.

And I was like, wow, I think, and I don't know if I'm gonna get this 11 15 staff members in the council office total, 10.

But we have we have a couple couple, yeah, vacancies that are being filled.

So we're a body of 25, uh, and we have a dozen, and there's a dozen staff members, and they have the minutes that they do, they clerk our meetings, we have our legal, right?

So we don't would I say we don't have a person with us, we do, but we share that as eight of us share one person.

And if you can imagine having eight bosses-ish, uh, as what our staff go through, is they are overworked, and we have we could ask them to do way more, and they like they already can't do what I guess I should say.

It's they do what they can with the amount of time that we have, and we would love to have a bigger budget to be able to do more things and send out mailers and be able to um to do that, and I think we would all agree for that, but we have that small amount of the budget.

Um to that point, I have uh uh friend, uh another socialist municipal legislator, uh Jake Efros in Jersey City, New Jersey, and you know, I was real excited he won his election, and then you know it was December, he takes office in January the same way we do, and he sent out an email, and I was on his email list because I gave him a little bunny, and he said, you know, now we're having to staff up because you know, obviously in my ward that do wards instead of council districts.

Um, you know, I only get to hire seven people.

Uh each of them gets a 70,000 salary, and they all report to me, and I choose who to hire.

And I was like, what?

So yeah, so even people in other cities or states just have, you know, we have a strong mayor system here, and so um, you know, there's 25 of us, uh, all arm wrestling against the mayor are gonna lose that that, you know, because again, there's how many staff people and we get two percent of the budget.

So I do think that that's not very well understood by constituents.

Yeah, I got a uh email last week that was like, hey, you know, I know you're busy today.

Can you just send one or two of your staff people out to like look at my alley?

You know, and I had a fun conversation trying to explain.

No, I will not.

Thank you though.

I wish I could.

Yeah, and my staff member is me and maybe my kid in tow on our way to whatever thing we have going on, we'll stop by and take a picture, right?

So, like, can't tell me how many times I've done that.

So there are these considerations that we have to have.

Um anything else on that?

No, okay, let's go on.

I think we're on the last bullet for you, Councilor Brown.

Yes, thank you for that.

Uh so the final one is just uh we categorize a structural or charter considerations, or rather, Chairman Gormick, you did, and I thought that was great.

Um, yeah, so at the end of the day, like constituents who feel just deeply wronged by their district counselor are especially frustrated that this is the only individual who can override zoning decisions.

Um, you know, and even though I think unless you guys got a million dollars that I didn't the last couple years, we only got that one million dollar project one a year, but constituents seem to think we get that all the time, and we frequently get to direct money in our districts.

At least I don't.

Um again, I guess don't tell me if it's not true, I'll be sad.

But so um, you know, there are no minimum expectations for counselors, there's no rules saying you have to show up at meetings.

Uh, thankfully, you know, all of our colleagues right now are, but you know, if somebody just decided to be checked out and just not show up for meetings for the next three years or you know, two years, they could do that, and the only um the only thing constituents could do about is just vote against the next election.

And so uh, you know, not every city has a four-year term for municipal elected officials.

Um, and so constituents felt that there should be some sort of recall process or provision for city-county counselors.

Um, I don't believe that we have any authority to do this under state law, but I did just want to bring it up that it was a constituent concern.

Um thank you.

And yeah, I think there is state law that we have to follow there.

There's stuff that we're bound by, and I there are specific rules.

We have a censure process that we can do in the council, but we don't have a recall process because we are our our job is decided on by the voters.

So, yes, for the most part, um, that would be like the recall process for constituents is the ballot box, right?

Um, and there are we could what we'll do is we have this conversations, we'll get more information and be able to clarify and say this is the statute and this is why, um, on as far as what we can do.

So we have a we have a process to censure, um, but I think it's speci is explicitly states that we cannot like we don't have a recall at the state level, but we'll be able to get that information and wording specifically for that.

Okay.

Any comments, colleagues on that one?

Okay, yes.

Thank you, Counselor Brown.

Um, so if there's no final clarifications on Councilor Brown, um, the final section is very small, so we're almost done, folks.

I promise.

Um, it's very small.

One um just a couple items, and more of these are clarification and administrative review notes as far as we go.

Uh, one of the processes I mentioned earlier, um, that things come up and we're like, oh, we can improve this and we can do better here.

And one of them was was uh reviewing ethics disclosures forms for completeness upon submission and prior uh prior to publication, so prior prior to posting on the website.

So when we receive them, counselor myself um receive the disclosure forms that there is a review process.

And so that became apparent um that we actually don't have a administrative review process for completeness before the disclosures are posted.

Um so working with general counsel, we're implement um we've discussed and we're gonna implement a review for completeness prior to publication.

So and I said the word completeness multiple times.

Uh because this is not a review for accuracy.

So again, looking at the bandwidth and the cap capacity that we have and what art falls under our charter, we can review for completeness.

Did counselor Brown check the right box?

Did he miss this section?

Is something missing on the table?

You use a Mac and uh we're on a PC and it didn't convert right, something like that.

But we would not we could not review for accurate accuracy.

Um each counselor would remain responsible for the uh for the accuracy or his or own filing under the ethics ordinance, which again um you sign it for penalty of perjury.

So if you intently uh and I can pull that up and read it, but it's if you willingly submit and correct information that you um subject to penalty under censure.

Perjury.

Okay, yes.

So um, so anyway, so just to uh to clarify that point, but that's something that we found that we could do for improvement.

Um then so we've talked about one of the things that you brought up, counselor, was whether the disclosure forms provide uh sufficient guidance.

We've had the conversation under our self-employment, our employers, and the boards and organizations compensated or not.

And so that's sort of the broader area of what we will be looking into, like what we're looking at and what can fall under.

Um I sort of am the mindset I would like to brainstorm and get all of the information, and then we can whittle down what we don't need versus starting at the low level, right, and working our way up.

Um is so one of the items is and I went over at the beginning.

We talked about the committee's scope and line of work.

Um we did have, and I know it was brought up, so I do want to say something about the ethics committee, this group, um, and the ethics commission, which is a completely separate entity, uh, a separate body with different jurisdictions.

So the city county ethics commission, not this group, the other group, uh, is established as part of the ethics code and revised code chapter 293.

Its members are appointed by the mayor and approved by the city county council.

So our role is to approve them to that.

Uh it is a five-member body that is charged with handling violations of the revised code chapter 293, the ethics code for the city, and has authority over the employees of the city, county, the board appointees of the city county, and the county elected officials.

So it um it does not apply to the city-county or council, so the city county council or counselors.

So there are some sections within 293 where it's specified that we, as the body of 25, are included, but for the most part, that ordinance that um sec that code does not apply to this body of 25, which is why we have a separate chapter 151 code of conduct for counselors.

Okay, so that's sort of the clarification there.

Um and then we've already talked about um, we talked already about community or residents and submissions of complaints on counselors.

So I think we went through that well enough.

Um, so that's the end of those points.

Um the conversation items before we start.

No, okay.

Um, so I want to thank you for the discussion.

Um, and for folks for coming and joining us and participating, um, listening in this.

Uh, I appreciate the willingness to ask thoughtful questions and clarify items that help us build a better understanding of the topics that are presented.

Um, if folks aren't don't know, my background is in engineering and I always naturally approach these conversations from a continuous improvement mindset, which I love.

So this the design process is iterative, and we're always identifying issues, gathering information, evaluating what working and what isn't, so we can continue to approve our processes, which ultimately uh broadens our transparency.

Uh I hope that today helped us identify some of those opportunities uh that can strengthen our work um and our current process and improve the transparency as we continue.

I mentioned earlier as we move into budget season.

Um we're going to digest and look at this, figure out how we can improve and refine areas that should refine areas that can to work that can should continue moving forward.

I haven't talked this long in a while.

Sorry.

Uh so then we will reconvene after budget season is sort of the plan for an additional committee discussion, and then uh that's where we will have public comment.

We'll refine those concepts, have drafts submitted, uh proposal submitted to the full council, then it would come back to us for another committee for a vote, and then go for full council for final action.

Uh so after budget, there is a window of time that we can do that before the next form is due.

So we have that time to do that.

Um, ethics, we do have a standing meeting monthly.

We don't normally meet, and um actually during budget season, uh our committee times often get overtaken by or uh the committees that have multiple uh budget presentations, and so I didn't would not want, I don't want to take time away from the budget hearings for us to have these conversations because there's those that's a loaded work on its own.

Uh working on a I think we're gonna be a 1.8 billion dollar budget, maybe.

Last year was 1.7 billion dollar budget for the city for 2026.

So we want to focus our time there.

So we will continue digest and uh council's council has a laundry list of things um that we're gonna look into and work on.

Um, I will share information to the committee if there's any information that's needed or any uh legal and for legal stuff for you to review before the next committee meeting, and we'll make that announcement um then.

Um so I want to thank everybody again for coming.

Thank you, Councillor Brown, counselors for being here.

Um, and that concludes the business before the committee, unless there's any final items.

Just very good.

I want to say thank you.

I know I'm not a member of this committee.

We just spent a long time talking about stuff that I brought to this committee.

Um, you know, on behalf of constituents, I really think uh we benefit from doing public business in public and doing that iterative process that you mentioned, uh, Madam Chair.

So uh just want to say thank you publicly and really appreciate you all being here.

Thank you.

Okay, anything else?

Motion to adjourn.

Perfect.

So second.

Okay, we're adjourned.

Have a good night, everyone.

Thanks again.

Thank you.