The Oakland Public Ethics Commission (PEC) held its regular meeting on Monday, November 4, 2019, at 6:30 p.m. in Hearing Room 1 of City Hall. Six of seven commissioners were present (Commissioner Butler absent). The meeting covered enforcement actions on campaign contribution violations, mediation closures, a revision of the Commission’s Complaint Procedures, a legal presentation on ballot measure activities, subcommittee updates, and informational reports.
Good evening. It's six thirty, and I call the November fourth, twenty nineteen meeting of the Oakland Public Ethics Commission to order. We have uh six of our seven commissioners present. That is, we have a quorum. So we will begin our business. The uh first item we will have tonight is any staff and commissioner announcements. Are there any from the DIES or from staff? Okay. Great. Then our next item is open forum, and this is an opportunity for the public to speak. Um it is a time for you to speak on matters that are not on the agenda this evening. And um when we hear comments in open forum, the commissioners cannot discuss the the substance of those comments. Um that is not because we're not interested in what you're saying, but it's precisely because it is not on our agenda tonight, and it would be a violation of the open meetings laws for us to talk about uh substantively talk about anything that is not on our agenda. Um however, we can hear you, and we do hear you, and thank you very much for um taking time to give comment and open open forum when there's something that you would like to bring to our attention. Uh if you do wish to speak on an item that is on our agenda tonight, please wait until I call that uh that item and you'll have an opportunity to speak at that time. I also want to clarify quickly how we handle public comment, both during open forum and then also later during the um public comment on each item so that everyone in the room is confident that they'll have the chance to be heard, and just so that you know what they uh what to expect and with the flow of the evening. Um the purpose of our public comment periods is for us to hear from you. It is not a time for commissioners to talk or to answer questions or for us to have dialogue with one another. It is fundamentally a time for us to listen to public comment. So if you speak during public comment, commissioners may ask you a clarifying question about something that you've said. Um but we will but we will not engage in a in a dialogue um about the public comment. Um however, after uh public comment has closed, I may ask staff to explain a procedural issue. I may ask our city attorney to um explain how a a legal issue is handled. I may um ask you to give staff your contact information if any follow-up is is needed. Or or something like something like that. But once public comment is closed for each item, it remains closed until the next agenda item um public comment period is opened. So if there is anyone who would like to speak in open forum on a non-agendized item, if you'll please come to the uh the podium there. Seeing none, we will proceed with the agenda and then open up public comment on each item. The first action item on our agenda tonight is approval of the minutes from our last meeting. Commissioners, are there any changes to the minutes? No. I had none either. Is there a motion? Move approval of the minutes as submitted. Is there a second? Second. Is there any public comment on this item? All in favor? Any opposed? Um Commissioner Butler will be abstaining as she was not present at last meeting. Uh there's um no nays that I call for nays. No, no, no, none opposed. The motion carries. Is in the matter of Dana King for City Council 2014, and we have our enforcement chief, Chief Kelly Johnson at the podium to introduce the matter. Thank you. We are here in the matter of Dana King for City Council 2014. This is case number 15-03 sub B. This case in particular, we sort of previewed it at our last meeting because it was tangentially related to a previous matter that the commission has already decided. I would like to state at this time that in the matter of Dana King is concerning a former public ethics commission member. So for those of you who knew this commissioner or work with this commissioner, I offer this to you in case you want consideration to recuse yourselves or consider this matter in some other way.