Ethics Board Meeting Summary - January 16, 2026
Ethics Board Meeting Summary - January 16, 2026
The Ethics Board convened on January 16, 2026, to review the minutes from December 18th, discuss board member training, debate amendments to City Code Chapter 216 regarding the definition of "city agency," and approve the 2025 annual report. The meeting featured discussions on conflict of interest perception, term length adequacy, and the communication status of board reports to the City Council.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes from the December 18th meeting were approved unanimously without changes.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were received during this session.
Discussion Items
- Board Member Training and Recusal: The City Attorney summarized recent training on the roles of boards, commissions, and ethics. A participant, citing a background in human resources, expressed strong support for the focus on "perception as reality" regarding conflicts of interest. The speaker noted that even if an individual feels they can act independently, public perception of a family or personal relationship could skew decision-making, and emphasized the importance of the recusal process to avoid embarrassment and maintain integrity.
- City Code Chapter 216 Amendments:
- Proposal to Define "City Agency": The board discussed adding a definition for "city agency." Nick presented two draft options: one streamlined version and one more detailed version listing specific bodies (boards, commissions, committees, etc.).
- Debate on Definitions: Member Nedlin expressed a preference for a broader, more specific list to minimize interpretation, while other members suggested referencing the existing Minnesota state statute definition to leverage established case law and avoid redundancy. Another speaker noted that while some metro-area cities use granular definitions, many do not, and clarifying the term proactively is beneficial.
- Typo Correction: The group agreed to correct a typo in the draft language changing "cooperate" to "collaborate" and fixing "human resources total department" to "human resources department."
- Annual Report and Term Lengths:
- During the review of the 2025 Annual Report, a member raised a concern regarding the three-year term structure. The speaker argued that with infrequent meetings, board members might complete their full term without encountering significant ethical issues, limiting their practical experience.
- The City Attorney clarified that while boards report to the Council via the consent calendar, the Council typically does not discuss these reports unless an item of interest is pulled, a mechanism that exists for addressing specific updates.
Key Outcomes
- A motion was passed with two votes in favor of zero opposition to forward the recommended changes to the City Code Chapter 216. The changes include adopting the state statute definition of "city agency" ("any board commission, committee, trust, department, or office of city government, whether elected, appointed, or otherwise constituted, regardless of its source of funding") and correcting the "human resources department" typo.
- The 2025 Annual Report was approved unanimously. The board agreed to pass the report to the City Council.
- The next meeting was scheduled for February 19th at the same time and location.
Meeting Transcript
Daniel, I said this found this in my public papers. I don't have your email in every corner. So you gave me that some time ago. Okay. And I realized I'd have done each back of paper. Thanks. All right. Well, welcome everybody. Happy new year. Whatever you call me in order to get on the voting. Yeah. Okay. Great. Well, our first item of business is approving the minutes from December 18th. To look and didn't see anything amiss. Any other comments on that? I thought much one can. Thanks. All right. All those in favor of approving the minutes. Okay. I don't have any changes to pose. Any changes for the agenda. Okay, great. Well, then we'll move on to reports and inquiries. So I'll turn it over to the city attorney. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the only thing on my agenda for this morning is just to talk talk briefly. So in the last couple of days, we did the um new board and commission uh member training. Um some of you were there and participated in that. Thank you for coming. It was recorded. If anybody feels like they want a refresher, um you can access that recording. Um maybe let Jogie know if you are interested in that admission on this how that recording would be accessible. We'll find out for sure. Um there's kind of two stages to that um training. One is for um all of you for for um new or uh existing members, um kind of an update from the mayor's perspective on the role of boards and commissions, and then some of the legal aspects from me. Um and then there uh is also separately uh a Jody training, the the staff liaison to all of the boards and commissions. Jody doesn't need training, but can educate the rest of us anyway. Um so just the importance of making sure that the city staff um are doing everything that they can to support and uh make sure the divorce and commissions are running smoothly, um coordinating all of the things that lead out to us being here together today. Um so we do that training annually. Um it is uh important to kind of get things framed up right for the important work that all of you do. The other thing that I wanted to mention just in terms of kind of inquiries to me. Um I think you all know that part of this part of the agenda is to let you know if there were somewhat interesting conversations that people brought to me, um, wonderings um or sometimes maybe more involved ethics questions. Um if it's the more involved um situation, I will cue that up for you more formally. Um but sometimes it's helpful to also just talk about the conversations that people bring my direction, um a bit of a reminder from somebody who was a newer um border commission member. Um and um we just needed to talk through um the part of the code that addresses sort of family or personal relationships that might cause questions of impartiality. Um as you all know, oftentimes our conversations get focused on the conflict of interest from a financial perspective. Um, but this was a just a bit of a reminder that sometimes the circumstances pop up where um because of a family relationship or some close personal connection, it's also important that border commission members um recuse themselves from those conversations and just talking through um examples and how you do it, what are the actual logistics of recusal so that everybody knows what's going on and nobody ends up embarrassed, doesn't become a public thing.
openpublica.com