HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-21-21 Board Of Ethics Agenda and Packet MaterialsA. Call meeting to order at 4:15pm
This meeting will be held using Webex, an online videoconferencing system. You can join this
meeting:
Via Webex:
https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php?
MTID=e8c62fea76c5227e3b9756e7dd266002b
Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit.
Click Join Now to enter the meeting.
Via Phone: This is for listening only.
United States Toll
+1-650-479-3208
Access code: 126 196 2454
B. Disclosures
C. Approval of Minutes
C.1 Approval of minutes from 12-09-2020 Board of Ethics Meeting (Sullivan)
D. Public Comment
Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for
individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be
an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please
limit your comments to three minutes.
E. Special Presentation
F. Action Items
F.1 Curriculum for 2020 Annual Ethics Training (Sullivan)
F.2 2020 City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Annual Report (Sullivan)
G. FYI/Discussion
H. Adjournment
THE BOARD OF ETHICS OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
BOE AGENDA
Thursday, January 21, 2021
For more information please contact Julie Hunter jhunter@bozeman.net
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Agenda, January 21, 2021
1
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Agenda, January 21, 2021
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO: Board of Ethics
FROM: Julie Hunter, Executive Assistant
Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Approval of minutes from 12-09-2020 Board of Ethics Meeting
MEETING DATE: January 21, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION: Review and approve minutes from 12-09-2020 Board of Ethics Meeting
STRATEGIC PLAN: 1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the
community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from
the community and stakeholders.
BACKGROUND: Board of Ethics Meeting held on 12-09-2020, held virtually
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None
ALTERNATIVES: As directed by the Board
FISCAL EFFECTS: None
Attachments:
12.9.2020 Board Of Ethics Meeting draft minutes.pdf
Report compiled on: January 15, 2021
3
BOE 12/9/2020 minutes (These are also recorded via WebEx)
Meeting called to order: Melissa Frost (Chair) called the meeting to order at 4:13PM
Changes to the agenda: Greg noted the wellness memo was put in the wrong place in the agenda. No
changes otherwise.
Public comment: Cory Klumb joined the meeting to get firsthand information on the Foundation.
Approval of Minutes: Sara Rushing moved to approve, seconded by Carson Taylor, motion carried
unanimously
Action Items:
A – Disclosure of information or comments: Carson Taylor, regarding the Mayor Mehl matter, had a
conversation with Comm. Cunningham scheduled, but the meeting was cancelled
Carson spoke with Greg about if he should attend the hearing with former Mayor Mehl. Carson
ultimately did not attend the hearing.
B – City Atty. Update: SULLIVAN: It’s been quite a year because of COVID. First few months were very
intense. CM shut down all advisory boards from holding meetings. The Executive Order still reduces the
number of Board meetings, but we needed to get BOE together to discuss training and the annual
report. We also have departmental questions on which to update you. There have been significant
changes to the City. We’ve had several situations where city officials/board members acted on matters
where they had personal interest. One board member’s actions constituted a conflict of interest. It was
noted and the member was asked to recuse themselves. The board member disclosed the conflict on
the record and signed out from the online meeting. Also, city commission members have recused
themselves on occasion. They are good about asking questions in advance to be sure there isn’t a
conflict of interest. Another circumstance occurred where Chuck Winn recused himself from Blackwood
Groves discussion because he has a personal relationship with the developer. The City Director of
Community Development asked if he had to recuse himself from applications coming from his
neighborhood. He did not have to recuse himself. That in and of itself doesn’t mean he would have to
step down. In another instance, there are norms and customs that are acceptable in public that are not
okay in city business. A city employee indicated they were thinking of buying a house and a realtor
offered to help as a friendly gesture. The employee was instructed to write an official response letter to
decline the offer. Finally, a city employee was selected to be on a selection committee that would be a
conflict of interest and he was advised to step-off of the committee. Karen mentioned we had a staff
liaison summit at the end of October. Part of the training was Ethical Considerations.
C – Discussion and Confirmation of Bozeman City Attorney Position on Compliance with the City’s
Code of Ethics Gift Provision: SULLIVAN: we intended to present the BOE with materials to amend
municipal code regarding employees receiving gifts. COVID prevented this from happening. We have
questions related to affiliated foundations. We needed to meet at this time because of time constraints
around this topic. Advice and input is needed from BOE.
Foundation Discussion: Library Foundation is a great example of an affiliated foundation working well.
Department Leaders who are liaisons in those Foundations would like to recognize particular employees.
4
Can they give a cash gift to employees? There are limitations that must be followed to be in accordance
with municipal code.
Foundation Scholarship discussion: Recommending BOE recognize these types of (things) are not gifts
and should be okay. Need to change the code of ethics to make this okay. Foundations would like to do
this during this Holiday Season.
Any discussion? Carson has no problem with either of them. Sara asked what would have to be done.
Greg explained the provision that would have to be made. Greg recommended to take public comment
and then make a statement. Provide instruction to Police Foundation on the timing. Mel asked if other
foundations might want to do this as well. Greg explained this can’t happen until BOE makes an
adjustment to the Code. Sara asked if there would be dollar limits that might indicate influence.
Public Comment: None
Carson Taylor moved that City Atty. draft code provisions consistent with the memo prepared for you.
Sara Rushing seconded
Sara Rushing: Aye
Carson Taylor: Aye
Melissa Frost : Aye
D - Update on schedule for 2020 Ethics training: We have a team that is developing a curriculum for
2020 training. Will need a 2nd BOE mtg in January for BOE to approve the training. Training will be occur
remotely on city online system. Questions/scenarios will be proposed: one for employees, one for
Boards. HR will manage it. Not sure when we can deploy, thinking Feb. or March. In-person discussions
are essential but this past year we were restricted. We want to get back to in-person summer of 2021 to
create curriculum and deploy late fall. Will send out a meeting request to group for January.
FYI/Discussion - Carson Taylor suggested a mock trial
Adjournment: meeting adjourned at 5:17pm
5
Memorandum
REPORT TO: Board of Ethics
FROM: Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Mike Maas, City Clerk
Julie Hunter, Executive Assistant
Jamie Norby, Interim Human Resources Director
SUBJECT: Curriculum for 2020 Annual Ethics Training
MEETING DATE: January 21, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION: Review and approve Curriculum for 2020 Annual Ethics Training
STRATEGIC PLAN: 1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the
community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from
the community and stakeholders.
BACKGROUND: Attached to this memorandum please find the proposed curricula for the
annual 2020 ethics training. Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, City
staff are just now able to prepare the curriculum for the 2020 training for
your review and approval.
As we noted at your December meeting, due to the ongoing pandemic we
propose conducting the training for both employees and appointed/elected
officials using the City’s Learning Management System (LMS). The LMS is an
online platform that provides opportunities for conducting trainings.
We suggest a common introduction for each curriculum – a number of
“slides” that provide background information on the purpose of the annual
training. Each training has a short number of scenarios followed by a
question and information related to the preferred response.
We are planning for deployment of the training during the month of
February.
We will be available during the meeting to answer questions.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None
ALTERNATIVES: As directed by the Board
FISCAL EFFECTS: None
Attachments:
Memo Re 2020 Ethics Training Curriculum.pdf
6
Report compiled on: January 15, 2021
7
To: Board of Ethics
Fr: Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Mike Maas, City Clerk
Julie Hunter, Executive Assistant
Jamie Norby, Interim Human Resources Director
Date: January 21, 2020
RE: Curriculum for 2020 Annual Ethics Training
Attached to this memorandum please find the proposed curricula for the annual 2020 ethics
training. Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, City staff are just now able to prepare the
curriculum for the 2020 training for your review and approval.
As we noted at your December meeting, due to the ongoing pandemic we propose conducting the
training for both employees and appointed/elected officials using the City’s Learning
Management System (LMS). The LMS is an online platform that provides opportunities for
conducting trainings.
We suggest a common introduction for each curriculum – a number of “slides” that provide
background information on the purpose of the annual training. Each training has a short number
of scenarios followed by a question and information related to the preferred response.
We are planning for deployment of the training during the month of February.
We will be available during the meeting to answer questions.
8
Page 1 of 5
2020 Boards Ethics Training
Slide 1 (before scenarios)
Due to the ongoing pandemic related to COVID-19, the City is conducting the annual
ethics training through this platform. During the past few years, we have worked toward
the goal of integrating ethics training into department and board meetings with the intent
of furthering a culture of strong ethical behavior. Hopefully, for the 2021 training, we will
be able to once again meet in person to discuss ethical situations.
Slide 2 (before scenarios)
City of Bozeman Ethics Program
The City of Bozeman’s ethics program is based on the City’s Charter. Sec. 7.01 of the
Charter states:
(a) Conflicts of Interest. The use of public office for private gain is prohibited. The city
commission shall implement this prohibition by ordinance, the terms of which shall
include, but not be limited to: acting in an official capacity on matters in which the
official has a private financial interest clearly separate from that of the general public,
the acceptance of gifts and other things of value, acting in a private capacity on
matters dealt with as a public official, the use of confidential information, and
appearances by city officials before other city agencies on behalf of private interests.
This ordinance shall include a statement of purpose and shall provide for reasonable
public disclosure of finances by officials with major decision-making authority over
monetary expenditures and contractual and regulatory matters and, insofar as
permissible under state law, shall provide for fines and imprisonment for violations.
Slide 3 (before scenarios)
The Charter creates a board of ethics and establishes the requirement that employees
and officials undergo an annual ethics training:
(b) Board of Ethics. The city commission shall, by ordinance, establish an independent
board of ethics pursuant to state law. The city commission shall appropriate sufficient
funds to the city manager to provide annual training and education of city officials, city
boards, and employees regarding the state and city ethics codes. City officials, board
members, and employees shall take an oath to uphold the state and city ethics codes.
Slide 4 (before scenarios)
The Charter requires the Commission to implement the Charter requirements through
adoption of a Code of Ethics. The City’s Code of Ethics can be found at Chapter 2,
Article 3, Division 4 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. In addition, the City has developed
an Ethics Handbook that is available to all employees and officials to help guide
9
Page 2 of 5
resolution of ethical dilemmas. For additional information and links to ethics resources
please visit the Ethics page on the City’s website
(https://www.bozeman.net/government/city-commission/ethics).
Slide 5 (before scenarios)
Include instruction here on how to move through the platform.
Scenarios (the scenario will be on a slide, then the question on a subsequent slide,
followed by a slide(s) that provides the correct response with supporting information):
1. Tanner is an active member of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board and
staunchly supports a proposed bike trail to/around a new City park. The subject has
been discussed at the board a number of times, and while a few members agree, the
majority of the board opposes the project. Tanner feels like their voice isn’t being
heard, so they submit public comment to the City Commission, and writes a letter to
the Chronicle extolling the benefits of the project, acknowledging their experience with
the project given membership on the RPAB. Tanner makes sure to include “on behalf
of RPAB” in the letters to reinforce their legitimate opinion and so that others will take
it seriously.
Question: Has Tanner done anything wrong?
Yes
No
It Depends
Yes. It would be improper for an individual member of a city board to provide their opinion
representing their opinion is that of the greater board if the board has not previously
authorized the member to do so. A deliberative body should make a formal vote to present
a recommendation as a whole. If Tanner had wished to speak in a personal capacity, this
is permissible provided there is a proper disclosure to the capacity in which the comments
are given.
Sec. 2.03.490. - Standards of conduct.
B. Officials and employees shall conduct themselves with propriety, discharge their
duties impartially and fairly, and make continuing efforts toward attaining and
maintaining high standards of conduct.
10
Page 3 of 5
2. Jenny is a member of the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board, and also
works for a local non-profit that helps to coordinate placement of low-income
individuals in affordable housing. Jenny is happy that their involvement on the board
can help facilitate a community need their profession also addresses. As an expert
in the area, Jenny makes sure that developers coming before the CAHAB are fully
aware of the different resources in the community, and gets frustrated when
someone asks for an incentive when they haven’t gone through all the steps to
minimize development costs, such as working with the non-profit organization to
potentially have them assist in financing some of the houses. Jenny votes no on
these projects since there are so many local organizations that could also benefit
from a developer utilizing the non-profit’s resources, and only votes yes on projects
that maximize these resources. Is Jenny’s behavior appropriate given the two
positions?
Question: Did Jenny do the right thing?
Yes
No
It Depends
Jenny must balance the obligations between the private organization they work for and
the responsibilities to the public and the City as a board member. The role of a board
member is to “carry out the individual’s duties for the benefit of the people (MCA 2-2-
103).” Jenny must work to avoid “conflicts with the proper discharge of such official …
duties (BMC 2.03.520.B)” as well as not “take or influence official action if the
official…has a financial or personal interest in a transaction or matter with the city (BMC
2.03.520.C),” and finally not “represent or appear on behalf of any individual or entity
before any agency of the city (BMC 2.03.520.E)”
BMC 2.03.520 Conflict of Interest
https://library.municode.com/mt/bozeman/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICOO
R_CH2AD_ART3OFEM_DIV4COET_S2.03.520COIN
MCA 2-2-103 Public Trust – Public Duty
https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0020/chapter_0020/part_0010/section_0030/0020-
0020-0010-0030.html
11
Page 4 of 5
3. Keith is a member of the Parking Commission and has, without staff involvement,
developed a proposal to reconfigure downtown parking. City staff has not had the
opportunity to evaluate Keith’s proposal and it has not been officially placed on an
agenda. Keith has repeatedly told staff they need to evaluate the proposal so it can
be scheduled for an agenda. Keith decides to send the proposal by email to the
other Parking Commissioners, and asks them to respond to all board members on
their thoughts about the proposal. H
Question: as Keith done anything wrong?
Yes
No
It Depends
No. Keith has engaged in a meeting as defined by MCA 2-3-202
(https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0020/chapter_0030/part_0020/section_0020/0020-
0030-0020-0020.html). Keith’s email to the entire board requesting they comment to him
could result in the convening of a quorum by electronic means to “hear, discuss, or act
upon a matter over which the agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory
power.” Email exchanges between board members that include a quorum is considered
discussion; the result is such a meeting must be open to the public. Using email to
simply schedule meetings is acceptable as long as the email does not solicit additional
communication. Keith may also have requested the staff liaison or the board chair to
schedule his plan on an agenda or brought the issue up at FYI for discussion on a
future agenda.
12
Page 5 of 5
4. Sally has been active in the neighborhood association for many years. Sally was
recently appointed to the board of the urban renewal district that is within the
neighborhood. During the discussion on funding infrastructure for a proposed
development project Sally insists that the zoning designation of the area surrounding
the project site needs to be modified to create a better balance for surrounding area
for the neighborhood. When the board chair brings the discussion back to the
project, Sally advocates for attaching the requirement of changing surrounding
zoning for approval.
Question: Has Sally done anything wrong?
Yes
No
It Depends
Sally must be mindful of the authority and jurisdiction of the board. Requiring a change
of zoning for properties adjacent to the property seeking urban renewal funds as a
specific condition of approval of the funding is beyond the authority of the board and
could be considered not in conformance with the standards of conduct in 2.03.470.B,
BMC (Officials and employees shall conduct themselves with propriety, discharge their
duties impartially and fairly, and make continuing efforts toward attaining and
maintaining high standards of conduct).
Specifically, in this instance, under State law and the City’s municipal code zoning
authority is granted to the zoning commission and city commission. If the board, as a
whole, determines adjustments to the zoning code are necessary, the board may
consider such action and recommend the City Commission investigate amendments.
13
Page 1 of 7
2020 Employee Ethics Training
Slide 1 (before scenarios)
Due to the ongoing pandemic related to COVID-19, the City is conducting the annual
ethics training through this platform. During the past few years, we have worked toward
the goal of integrating ethics training into department and board meetings with the intent
of furthering a culture of strong ethical behavior. Hopefully, for the 2021 training, we will
be able to once again meet in person to discuss ethical situations.
Slide 2 (before scenarios)
City of Bozeman Ethics Program
The City of Bozeman’s ethics program is based on the City’s Charter. Sec. 7.01 of the
Charter states:
(a) Conflicts of Interest. The use of public office for private gain is prohibited. The
city commission shall implement this prohibition by ordinance, the terms of
which shall include, but not be limited to: acting in an official capacity on
matters in which the official has a private financial interest clearly separate from
that of the general public, the acceptance of gifts and other things of value,
acting in a private capacity on matters dealt with as a public official, the use of
confidential information, and appearances by city officials
(b) before other city agencies on behalf of private interests. This ordinance shall
include a statement of purpose and shall provide for reasonable public
disclosure of finances by officials with major decision-making authority over
monetary expenditures and contractual and regulatory matters and, insofar as
permissible under state law, shall provide for fines and imprisonment for
violations.
Slide 3 (before scenarios)
The Charter creates a board of ethics and establishes the requirement that employees
and officials undergo an annual ethics training:
(b) Board of Ethics. The city commission shall, by ordinance, establish an independent
board of ethics pursuant to state law. The city commission shall appropriate sufficient
funds to the city manager to provide annual training and education of city officials, city
boards, and employees regarding the state and city ethics codes. City officials, board
members, and employees shall take an oath to uphold the state and city ethics codes.
Slide 4 (before scenarios)
The Charter requires the Commission to implement the Charter requirements through
adoption of a Code of Ethics. The City’s Code of Ethics can be found at Chapter 2,
14
Page 2 of 7
Article 3, Division 4 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. In addition, the City has developed
an Ethics Handbook that is available to all employees and officials to help guide
resolution of ethical dilemmas. For additional information and links to ethics resources
please visit the Ethics page on the City’s website
(https://www.bozeman.net/government/city-commission/ethics).
Slide 5 (before scenarios)
Include instruction here on how to move through the platform.
Scenarios (the scenario will be on a slide, then the question on a subsequent slide,
followed by a slide(s) that provides the correct response with supporting information):
1. Sally, a recreation leader, finished teaching summer swim lessons and a parent
of a student gives Sally a “thank you" card which contains a $20 gift card to a
local coffee shop. Sally thinks the gift is a nice gesture and it would be rude to
refuse to accept it. The next morning, Sally stops at the coffee shop and buys
coffee for her co-workers at the pool, telling them about the grateful parent and
their thank-you card.
Question: Did Sally do the right thing?
Select one:
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
No. Although the $20 gift card may not tend to improperly influence Sally from
departing from the faithful and impartial discharge of her public duties, it was given to
her immediately upon completing the class and could be considered to be given
“primarily for the purpose” of rewarding her (and specifically her) for performing her job.
2.03.540.B.2. It does not matter than she spent the gift card on her entire team; to the
parent, it appeared Sally was accepting the gift for herself.
Sec. 2.03.540. - Gifts, gratuities and favors.
B. No official or employee shall accept a gift, gratuity, or favor from any person or
entity:
1. That would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in the
person’s position to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of the person’s
public duties;
15
Page 3 of 7
2. That the person knows or that a reasonable person in that position should
know under the circumstances is primarily for the purpose of rewarding the person for
official action; or
3. Has a value of $100.00 or more for an individual.
C. An employee or official may accept a gift, gratuity, or favor that has a value
greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual only if such gift, gratuity or
favor:
1. Complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and 2; and
2. Is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public event where the
official or employee’s attendance is in fulfillment of their official duties.
16
Page 4 of 7
2. Beth, who works in Economic Development, just finished a meeting with a large
national firm who is working to finalize their plans to open a location in Bozeman.
The next step is for the firm to find experts who can help construct the building.
Beth calls one of her friends at an engineering firm to let her know the good news
and pass along a business lead she met at the meeting today.
Question: Did Beth do the right thing?
Select one:
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
No. Beth attended the meeting in her role as a City employee. She cannot pass along
the tip to a friend for the friend’s potential financial gain. The scenario does not indicate
whether the information is public. In that case, the employee should assume it is not. In
addition, Beth cannot disclose confidential information concerning affairs of the City that
is not known by the general public and which Beth obtained only because of her
position at the City.
2.03.490.E: No official or employee shall, for any reason, use or attempt to use the
official or employee’s position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for
said official or employee, or others.
2.03.530.A: Confidential information. No official or employee shall, without legal
authority, disclose confidential information concerning the personnel, property,
government, or affairs of the city.
2.03.470.A.3: “Confidential information” means any information which is not available to
the general public and which is obtained only by reason of an official’s or employee’s
position.
17
Page 5 of 7
3. A woman approached Sam, in the Forestry Department, while he was out
trimming boulevard trees one day. The woman lived nearby and asked if Sam
could look at a tree in her backyard. Sam knows any trees that aren’t in the right-
of-way are not the responsibility of his department. However, he did not want to
be rude to a citizen, so he followed the woman and looked at the tree. He
advised the woman the tree needed to come down. Sam mentioned that he
operates a tree maintenance business on the weekends, offered the woman his
business card, and said he could come back that weekend to remove it for her.
Question: Did Sam do the right thing?
Select one:
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
No. Sam is an employee of the City and cannot use his position to benefit himself
financially. Although he cannot be rude to the woman, he should have politely
suggested she contact a tree company to look at the tree. By entering onto a citizen’s
private property, Sam may also have created a liability risk to the City.
2.03.490.D: No official or employee shall, for any reason, use or attempt to use the
official or employee’s position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for
said official or employee, or others.
2.03.490.B: Officials and employees shall conduct themselves with propriety, discharge
their duties impartially and fairly, and make continuing efforts toward attaining and
maintaining high standards of conduct.
2.03.510: City officials and employees represent the city government to the public. In
their contact with the public, officials and employees must bear in mind their role as
public servants. Each member of the public shall be treated courteously, impartially, and
fairly. […]
18
Page 6 of 7
4. Bob is a new employee in Planning. Prior to starting at the City, he worked for a
local architecture firm, ABC Design. Bob is an excellent employee, and when he
left ABC Design, the president told him he was welcome to come back to work
there if he ever decided local government work wasn’t a good fit.
A year after Bob joined the City, ABC Design submitted an application for site
plan approval for a new strip mall. Bob is assigned the site plan review. As soon
as he saw ABC Design had signed the application as the applicant’s
representative, Bob told his boss the project should be assigned to another
planner.
Question: Did Bob do the right thing?
Select one:
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
Yes. Although Bob was not going to receive any immediate financial benefit from ABC
Design, there could be the appearance of a quid pro quo (“this for that”) deal if Bob
recommends approval of the site plan. Bob may feel some pressure to approve the
project in order to keep open the prospect of future employment at ABC Design. Even if
he thinks he won’t be influenced, there could be an appearance of conflict of interest.
Bob should not only not do the application review, he should take care not to influence
or appear to influence the other planner who is assigned the review.
2.03.520, Conflict of interest.
C. No official or employee shall take or influence official action if the official or employee
has a financial or personal interest in a transaction or matter with the city.
2.03.490, Standards of conduct
D. No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or
employee’s city position to improperly influence any other official or employee in the
performance of such official or employee’s official duties.
19
Page 7 of 7
5. Fred and Marlene, who own a home outside City limits with a failing septic system,
have applied to have their property annexed to the City so they can hook up to City
sewer and water. A family friend, Peter, works in the City’s Engineering Department.
When the couple’s annexation application is scheduled to be heard by the City
Zoning Commission, they are nervous about having to stand up to speak, and ask
Peter to do the “applicant presentation” at the hearing as a favor to them.
Question: Can Peter do the presentation at the Zoning Commission on the couple’s
behalf?
Select one:
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
No. Even though Peter is not being paid to appear on the couple’s behalf, this is
prohibited as a conflict of interest.
2.03.520, Conflict of Interest.
E. No employee, whether paid or unpaid shall represent or appear on behalf of any
individual or entity before any agency of the city, or take any appellate proceedings from
any action of such agency, either personally or through an associate or partner.
20
Memorandum
REPORT TO: Board of Ethics
FROM: Julie Hunter, Executive Assistant
SUBJECT: 2020 City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Annual Report
MEETING DATE: January 21, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Plan/Report/Study
RECOMMENDATION: Review and approve 2020 City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Annual Report
STRATEGIC PLAN: 1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the
community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from
the community and stakeholders.
BACKGROUND: 2020 City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Annual Report
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Review and approve 2020 City of Bozeman Board of Ethics Annual Report
ALTERNATIVES: None
FISCAL EFFECTS: None
Attachments:
2020 Board of Ethics Annual Report DRAFT.pdf
Report compiled on: January 15, 2021
21
City of Bozeman
Board of Ethics
Report
2020
January 2021
22
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 2 of 7
Table of Contents
Board of Ethics Summary ………………………………………………………………. Page 3
Members…..……………………………….……………………………………… Page 3
Support Staff……..………………………………………………………...…… Page 3
Membership Details………………………………………………………….. Page 3
Creation of the Board..……………………………………………………… Page 4
Duties and Responsibilities…………………………………………………Page 4
Requirement of Annual Report ………….………………………………Page 5
2020 Report………………………….…………………………………………………..……Page 7
2020 Ethics Training …………………………………………………………. Page 7
Summary of the Board’s Decisions and Opinions ……….…….. Page 7
23
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 3 of 7
Board of Ethics Summary
Current Board Members:
Melissa Frost - Chair Appointed August, 2019 Term expires July, 2021
mfrost@bozeman.net
Carson Taylor Appointed September, 2018 Term expires July, 2020
ctaylor@bozeman.net
Sara Rushing Appointed August, 2019 Term expires July, 2021
srushing@bozeman.net
Support Staff:
Julie Hunter – Executive Assistant Administrative and Recording Services
jhunter@bozeman.net
Mike Maas – City Clerk Administrative and Recording Services
dsweeney@bozeman.net
Greg Sullivan – City Attorney Legal and Procedural Recommendations
gsullivan@bozeman.net
Membership Details
The Board of Ethics is made up of three members appointed by the City Commission to two
year terms. Members cannot be city elected officials, city employees, or currently serving on
any other city board or commission.
24
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 4 of 7
Creation of the Board of Ethics
2008 Bozeman City Charter
The Bozeman City Charter (the “Charter”) was proposed by the City of Bozeman’s 2004-2006
Local Government Study Commission and was approved by the voters at the November 7, 2006
general election. The Charter became effective on January 1, 2008. The Charter confers certain
powers and restrictions, prescribing procedures and governmental structure. The Charter was
created …to secure the benefits of local self-government and to provide for an honest and
accountable commission-manager government. (Preamble, City of Bozeman Charter)
Section 7.01 (b) of the Charter called for the establishment of an independent Board of Ethics
as well as the requirement for annual training and education of city officials, city board
members and employees regarding the state and city ethics codes.
Ordinance No. 1726, Creation of the Board of Ethics
To establish a Board of Ethics (the “Board”) as required in the voter approved Charter, the City
Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1726 which provide guidelines for the creation of the
board and other ethics related content required in the Charter. These provisions are codified in
the Bozeman Municipal Code at Chapter 2, Article 3, Division 4 (Sect. 2.03.460 et seq., BMC).
Duties and powers of the Board, who may request board action and the limitations of the
board’s power, are included. In May of 2009, the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1759
which amended the original Ordinance. Changes made relating to the board itself were minor.
Board Duties and Responsibilities
Bozeman Municipal Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Division 4 – Code of Ethics
The Code of Ethics is an important piece of City law. As the declaration of policy section
2.03.460 states, The purpose of this code of ethics is to set forth standards of ethical conduct, to
assist public officials and employees in establishing guidelines for their conduct, to foster the
development and maintenance of a tradition of responsible, accountable and effective public
service, and to prohibit conflict between public duty and private interest.
Following are sections within the Code of Ethics directly related to the Board and a brief
summary of each. Other sections within the Code of Ethics provide additional direction to the
Board and the public in addressing ethical issues and violations.
25
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 5 of 7
Sec. 2.03.580 - Board of Ethics.
This section defines the composition and terms of the Board, requirements for membership,
and lists the support City staff will provide.
Sec. 2.03.600 - Duties and powers of the board.
This section provides details about Board procedures related to meetings, conducting hearings,
and reporting and establishing procedures for administration and implementation of the Code
of Ethics. These duties include:
• Evaluating all aspects of the Code of Ethics to ensure the public and all public servants
have a reasonable opportunity and are encouraged to participate;
• Developing a plan to educate public servants about their rights, duties and
responsibilities;
• Submit an annual report of summary decisions, opinions and recommended actions
regarding ethical practices or policies;
• Arrange for an annual workshop or training program for all employees, elected officials
and board and committee members; and
• Conduct hearings as needed.
Sec. 2.03.610 - Who may request board action.
This section outlines that any person may file a complaint with the Board and further explains
who may request of the Board an ethics opinion.
Sec. 2.03.620 – Limitations on board’s power.
This section explains in detail what limitations are placed on the Board and that the Board may
refer a matter to the city attorney for review.
In addition to the City’s Code of Ethics, the Board has jurisdiction over State of Montana Ethics
laws. These provisions are codified in Title 2, Chapter 2, Part 1, MCA (Sect. 2-2-101, et seq.,
MCA).
Requirement of Annual Report
The annual report of the Board is a way to inform the public, officials and city employees of
what the Board has accomplished in the past year and report any decisions or opinions.
The Bozeman Municipal Code Sec. 2.03.600 specifically states that the board shall:
26
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 6 of 7
4. No later than December of each year, submit an annual report to the city commission
concerning its action in the preceding year. The report shall contain:
a. A summary of its decisions and opinions, both open and confidential; the board
shall make any alterations in the summaries necessary to prevent disclosure of
any confidential information pertaining to any individual or to any organization if
the disclosure could lead to the disclosure of the identity of a person who is
entitled to confidentiality; and
b. Recommend any legislative or administrative actions regarding the city’s policies
and practices which the board believes would or could enhance the ethical
environment in which public servants work.
27
Board of Ethics Report, 2020
Page 7 of 7
2020 Year-End Report
2020 Ethics Training
This year’s employee and advisory board ethics training was designed by City Attorney Greg
Sullivan, City Clerk Mike Maas, Deputy Clerk Jesse DiTommaso, Interim HR Director Jamie
Norby, HR Specialist Eilis Gehle and Executive Assistant Julie Hunter. This team created realistic
ethics scenarios with resolutions for ethics training. Variations of the training provided
customization for employees and boards. The Board of Ethics approved the curriculum and it
was provided to the HR Department for deployment via the online Learning Management
System. This method of deployment followed the Governor’s Order regarding COVID-19
restrictions for in-person meetings.
The city continues to ask new employees and board members to complete ethics training
shortly after hiring/appointment to help familiarize them with the Code and to meet the yearly
training requirement even when joining the organization after the yearly training.
Summary of the Board’s Decisions and Opinions
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the restrictions in place for City of Bozeman Advisory Boards, the
Board of Ethics met virtually just once in December of 2020. At this meeting, the Board of Ethics moved
to affirm the following items presented by City Attorney Greg Sullivan:
1. City Wellness Program;
2. Acceptance by City Employees of Benefits from Labor Unions; and
3. Acceptance by City Employees of Gifts in Recognition of Service from Affiliated Private
Foundations
In 2021 The Board of Ethics will review an ordinance related to the items listed above and will discuss
the establishment of scholarship programs that will benefit specific city departments. The Board will also
review and approve the 2020 City Employee and Board Ethics Training curriculum.
28