Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-24 - Board of Ethics - Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call meeting to order B. Disclosures C. Changes to the Agenda D. Public Service Announcements E. Approval of Minutes E.1 Approve the minutes from June 6, 2024 (Maas) F. Action Items F.1 Review the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum (Maas) THE BOARD OF ETHICS OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA BOE AGENDA Monday, September 16, 2024 General information about the Board of Ethics is available our Board of Ethics webpage. If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to comments@bozeman.net or visit the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the meeting. Anonymous public comments are not distributed to the board or staff. Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through Video Conference during the appropriate agenda items. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the City on cable channel 190. For more information please contact Greg Sullivan, gsullivan@bozeman.net This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Video Conference: 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 if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in- person United States Toll +1 253 215 8782 Access code: 952 1141 1005 Consider the Motion: I move to approve the minutes as submitted. Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in accordance with the City's Charter. 1 F.2 Review the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum (Maas) F.3 Revise the Bozeman Code of Ethics(Giuttari) G. Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board H. FYI/Discussion I. Adjournment Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual boards' ethics training curriculum in accordance with the City's Charter. Provide staff on recommendations, if any, on the revision of the Bozeman Code of Ethics Secs. 2.03.600 - 2.03.690. This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matter falling within the scope of the Board of Ethics. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic. Please note, the Board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name, and state whether you are a resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. This board meets as needed. Board of Ethics meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our Acting ADA Coordinator, Max Ziegler, at 406.582.2439 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Board of Ethics FROM:Mike Maas, City Clerk SUBJECT:Approve the minutes from June 6, 2024 MEETING DATE:September 16, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the minutes as submitted. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:The June 6, 2024 meeting minutes are attached for review. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:none ALTERNATIVES:none FISCAL EFFECTS:none Attachments: 06-06-24 Board of Ethics Minutes.docx Report compiled on: September 12, 2024 3 Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, June 6, 2024 Page 1 of 2 THE BOARD OF ETHICS MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES June 6, 2024 A)00:16:57 Call meeting to order Present:Sara Rushing, Kristin Taylor, Mark Bond Absent:None Excused:None Staff Present at the Dais:City Attorney (CA) Greg Sullivan, City Clerk (CC) Mike Maas B)00:18:34 Disclosures C)00:18:41 Changes to the Agenda D)00:18:59 Approval of Minutes D.1 00:19:04 Approve the minutes from October 2, 2023 and November 20, 2023. 04-25-24 Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes.docx 00:19:14 Correction 00:19:57 Motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Mark Bond: Motion Kristin Taylor: 2nd 00:20:03 Vote on the Motion to approve the minutes as corrected.The Motion carried 3 -0. Approve: Sara Rushing Kristin Taylor Mark Bond Disapprove: None E)00:20:08 Public Comment 4 Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, June 6, 2024 Page 2 of 2 There were no general public comments. F)00:21:05 Action Items F.1 00:21:07 Approve Annual Ethics Report Board of Ethics Annual Report 2023.docx 00:21:15 Discussion 00:22:52 Motion to approve Consider the Motion: I move to approve the 2023 Annual Ethics Report Kristin Taylor: Motion Mark Bond: 2nd 00:23:00 Vote on the Motion to approve Consider the Motion: I move to approve the 2023 Annual Ethics Report The Motion carried 3 - 0. Approve: Sara Rushing Kristin Taylor Mark Bond Disapprove: None F.2 00:23:39 Discussion of 2024/25 Work Plan Including Evaluation of Standards of Conduct, Hearing Procedures for Ethics Complaints, and Meeting with Chairs of Advisory Boards Brd Ethics Ltr 9 25 23.pdf 00:23:44 Discussion 01:14:41 Review of Letter from Jordan Crosby 02:14:06 Summary of Next Steps G)02:14:49 FYI/Discussion H)02:15:16 Adjournment 5 Memorandum REPORT TO:Board of Ethics FROM:Julie Hunter, Executive Assistant Mike Maas, City Clerk Jennifer Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney Greg Sullivan, City Attorney SUBJECT:Review the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum MEETING DATE:September 16, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in accordance with the City's Charter. 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:The City of Bozeman will be utilizing the discussion format for employee ethics training. To create the curriculum, a team of volunteer staff from multiple departments and multiple levels within the organization was gathered to propose, discuss, and craft the scenarios for staff training. This same group of volunteers will also act as the leaders in the discussion sessions. The goal is to make the material more familiar by using scenarios similar to what arises in day-to-day work. Engaging in conversation helps staff learn as a group and group discussion assists in thinking of ethics holistically, rather than a lecture format that is one-way presentation in a prescriptive manner. For this year's training, the method of delivering the training will be modified. The ethics team wanted to increase discussion that can often be a challenge in a large group dynamic. The new approach will be to form small groups and provide one or two of the scenarios for more detailed discussion before reporting back to the larger group. Additionally, a blank form will be provided for any group that has their own scenario they would like to discuss or provide to the ethics team for future trainings. Lastly, the ethics team has heard that some staff would like to bring scenarios they have encountered but do not want their names associated with the submission. The ethics team will be informing all trainees that they can interoffice a situation to the City Clerks' Office without need to self identify. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified. 6 ALTERNATIVES:None suggested. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios-Citations.final.docx Report compiled on: September 12, 2024 7 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 1 of 7 Scenario 1: An employee has an out-of-town work conference and reserves a hotel room for the three nights that the City will pay for. Because the location is a desirable vacation spot, and the room has two beds, the employee decides to invite their family to join them for the stay. The employee contacted the hotel and was told that there may be a five dollar per night increase in the price for the individual compared to with the family due to differing occupancy rates. What are the ethical considerations here? Citations: 1. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of Conduct. o (A) - Officials and employees have an obligation to act morally and honestly in discharging their responsibilities. o (D) - No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official employee, or others. Sec. 2.03.470. Definitions: "Financial interest" means any ownership interest, contractual relationship, business relationship, or other interest which will result in a monetary or other material benefit to an official or employee, either tangibly or intangibly, which has a value of more than $15.00, other than the official or employee's duly authorized salary or compensation for the official or employee's services to the city, and which interest is not common to the interest of all other citizens of the city. The following financial interest shall be imputed to be those of an official or an employee of the city: that of a spouse or child of an official or employee;that of any prime contractor or subcontractor of the city, in which the official or employee or any member of the official or employee's immediate family has any direct or indirect interest as the proprietor, by ownership of stock or partnership interest. 2.Montana Code Annotated § 2-2-103. Public trust -- public duty. (1) The holding of public office or employment is a public trust, created by the confidence that the electorate reposes in the integrity of judicial officers, public officers, legislators, and public employees. A judicial officer, public officer, judge, legislator, or public employee shall carry out the individual's duties for the benefit of the people of the state. o Follow-up question: $$ difference? $50 a night? What if there is no increase? 8 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 2 of 7 Scenario 2: An employee is working their job helping customers/patrons. Someone the employee assists regularly offers afterhours work to the employee. Telling them they’ll pay more than they are making per hour since they know each other so well from their current job. The employee feels uncomfortable, knowing their supervisor and coworkers can hear and so can other patrons. They were told when they were hired not to solicit themself in anyway while at work. What are the ethical considerations here? Citations: 1. Sec. 2.03.520. Conflict of interest. o (B) No official or employee shall engage in any employment or business which conflicts with the proper discharge of such official or employee's duties. o (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. (*Subsection (C) could easily be applicable if fact scenario is slightly changed during discussion) 2. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct. o (D) Standards of conduct. No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official employee, or others. Sec. 2.03.470. Definitions: "Financial interest" means any ownership interest, contractual relationship, business relationship, or other interest which will result in a monetary or other material benefit to an official or employee, either tangibly or intangibly, which has a value of more than $15.00,other than the official or employee's duly authorized salary or compensation for the official or employee's services to the city, and which interest is not common to the interest of all other citizens of the city. The following financial interest shall be imputed to be those of an official or an employee of the city: that of a spouse or child of an official or employee;that of any prime contractor or subcontractor of the city, in which the official or employee or any member of the official or employee's immediate family has any direct or indirect interest as the proprietor, by ownership of stock or partnership interest. o Follow-up questions: 1. What if the employee was “off-shift” or away from work? 2. Gig vs job offer? 3. 2 nd job vs leave the City 4. Does it matter if it is the same work or a different “job”? 9 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 3 of 7 Scenario 3: A City Employee has a Tik Tok following of 100K people. They had this account for 5 years and people in Tik Tok have come to know they’re a City Employee. Most of his content has been related to public shaming. Using his personal phone, the content is gathered on city time while performing city duties. The subjects of the video are unaware. The City is getting calls complaining about it. What are the ethical considerations? Citations: 1.Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct. o (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. o (D) No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official employee, or others. Sec. 2.03.470. Definitions. "Personal interest" means any interest in the matter which would affect the action of the official or employee other than a financial interest, and other than an interest because of membership in, or affiliation with, but not employment by a social, fraternal, charitable, service, educational, religious, governmental, health service, philanthropic, cultural, or similar nonprofit institution or organization. o (H) All officials and employees shall refrain from improper governmental action as defined in this division. Sec. 2.03.470. Definitions. a."Improper governmental action" includes any action taken by an official or employee during the performance of the officer's or employee's duties, regardless of whether the action is within the scope of the employee's employment or the officer's duties, and that: (1)Violates the standards of conduct listed in section 2.03.490 or 2.03.510; 490 – Standards of conduct 510 – Treatment of the public (2) Violates the standards prescribed by title 2, chapter 2, of Montana Code Annotated (MCA 2-2-101 et seq.); (3)Is intended to harass, intimidate, or retaliate against any other employee, official, or any member of the public for the conduct protected under this division or state or federal law; 10 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 4 of 7 (4)Violates a fiduciary duty to the city or its citizens; or (5) Creates a substantial or specific danger to the public's health or safety. b.Improper governmental action excludes personnel actions, including, but not limited to: employee grievances, complaints, appointments, promotions, transfers, assignments, reassignments, reinstatements, restorations, reemployments, performance evaluations, reductions in pay, dismissals, suspensions, demotions, reprimands, violations of collective bargaining or civil service laws, or alleged violations of agreements with labor organizations under collective bargaining. c.A properly authorized city program or budgetary expenditure does not become an improper governmental action because a reporting person dissents from or disagrees with the city policy or decision. 2. Sec. 2.03.510. Treatment of the public. 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.All employees and officials shall, in the exercise of their official duties, refrain from taking any action, making of any statement, or authoring any document that is intended to-harass, intimidate, or retaliate against any member of the public. 11 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 5 of 7 Scenario 4: The City is putting a question on the upcoming ballot asking for funding for a new City facility. A City employee is on their lunch break at the Co-op and bumps into a friend who asks them what they think about the ballot measure. The City employee starts telling their friend how great this new City facility will be and urges them to support it. They then lean in and whisper, “what nobody knows is that someone bought the naming rights to the facility.” The City employee is wearing their Bozeman logo wear. What are the ethical considerations? 1. Follow-up questions:Does the logo wear matter if they are on their lunch break? 2. How should the City employee respond to this inquiry from their friend? Citations: 1. Sec. 2.03.530. Confidential information. o (A) No official or employee shall, without legal authority, disclose confidential information concerning the personnel, property, government, or affairs of the city. o (B) No official or employee shall use confidential information to advance such official or employee's own financial or personal interest or the financial or personal interests of any other person. o (C) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting the disclosure of information required by law to be disclosed. 2. 2.03.490 Standards of Conduct. o (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. 12 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 6 of 7 Scenario 5: The HR Director has had her eye on some old furniture at City Hall. In particular, she really likes an old desk from the old Carnegie library. The City is replacing some old furniture in offices at City Hall and the old table ends up in the dumpster. The HR Director is thinking about jumping in there to pull it out and put it in the back of her truck to take home. What are the ethical considerations? Citations: 1.BMC 2.03.490 Standards of conduct o (D) No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official employee, or others. 2.BMC 2.03.500 Use of City Resources. No official or employee shall use, or permit the use of, city-owned vehicles, equipment, material, or city personnel for personal use of the employee or official or anyone else or to be used in any manner prohibited by state statutes or city ordinance. 3. City Scavenging Policy 08/01/2005: "It is the policy of the City of Bozeman that Solid Waste Division employees will NOT scavenge through garbage or refuse while in the act of collecting or disposing of said garbage or refuse. No items disposed of by customers, whether curbside, in commercial containers, recycling containers, or at the landfill, will be retained by Solid Waste Division employees for their personal use, or for the personal use of any other individual.” o Follow-up questions: 1. Does it matter how much the desk is worth? Or does it make a difference if the employee knew the desk had value but others might not have? 2. What if other employees also want the desk? 3. Is it fair game for anyone if it is in the dumpster? 4. Instead of taking it home, what if she moved it into her office at City Hall? 13 2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios Page 7 of 7 Scenario 6: A new employee recently accepted a position in a City Department. Prior to their employment with the City, they had been the Executive Director of an advocacy group in the same field. The new employee stepped down from the Executive Director role when offered the position with the City. An applicant has requested a permit with the City to allow for nutrient effluent into Bozeman Creek. The new employee’s friends and former colleagues are urging them to reject the permit entirely. What are the ethical considerations? Citations: 1. Sec. 2.03.520(C). Conflict of interest. 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. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct. o (D) No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said official employee, or others. o (E) No official or employee shall, for any reason, use or attempt to use the official or employee's position to improperly influence any other official or employee in the performance of such official or employee's official duties. 14 Memorandum REPORT TO:Board of Ethics FROM:Mike Maas, City Clerk Jen Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney Greg Sullivan, City Attorney SUBJECT:Review the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum MEETING DATE:September 16, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual boards' ethics training curriculum in accordance with the City's Charter. 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:For the City Commission and Citizen Boards, the City Clerks' Office has created the included scenarios for the annual training. The City Clerks' Office will arrange an item to be placed on an upcoming agenda to receive the training. The City of Bozeman will be utilizing the discussion format for board ethics training. To create the curriculum, the City Clerk and Deputy City Clerk, with assistance from the City Attorney's office, collaborated on issues or questions from the Code of Ethics that generally align with questions that have arisen through the last year surrounding Board operations. The goal is to make the material more familiar by using scenarios similar to what arises. Engaging in conversation helps everyone learn as a group and group discussion assists in thinking of ethics holistically, rather than a lecture format that is one-way presentation in a prescriptive manner. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified. ALTERNATIVES:None suggested. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: 2024 board scenarios with citations.docx Report compiled on: September 12, 2024 15 16 Scenario 1: A board member is a member of multiple outside organizations in addition to their appointed position with the City. They are a vocal policy advocate in their outside roles and are bringing their policy positions to the board. During a board meeting, one of the organizations the board member is associated with goes before the board and advocates that the board make a specific policy recommendation to the City Commission. However, the board member never states that they are also a member of this outside organization, and votes on the item. What is the ethical consideration here? Sec. 2.03.520. - Conflict of interest. B. No official or employee shall engage in any employment or business which conflicts with the proper discharge of such official or employee's duties. 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. D.If an official or employee has a financial or personal interest in the outcome of a transaction or matter coming before the agency of which they are a member or by which they are employed, such official or employee shall: 1. Publicly disclose on the record of the agency, or to their superior or other appropriate authority, the existence of such financial or personal interest; and 2. Except as authorized pursuant to 2.03.520.A and G, shall not engage in deliberations concerning the matter or transaction, shall be disqualified from acting on the matter or transaction and shall not communicate about such matter or transaction with any person who will participate in an action to be taken on such matter or transaction. Scenario 2: A board member was observed behaving in a manner some members of the public considered to be disrespectful to those with opposing views. One night during a public event at Story Mill Park, several members of the public observed the board member ranting so loudly and in such an intimidating manner that some families left the event early. The members of the public who observed this behavior weren’t entirely clear if the board member was acting in their official capacity or if they were on their own time. What is the ethical consideration here? BMC Sec. 2.03.490 - Standards of conduct. A. Officials and employees have an obligation to act morally and honestly in discharging their responsibilities. 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. 17 Scenario 3: The same board member that was in Scenario 2 is approached by a member of the public at the Story Mill Park public event. The member of the public identifies the board member and begins to politely ask the board member questions related to board business. In response, the board member becomes very confrontational and aggressive with the member of the public, telling them that they have no business approaching them and to get out of his face now or else they will call the Mayor. What is the ethical consideration here? Sec. 2.03.510. - Treatment of the public. 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.All employees and officials shall, in the exercise of their official duties, refrain from taking any action, making of any statement, or authoring any document that is intended to-harass, intimidate, or retaliate against any member of the public. Scenario 4: A board member resigns their position and becomes the head of a neighborhood group. The former member is paid a nominal fee and holds themselves out as the director of the group. One month after resigning from the board, the former board member appears before the board advocating for their desired changes on a policy recommendation the board will be supplying to the City Commission. What is the ethical consideration here? BMC Sec. 2.03.560. - Post employment/service activities. A. Within 12 months following the date on which a former public servant ceases service to the city, a former public servant may not, without complying with the provisions of 2.03.570: 1. Make any formal or informal appearance before, or negotiate with any decision maker regarding a transaction or matter which was under the former public servant's direct responsibility or which the former public servant participated personally and substantially; or 2. Represent or act or appear on behalf of an individual or entity other than the city in connection with any a transaction or matter which was under the former public servant's direct responsibility or which the former public servant participated personally and substantially as a public servant. B. No former public servant may use any former city title, including on business cards, email, or stationery, except that such use is not prohibited if the former public servant clearly indicates service to the city is no longer ongoing.C.The provisions of this section do not absolve a public servant from complying with the prohibitions against contracting in 2-2-105(3), MCA, or the prohibitions against obtaining employment in 2-2-201, MCA. If any provision of this section is in conflict with Title 2, Chapter 2, MCA, the more stringent provision shall apply. 18 MCA 2-2-105. Ethical requirements for public officers and public employees. (1) The requirements in this section are intended as rules of conduct, and violations constitute a breach of the public trust and public duty of office or employment in state or local government. (2) Except as provided in subsection (4), a public officer or public employee may not acquire an interest in any business or undertaking that the officer or employee has reason to believe may be directly and substantially affected to its economic benefit by official action to be taken by the officer's or employee's agency. (3)A public officer or public employee may not, within 12 months following the voluntary termination of office or employment, obtain employment in which the officer or employee will take direct advantage, unavailable to others, of matters with which the officer or employee was directly involved during a term of office or during employment. These matters are rules, other than rules of general application, that the officer or employee actively helped to formulate and applications, claims, or contested cases in the consideration of which the officer or employee was an active participant. (4) When a public employee who is a member of a quasi-judicial board or commission or of a board, commission, or committee with rulemaking authority is required to take official action on a matter as to which the public employee has a conflict created by a personal or private interest that would directly give rise to an appearance of impropriety as to the public employee's influence, benefit, or detriment in regard to the matter, the public employee shall disclose the interest creating the conflict prior to participating in the official action. (5) A public officer or public employee may not perform an official act directly and substantially affecting a business or other undertaking to its economic detriment when the officer or employee has a substantial personal interest in a competing firm or undertaking. MCA 2-2-201.Public officers, employees, and former employees not to have interest in contracts. (1) Members of the legislature; state, county, city, town, or township officers; or any deputies or employees of an enumerated governmental entity may not be interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity or by any body, agency, or board of which they are members or employees if they are directly involved with the contract. A former employee may not, within 6 months following the termination of employment, contract or be employed by an employer who contracts with the state or any of its subdivisions involving matters with which the former employee was directly involved during employment. (2)In this section, the term: (a)"be interested in" does not include holding a minority interest in a corporation; (b) "contract" does not include: (i) contracts awarded based on competitive procurement procedures conducted after the date of employment termination; 19 (ii) merchandise sold to the highest bidder at public auctions; (iii) investments or deposits in financial institutions that are in the business of loaning or receiving money; (iv) a contract with an interested party if, because of geographic restrictions, a local government could not otherwise reasonably afford itself of the subject of the contract. It is presumed that a local government could not otherwise reasonably afford itself of the subject of a contract if the additional cost to the local government is greater than 10% of a contract with an interested party or if the contract is for services that must be performed within a limited time period and no other contractor can provide those services within that time period. (c)"directly involved" means the person directly monitors a contract, extends or amends a contract, audits a contractor, is responsible for conducting the procurement or for evaluating proposals or vendor responsibility, or renders legal advice concerning the contract; (d) "former employee" does not include a person whose employment with the state was involuntarily terminated because of a reduction in force or other involuntary termination not involving violation of the provisions of this chapter. Scenario 5: A board member is approached by an individual to discuss a potential application to solicit support for the project. The individual assures the board member that they have spoken with their Chair and they are supportive. The board member declines to continue the conversation because they are uncomfortable with the topic. Despite this, before walking away from the board member, the individual gives the board member a $100 gift certificate to a local business and says, in a questionable tone, “I understand and I appreciate your time today.” What is the ethical consideration here? Sec. 2.03.540. Gifts, gratuities and favors. A.Legislative intent.The intent of this section is to further implement the declaration of policy set forth in 2.03.460 and establish specific standards of conduct related to gifts, gratuities, and favors that are provided to a person because of a person's employment or official position with the city. Further, this section ensures city employees are not influenced in the performance of their work by outside persons or entities in a manner that entices the employee or public officers to shift their commitment and dedication away from public service to their own personal interests or the interests of an outside entity or person. These standards recognize legitimate governmental interests exist that allow an employee or official to accept a gift, gratuity or favor in limited circumstances without such acceptance being considered the use of public office for private gain. These interests include, but are not limited to, establishing effective relationships with citizens, acceptance of professional and community awards for public 20 service, and attending public events in an official capacity. At the same time, these standards make it clear that each public officer and employee holds such office or employment as a public trust. 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; 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 taken; 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. D. 1. 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 that complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and 2 and 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. 2.An employee or official may accept payment or reimbursement from a person or entity for necessary expenses such as travel, lodging, meals, and registration fees in excess of $100.00 if the expense is incurred while representing the city and the reimbursement would not violate 2.03.540.B.1 and 2. Reimbursement or payment for educational activities in excess of $100.00 is permissible if the payment or reimbursement does not place or appear to place the official or employee under obligation, clearly serves the public good, and is not lavish or extravagant. E.Upon the acceptance of a gift, gratuity, favor or award pursuant to 2.03.540.C, the recipient shall file a disclosure statement with the board of ethics. Such disclosure statement shall indicate the gift, its estimated value, the person or entity making the gift, the relationship to the employee or official, and the date of the gift. The disclosure statement is a public record. F.A gift, gratuity, or favor does not include: 1.Items or services provided an employee or official in their private capacity and without relationship to their employment or official position: 21 2.A prize received upon a random drawing at an event where the official or employee attends in their capacity as an employee or official, the drawing is open to all attendees, and receipt of the prize does not place the official or employee under obligation; 3.An award publicly presented to an employee or official in recognition of public service; 4.Compensation for officiating at a ceremony; 5.Benefits provided by the city as an employer beyond salary and medical- related benefits, and which are available to all city employees; 6.Discounts on goods or services, or other benefits provided by a labor union to its members who are employees of the city if: i.The benefit is generally available throughout the state or the country to the same category of union member; and ii.The benefit is not offered to influence an employee to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of a person's public duties or to reward the person for official action taken; 7.Discounts on good or services or other benefits provided by an employee's professional organization if: i.The benefit is generally available throughout the state or the country to the same category of professional organization member; and ii.The benefit is not offered to influence an employee to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of a person's public duties or to reward the person for official action taken; and 8.Educational scholarships provided by a private entity affiliated with the city or with an employee's labor union or professional organization, including but not limited to a private corporation, foundation, and non-profit organization, to an employee because of their professional status or category if: i.The benefit is not offered to influence an employee to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of a person's public duties or to reward the person for official action taken; and ii.The city does not purchase goods or services from the private entity. Scenario 6: A board member has been a vocal opponent to a proposed project within the City. But, the board has not taken up any discussion on an agenda related to it. Upon becoming Chair of the board, the board member emails their position on the project to all the board members.At the end of the email, the board member writes, “I’d love to hear from each of you about whether you my 22 position. If enough of you agree, I’ll reach out to the director and talk to them about our concerns about the project.” What is the ethical consideration here? MCA 2-3-202. Meeting defined. As used in this part, "meeting" means the convening of a quorum of the constituent membership of a public agency or association described in 2-3-203, whether corporal or by means of electronic equipment, to hear, discuss, or act upon a matter over which the agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. MCA 2-3-203. Meetings of public boards must be open to the public 23 Memorandum REPORT TO:Board of Ethics FROM:Jennifer A. Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney Greg Sullivan, City Attorney SUBJECT:Revise the Bozeman Code of Ethics MEETING DATE:September 16, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Provide staff on recommendations, if any, on the revision of the Bozeman Code of Ethics Secs. 2.03.600 - 2.03.690. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.1 Values-Driven Culture: Promote a values-driven organizational culture that reinforces ethical behavior, exercises transparency and maintains the community’s trust. BACKGROUND: In June 2024, the Board of Ethics established a work plan. The Board’s work plan contains five areas: 1. Revise the City’s Ethics Handbook – anticipated draft to Board for discussion in December of 2024; 2. Adopt ordinance on procedural changes for ethics complaints and opinions – anticipated completion December of 2024/January of 2025; 3. Conduct a mock trial – anticipated completion late-winter 2025; 4. Perform a substantive review of the Code of Ethics – anticipated Board discussions to begin in December of 2024; and 5. Meet with board chairs regarding changes – anticipated completion at the Board’s discretion. This item is a work session on area two, above. Upon the Board establishing its work plan, we began reviewing the Code of Ethics to determine what procedural changes related to the filing and processing of a complaint, if any, we would recommend to the Board. In reviewing the Bozeman Code of Ethics, we determined the need to specifically revise Secs. 2.03.600 - 2.03.690. In conducting our review and analysis of the Code, we identified four key principles which serve as the basis for the recommended revisions to the 24 complaint process. Specifically, the recommended revisions seek to: 1) enhance the efficiency of the process the Board will use to review and decide a complaint, 2) ensure the constitutional rights of the parties are protected, 3) ensure the process for reviewing a complaint are fair and impartial, and 4) protect the integrity of the hearing record. In addition to revising the complaint process, we determined that Sec. 2.03.630, which governs City Attorney ethics opinions, needs to be revised. The recommended revisions both clarify and simplify when the general public, and when public officials and employees may request the city attorney to issue an ethics opinion. We will explain these recommended adjustments during the meeting. During this work session we will present our recommended revisions to the ethics complaint process. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:To be identified by the Board. ALTERNATIVES:As directed by Board. FISCAL EFFECTS:None presently identified. Attachments: Board of Ethics Prop. Rev. Complaint Process.pdf Report compiled on: September 11, 2024 25 PROPOSED Board of Ethics Complaint Process (September 16, 2024 Board of Ethics Work Session) Clerk processes complaint Complaint Filed Copies sent to Respondent & City Attorney Respondent files written answer City Attorney provides written analysis for Board 26 Board meets for initial review of complaint Board Action: Dismiss complaint w/ prejudice OR dismiss complaint w/out prejudice due to deficiencies OR determine if complaint can be decided on briefs OR determine if formal ethics hearing is necessary If complaint is not dismissed, Board may issue a scheduling order, including a request for briefs If Board determines it wants an evidentiary hearing or oral argument, Board holds formal ethics hearing Written opinion issued 27