HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-04-15 Board of Ethics MinutesPage 1 of 4
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF ETHICS
MARCH 4, 2015
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
The Board of Ethics of the City of Bozeman met in the Madison Room, City Hall at 121 North
Rouse on Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 7 a.m. Present were Board members Chris Carraway,
Melissa Frost and Mary Jane McGarity. Staff present was City Clerk Stacy Ulmen, City Attorney
Greg Sullivan and City Manager Chris Kukulski. Guests present were Betsy Webb, on behalf of
the Montana State University Local Government Center.
A. Call meeting to order – 7 a.m. – Madison room (upstairs), City Hall, 121 North Rouse
Chairman Carraway called the meeting to order at 7:04 a.m.
B. Public Comment
Chairman Carraway opened public Comment.
No person Commented.
Chairman Carraway closed public comment.
C. Approval of Minutes-February 19, 2014
Motion by Ms. McGarity seconded by Ms. Frost to approve the Minutes as submitted from
February 19, 2014. The Motion passed 3-0.
D. Disclosure of Information or Comments Received.
None.
E. Action Items
1. Update/Design/Decision regarding 2014-2015 Annual Ethics Training
a. Betsy Webb’s Dissertation/Study of Comprehensive Ethics
Program (CEP) within a municipal government 5 years after
implementation. (full dissertation is available by request in pdf format
(over 200 pages) (Webb)
MSU Local Government Representative Betsy Webb began her presentation highlighting
the results of her Dissertation/Study of Comprehensive Ethics Program (CEP) within a
Page 2 of 4
municipal government 5 years after implementation in which the City of Bozeman was
surveyed. The entire dissertation was titled: What is Good and what is Right: An Investigation
of the Outcome of a Comprehensive Ethics Program in Municipal Government. She began by
discussing the overall Ethics Scores as charted on page 15 on Figure 3 (concept map with
Summary results). The overall Ethical Climate rating was 5.28. Ms. Webb stated that the
areas related to available resources all produced good scores. To her this is a clear indication
that employees and board members know that an “Ethics Handbook” exists. Ms. Webb stated
that the ethical environment has some potential for opportunity as the results produced a
perception of a gap between the top leaders within the City and the rest of the employees.
Ms. Webb stated that she found the emphasis of “role modeling” by peers and
supervisors as a high desire. After all, these are drivers for ethics. Her concern is that
according to the results, ethics violations are not being reported and that the biggest reason
is the fear retaliation. The Board and Ms. Webb discussed this and stated that we want to
look closely at this and that the High Performance Organization (HPO) group may be of some
assistance. The Board and Ms. Webb continued to discuss as to why there is such a fear in
Bozeman and if it was different in other municipalities and if it has anything to do with the
City’s size and population. Ms. Webb stated that in part it may be related to the economy.
Ms. Webb then continued and spoke regarding the top leaders and that the results
indicated a distance and lack of trust possibly due to relationships. This area was focused on
in the platform for the online training module.
Ms. Webb stated that another strong area that rose to the top is rewarding employees
for good ethics. The Board and Staff discussed this and suggested that this could possibly be
addressed in annual evaluations.
Ms. Webb highlighted the area related to personnel decisions and hiring and firing.
The Staff and Board discussed the difficulties of balance between confidentiality and
assumptions that arise when something occurs with an employee. Discussion continued in
regards to employees needing to become more knowledgeable about the on-boarding
process and what that entails. The hiring of a Director was discussed at length and the
concerns related to outside hires being external instead of internal. There is a desire to focus
more from within and this plays a part in the feedback. The group continued to discuss the
area related to reporting and the differences between perception and what is actually being
seen. There may be a need to break down retaliation as it related to peers vs management.
Sometimes reporting may create a difficult work environment so an employee may be
withholding from reporting due to this. An employee may be faced with balancing a minor
ethics violation with a large ethics violation as it related to misconduct.
Ms. Webb then went over her recommendations including Benchmarking
Organizational Ethics, focusing on the tone at the top, investigating low reporting by
Bozeman employees, that the research results should guide the design of future City of
Bozeman ethics trainings and the need to share research results with employees.
b. Highlights of total NEW City Employees and Citizen Advisory
Board Members who took the online Training in 2014 (Ulmen/Wilbert/Jorgenson)
Ms. Ulmen stated that this has been highlighted in the draft Annual Report and can be discussed
in conjunction with that.
Page 3 of 4
e. Discussion with guests and staff regarding the design of the 2014-2015
annual ethics training.
Ms. Webb and the Board began to review the draft training platform that has been
developed based on Ms. Webb’s feedback from her dissertation. There was some discussion about
the training seeming clunky, but Ms. Webb explained that it is set up to collect data as well as
conduct the training. To go to a different type of platform would be very costly. Mr. Kukulski
suggested that the National Citizens Survey platform be explored in the future to see what it may
be able to provide. Four modules to this platform have been developed based off of the results
from Ms. Webb’s survey. Ms. Webb stated that the duration to take the training ranges from 20 to
30 minutes. Links have been embedded into the training as well for additional information. The
Board discussed when to go live with the training.
Ms. Webb will be presenting the results of her dissertation to the HPO Group on April 21st.
The Board will do their best to attend the meeting on that date. The forum will really concentrate
on action steps in moving forward. Ms. Webb suggested that an open session take place as well so
that all employees who may not be part of the HPO group have the option of attending.
The Board and Staff discussed further how to get away from the “ethics season” persona
and start investigating how to embed the training into regular departmental procedures. 2014 was
used as a compilation phase in order to create a solid “benchmark” for future ethics trainings for
the City.
Discussion commenced on the possible creation of an anonymous reporting system. Ms.
Webb stated that MSU has created a system of this sort. If the City is interested in this, Ms. Webb
gave the name of the person monitoring the MSU system.
The Group discussed the possibility of asking the citizenry to change the “annual training”
mandate in the City Charter. They discussed the costs associated with the trainings. Ms. Webb
stated that Bozeman is out of the norm as most municipalities conduct ethics training every 2-3
years. Mr. Sullivan reiterated the need to embed the ethics training into departments that could be
done on an ongoing basis and then have a large type of forum training every 2 years or so.
The Group discussed the need to work on closing the gap between staff and top leaders.
The Board wondered if there was a way to clarify or define who are the “top leaders.” By doing
this, it could help improve the connection.
The Group discussed the possibility of adding an “anonymous” page to the module but
after discussion agreed not to. Ms. Webb reiterated that the results from the survey indicated a
high number of staff understand where to find resources for the City’s ethics program. Ms. Webb
stated that the right answers come up at the end of the training.
The Board agreed that a Citizen Advisory Board scenario should be added to the training
as it appeared that this training was more gauged towards employees. Mr. Sullivan gave an
example and Ms. Webb will incorporate the suggestion. Mr. Sullivan also suggested that the
Clerk’s office offer some kind of “open meeting” trainings in the future.
Ms. Webb asked the Board members to take the training and give her feedback by Monday
March 9. The Board agreed that the live date with be April 1.
Page 4 of 4
Motion by Ms. McGarity seconded by Ms. Frost to approve the training module with the changes
discussed and launch the training on April 1, 2015. The Motion passed 3-0.
c. Review and Possible Approval of the 2014 Annual Report (Ulmen)
Ms. Ulmen provided a draft of the Annual Report. The Board directed her to change the name to
2014-2015 Annual Report. Also, Exhibit A which reflects Ms. Webb’s dissertation will only
include the questions asked, the graphs and the recommendations page. The Board directed Ulmen
to strike Exhibit B (minutes from 2-9-14) and replace with Exhibit C (price quote). They also
directed her to strike the Administrative Accomplishments section. The Group proposed that the
Upcoming Goals Section discuss that 2014 was used to collect information to create the training
and that we are utilizing those results for trainings into the future. Ms. Frost suggested changes to
the section pertaining to Upcoming Recommendations and stated that she will email Ulmen the
proposed language reflecting that legislative changes have been formalized. The Board agreed that
this Annual Report should be added to the Commission Consent Agenda. Ulmen will make the
changes, prepare the packet materials and send the draft to the Board.
Motion by Ms. McGarity seconded by Ms. Frost to approve the 2014-2015 Annual Ethics Report
with the changes discussed. The Motion passed 3-0.
e. Staffing changes with the Board of Ethics (Ulmen)
The Group discussed that the ethics administrative support will be moving to the City Manager’s
office. The Clerk’s office will still handle regular board duties of posting requirements and board
appointments. The Board asked that the City Attorney stop in and give a report on a regular basis.
The Board then discussed the timing related to appointments. Two appointments expire this year.
F. FYI / Discussion
1. Upcoming Schedule
The Board agreed to meet again in the Fall of 2015 to review the results from the training and
begin designing the next curriculum from those.
G. Adjourn The meeting was then adjourned at 8:50 a.m.