The Orting City Council on Sept. 24 paused final action on an ethics dispute after an independent legal review concluded the complaint did not allege violations of the council’s ethics policy. The memorandum, provided to the council by an attorney from Lighthouse Law Group at the council’s request, said “none of the allegations against deputy mayor Koenig, even if true, are sufficient to constitute a violation of the Orting City Council’s code of ethics.” The council then voted to postpone formal disposition of AB 25‑85 to the Oct. 8 meeting and to obtain further legal counsel before any referral to a hearings examiner.

The Lighthouse Law Group review, read into the record at the meeting, examined allegations raised in a complaint filed Sept. 8 by Council Member Chris Moore. The report stated it was retained because the city attorney was named in the Moore complaint and the city sought an independent reviewer. The memo evaluated the alleged conduct against Orting City Council Policy 2017‑004 and relevant state law and concluded the written allegations, as presented, did not meet the policy threshold for discipline of the named council members.

Council members spent more than an hour debating procedure, the proper next steps and whether the document itself raised conflicts because it was requested by city administration. Moore argued the two complaints at issue were separate in content and process and said parts of the review should be handled in executive session or by a neutral third party. Other council members, including Todd Gunther and Jamie Tracy, pushed for an outside, neutral review and asked that the matter be moved to a later meeting when independent legal counsel could be present to answer follow‑up questions.

At the meeting, council members also disagreed about whether the same issues had already been voted on at a prior meeting. After extended procedural discussion, the council voted on a motion to postpone further action on AB 25‑85 to Oct. 8 so legal counsel could be engaged; the vote passed by recorded voice (majority; dissent recorded in the transcript). The council did not adopt any disciplinary action at the Sept. 24 meeting.

The independent memo addressed several specific legal points cited in the Moore complaint, including whether the term “executive privilege” as used in the complaint applied to city executive‑session confidentiality protections under RCW. The reviewer concluded the Moore complaint used the term inconsistently and that the factual statements in the Moore filing did not identify disclosure of material that was both gained by reason of office and not otherwise publicly available — a threshold the reviewer said would be required to establish a policy or statutory violation.

Council members said they sought the memorandum because the retained city attorney was named in the Moore complaint; Mayor Josh Penner was not present at the meeting. Council member Moore continued to press for a fuller record and independent review; other council members said they wanted to ensure the council had neutral legal advice before moving the matter to a hearings examiner.

No final administrative discipline or referral to a hearings examiner was approved at the Sept. 24 meeting. The council’s decision sets a timeline for a follow‑up on Oct. 8 and directs staff to obtain outside legal counsel who can brief the council prior to any adjudicative referral.

The council also voted separately earlier in the meeting to postpone one related ethics item previously discussed at study session; that scheduling action was separate from the Lighthouse review but was part of the procedural debate that consumed much of the evening.

The memo and its reading into the record generated repeated procedural questions from council members about who retained the attorney and whether a conflict existed when the administration arranges an outside review of complaints that name administration officials. Council members asked staff to clarify who engaged Lighthouse Law Group and to supply any engagement letters in advance of the Oct. 8 follow‑up.