Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves revisions to board policy on complaints against individual board members
Summary
After multiple edits and debate over record classification and staff roles, the committee approved draft amendments to Board Policy 02/2005 on complaints against individual board members and forwarded the policy to the full board.
The Rules and Licensing Committee approved draft revisions to Board Policy 02/2005, which governs complaints filed against individual board members, and forwarded the amended draft to the full board for consideration.
Vice Chair Amanda Bollinger led discussion of Chair Carey’s board‑member‑initiated draft. Committee members and staff debated terminology consistency, the scope of materials provided in executive session packets, parity between staff work and respondent board members’ access to materials, and whether records of unsubstantiated allegations should be classified as private.
Multiple edits were adopted as friendly or formal amendments: consistent use of the term “respondent board member,” replacing “agency legal counsel” with “assistant attorney general” where appropriate, and a provision permitting a respondent board member to request that staff assemble and distribute an executive‑session packet on the respondent’s behalf. The committee also amended language to classify records of unsubstantiated allegations as private and refined references to staff roles (for example, clarifying whether the board secretary or designated assistant prepares materials).
Committee members and counsel discussed GRAMA (the Government Records Access and Management Act) requirements for public disclosure of substantiated allegations and whether the policy could match statutory exceptions that make some ethics records private except for a summary report; staff advised that such an exception would require legislative action. CAE (Chief Administrative Executive) Debbie Davis explained that other ethics commissions have statutory exemptions for summary reporting, but the board is not statutorily covered in the same way.
The committee voted to approve Board Policy 02/2005, draft 2, as amended, and forward it to the full board. Committee members said the changes attempt to balance due process for board members with transparency and the board’s investigatory obligations.
Vote: Motion to forward draft 2 as amended passed unanimously.
