Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ethics topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Aberdeen council adopts revised ethics code after split vote amid member concerns

3841946 · June 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Aberdeen City Council approved amendments to the municipal code of ethics (AMC chapter 2.24) on third and final reading after debate about vague penalty language; the ordinance passed 7–5.

The Aberdeen City Council adopted an amended code of ethics ordinance on third reading after several council members voiced concerns that penalty provisions and complaint procedures remain unclear.

The council accepted the final reading of Bill 2025‑06, amending AMC Chapter 2.24, in a roll‑call vote that passed 7–5. The ordinance will be codified as Ordinance 6726, the clerk announced.

Several council members who opposed the measure said the document was close to complete but left ambiguity about which actions trigger specific penalties and about how complaint information would be shared with the ethics committee. One council member who helped draft the ordinance said the text was “about 95% there” but that the penalties portion did not “clearly describe what action causes what penalty.” Another member said they were uncomfortable if the committee were presented with complaints without substantive context, describing the possibility of a “blind” vote without adequate information.

Supporters said the committee had worked regularly between readings to clarify vague language and that changes enacted during the process had improved the document. After discussion the council proceeded to the roll call. The vote by name recorded: Ellis—Yes; Francie—Yes; Jenkins—No; Hodgkin—No; Hubbard—Yes; Lawrence—No; Mackie—Yes; Morrison—No; Perchini—Yes; Crater—Yes; Swar—Yes; Taylor—No. The result was 7 in favor, 5 opposed.

A member of the public who addressed the council during a later public comment period urged restraint, saying she hoped the code would be used “very rarely and judiciously” and not vindictively. The council did not take additional amendments at the meeting.

The ordinance takes effect according to the city code schedule for municipal ordinances unless otherwise provided in the text.