Council declines to accept independent ethics panelreport; action deemed rejected after split vote

Scottsdale City Council considered a three-judge independent ethics panel report that found a technical but unintentional ethics violation related to a March 23, 2025 complaint against Councilman Barry Graham. After public comment and brief discussion, a motion to accept the panelreport failed on a 3-3 tally; council procedures require four votes to take the action, so the panel report was not accepted.

Several public speakers urged the council to reject the panelfindings. Timothy LaSotta told the council he believed the report relied on an overly restrictive interpretation of the code and warned of chilling effects on routine communications: "If we're gonna get into this is an ethics violation ... for basically having a conversation ... it's going to get worse," LaSotta said. Another commenter argued the panel's approach conflated requests and orders and urged council to reject the finding.

Council members did not adopt the report. A motion to accept the panel's findings was made and put to a vote but failed to reach the four-vote threshold required to accept the panel's recommendation, leaving the council record without formal acceptance of the independent panel's conclusions.

City staff noted the panelhearing had been conducted under the city's independent ethics-process rules and that both parties had legal representation during the prior hearings. No further administrative action was announced on the dais; councilors said the outcome would be reflected in the meeting minutes and that any procedural or code changes would require a separate process.