Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee splits over nepotism rule for boards and commissions; ethics ordinance alignment proposed
Summary
Members debated whether to bar spouses or domestic partners of council members from appointment to boards and commissions, with no change adopted and a plan to align charter language with the city's ordinance and definitions.
Committee members debated proposed language that would prohibit spouses or domestic partners of city elected officials from serving on boards and commissions.
Several members urged caution, noting boards and commissions are voluntary and often hard to staff; they worried an outright prohibition could exclude capable volunteers. Other members said narrowly targeted restrictions (for example, limiting spouses and children of council members) could reduce perceptions of undue influence. Committee members noted existing appointment procedures: applicants are interviewed, council and liaisons make recommendations and the mayor formally appoints members.
Members agreed the matter overlaps with the city's ethics ordinance and suggested Tony (city attorney) compare charter text with the ordinance and provide harmonized language. Committee discussed using an existing definition of "domestic partner" from the zoning code as a possible definitional anchor.
Ending: No charter amendment was adopted; the committee asked staff and the city attorney to return redrafted language that aligns nepotism-related charter language with the city's ethics ordinance and existing definitions.
