Board of Ethics presses for public disclosure of filing status, delays enforcement

The Board of Ethics discussed large-scale delinquency on required annual financial-disclosure filings and agreed to pursue a public webpage showing each filer’s status while postponing formal enforcement until staff and counsel questions are answered.

Board members said dozens of disclosure forms were still missing and described plans to add an "Annual financial disclosure status" button on the board’s page that would display a simple list with name, title and whether a form is received, filed, delinquent or fined. Tim Allen, identified in the meeting as the city communications director, was named as the point person the board expects to ask to publish the page.

The board’s chair (name not specified in the public record) opened the discussion by noting the scale of delinquency and asking that the matter be reviewed in executive session; the chair also described prior communications with the clerk’s office and the mayor’s office to notify filers. One board member read from the board’s rules and regulations (revisions through 06/06/2024), citing Article 3’s limits on who may issue official statements.

Why it matters: the board is responsible for collecting and enforcing financial-disclosure filings for city employees and appointed board and commission members. Members said publishing a public status list would improve transparency and make it easier for residents and supervisors to see who has filed.

What the board discussed and decided - Delinquency: Board members reported a list of missing submissions; at one point a member read aloud a set of missing items recorded as “1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21.” The chair said the late filings are a recurring problem and that, in prior years, the board had chased filers well into the following calendar year.

- Public webpage and button: Members described a simple implementation: a button on the Board of Ethics web page labeled something like “Annual financial disclosure status.” When clicked, the page would present a table or spreadsheet with name, title and a status flag (received/filed/delinquent/fine). The board instructed staff to follow up with communications staff (Tim Allen) to produce the page and to return with a sample or prototype.

- Press release and social media: Members agreed to prepare an informational press release and a social-media post from the board (to be issued through the chair or the chair’s designee, per board rules). The board emphasized that the release should be informational—explaining what a disclosure is and how to find status—and not comment on any pending investigations.

- Enforcement and fines: The city code and ordinance were cited as giving the board authority to levy fines up to $10,000, with a referenced $5,000 amount discussed as a common or previously used figure. Board members debated whether to adopt a graduated schedule of fines and how to structure collection and tracking (for example, whether a fine, if imposed, had an auditable trail showing payment and where funds are deposited). Several members said the code provides a maximum but not detailed procedures for collection, and that additional legal and procedural questions remain.

- Timing and next steps: After discussion the board agreed not to rush implementation. Members said outstanding procedural questions and a pending complaint would be taken to executive session; the chair asked members to forward draft language and prior minutes showing past iterations of enforcement language ahead of the next meeting. One member said the board now expects to put finalized steps in place for the 2026 filing cycle (covering 2025 filings) rather than rush enforcement for the current cycle.

- Confidential complaint: The chair confirmed that the board had received one complaint that would be discussed in executive session; no details of the complaint were disclosed in open session.

Votes at a glance - Approval of previous meeting minutes — motion approved (unanimous by voice vote recorded as ayes). The meeting record shows a motion, a second and an affirmative voice vote. - Motion to enter executive session to discuss the complaint and enforcement matters — motion approved by voice vote; board members moved into executive session at about 7:20 p.m.

Ending: Board members asked staff to gather prior drafts of enforcement language, to coordinate with Tim Allen on a web prototype and to send suggested text for the informational press release to the chair before the next meeting. The complaint and outstanding enforcement questions will be handled in executive session per the board’s motion.