Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ex Parte Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Ethics directs staff to redraft ex parte-communications language for clarity
Summary
Board members agreed staff should propose clearer ordinance wording about ex parte communications, replacing the term 'pendency' with language such as 'pending' or 'until the complaint is resolved.' Staff will return a redline in a future meeting.
The Denton Board of Ethics instructed staff to prepare clearer ordinance language about ex parte communications in ethics complaints, with members asking the code to avoid legal jargon and specify when restrictions begin and end.
At the April 14 meeting, staff presented the current ethics ordinance language about ex parte communications under City of Denton Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article 11. Members raised concerns that the term “pendency” is legalistic and could confuse residents who must follow the code. A board member suggested changing the phrase to “after a complaint has been filed and is pending before the board of ethics,” saying “I think that would be a lot more clear.” Another member recommended the wording “after a complaint has been filed and until the complaint has been resolved by the board of ethics.”
Madison (staff) and Scott (city attorney) explained the practical limits: while the words can be clarified, some complaints remain subject to open-records requests even if not publicly posted, and not all persons covered by the ethics ordinance are city employees or public officers who would qualify for closed-session employment deliberations. The board reached informal consensus that staff should return a draft redline replacing “pendency” with clearer terms and setting a clearer end point (for example, “until the complaint has been resolved by the board of ethics”) for ex parte restrictions.
There was no formal recorded vote on the language change; staff said the redline would be presented at a future meeting for board review. Any change to the ordinance would require city-attorney review and council adoption before taking effect.
