Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Complaint Benefit Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Taneytown ethics board schedules closed session to review complaint that a council member may have avoided benefit assessment fee
Summary
The board heard an update on an ethics complaint originating in fall 2023 alleging a sitting council member did not pay a water/sewer connection benefit assessment required by a recorded public works agreement and agreed to meet in closed session March 26 to review the evidence and provide the accused an opportunity to respond.
The Taneytown Ethics Board said it will hold a closed session to review an investigation into an ethics complaint alleging a sitting council member failed to pay a required benefit assessment fee tied to water and sewer connections.
City Attorney Jay Gullo briefed the board on the complaint, which he said was filed in fall 2023. Gullo told members the commission had obtained a recorded public works agreement (PWA) that required payment of a benefit assessment fee when the business connected to the city’s water and sewer. “The evidence that we went and dug up was we dug up the PWA,” Gullo said. He said the business owner told investigators he believed he had not received proper notice and that his water use was below thresholds the owner thought would require payment; Gullo said the agreement does not provide relief for low water use and states the fee is required.
Gullo said the city council was presented the matter several months earlier but took no action. The ethics board decided it should give the person accused an opportunity to address the board and scheduled a closed session at the end of the March 26 meeting to review the documents and determine whether to proceed with any formal action. “There’s nothing we need to do today, but we should probably schedule a closed session,” Gullo said when asking members to prepare to review the evidence in advance.
The board read into the public record that it had previously met in closed session to consult with counsel about the complaint; the minutes record that a motion to move into closed session carried 3 to 0 with the members present. The board directed staff to compile a fresh packet of all relevant documents for the members before the March 26 meeting so everyone would begin with the same materials. Gullo said the meeting in March would not be adversarial but would be used to determine whether the commission should proceed and, if so, to explain the process to the accused and staff.
No formal enforcement action was taken at the meeting itself; the board will decide next steps after the closed session and after the accused has had an opportunity to respond.
