Leadership committee refers staff-related ethics matter back to ethics subcommittee; recommends social‑media training for board member

The Bronx Community Board Leadership Committee on Feb. 20 reviewed two pending ethics complaints, identified in the meeting as Case 116 (complaint involving Deborah Kaye and matters that also referenced staff member Jeremy) and Case 117 (a complaint by Grace M.).

Naomi Robertson, chair of the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee, told leadership that the ethics committee recommended that the portion of Case 116 involving staff member Jeremy be returned to the Ethics Committee for further review. Robertson said the committee recommended that Deborah Kaye sign the board's social media policy and complete a privacy training course as part of the committee's response to her portion of Case 116. Robertson also said the ethics committee recommended referring Case 117 to the Conflict of Interest Board.

The leadership committee agreed that the Jeremy portion of Case 116 should be considered again by the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee. Leadership recorded that the ethics committee's recommendations for Deborah Kaye's social‑media training and privacy course would be forwarded on for consideration at the full board. Leadership did not itself impose additional disciplinary sanctions during the meeting.

Several members pressed for clearer, written procedures for how complaints move from committee to leadership to the full board. Participants noted that a flowchart discussed in April 2023 had not been formally adopted by the full board; some members said that gap had caused confusion over whether leadership or ethics should handle specific steps. Miguel (participant) said the flowchart had not been voted on and that the mayor's office had previously indicated not every internal housekeeping item required a full‑board vote. Naomi Robertson and other committee members urged that the flowchart and related documents be finalized and, if desired, brought back to ethics for a recorded vote so the process is unambiguous going forward.

Public commenters and board members raised concerns about how complaints and related notices were distributed. A complaint subject said she had not received complaint materials in time to prepare; leadership members and the committee chair urged complainants and respondents to contact the ethics chair or staff if there is uncertainty about receipt of notices. Several speakers — including community members who identified themselves during the gallery session — urged an appeals process or clearer notification procedures so subjects know how to respond and whether a formal hearing will occur.

The meeting record shows the leadership committee will: 1) send the Jeremy portion of Case 116 back to the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee for further review; 2) forward the ethics committee's recommendation that Deborah Kaye sign the social media policy and complete privacy training to the full board for action; and 3) note that Case 117 has been referred, per ethics, to the Conflict of Interest Board. Leadership recommended that ethics finalize any proposed changes to the flowchart or manual in committee and, if needed, present those changes as a recorded item to the full board.

Background: Robertson told leadership the ethics committee has processed more than 100 complaints to date and that the panel believed the current matter required clarifying whether process items (for example, a leadership flowchart discussed in April 2023) had been formally adopted by the full board. Several participants said that adopting a written, published flowchart and ensuring clear read‑receipt or notification procedures would reduce confusion in future complaints.

The committee scheduled follow‑up work on the flowchart, and leadership asked staff to ensure the full board is able to view the ethics committee's recommended documents before the next full‑board meeting.