Jackson City committees recommend ordinance changes to allow anonymous employee ethics reports and tighten definitions

Jackson Cityaudit and ethics committee members agreed on a package of recommended changes to the cityethics ordinance and on a parallel plan to explore anonymous reporting tools for employees, the joint meeting concluded Thursday.

The committees voted to recommend that the City Council amend the ordinanceto expand the definition of personal interest to include grandparents, grandchildren and domestic partners, and to insert the word "official" in two places so the ordinance applies to official past actions. Members also approved a recommendation to identify a third-party vendor to receive anonymous initial ethics complaints from employees, with the city attorney asked to review open-records implications.

Committee members said the changes are intended to close gaps they identified while reviewing the ordinance and to give employees a safer path to report potential ethics issues. "The ordinance says it's currently written, there's no provision for that," said Christy Cruzen, who presented the committeefindings and led the review, referring to the lack of an anonymity option for employees.

Why it matters: Committee members said employees sometimes fear retaliation and therefore may not report misconduct. The changes would be advisory to the City Council; any change to permit anonymous ethics complaints would also require amending the ordinance and legal review because records created during any investigation can be subject to Tennessee open-records law.

Most important facts - The audit committee formally moved and the group approved a recommendation that the City Council expand the ordinancedefinition of personal interest to add grandparents, grandchildren and domestic partners. The motion was seconded and passed by voice vote. - The committee approved inserting the word "official" into section references (discussed as 4-1-45-2 in meeting discussion) to limit application to official actions or the exercise of official discretion. - The audit committee voted to ask staff to identify and vet third-party vendors that can take anonymous initial reports from employees (committee members cited a previous vendor, "Ethical Advocate," used earlier by the city), and to have the city attorney assess whether outsourcing collection or preserving anonymity would conflict with open-records obligations.

What the committees discussed Christy Cruzen summarized three reporting paths the group considered: internal human-resources reporting (which generally requires identification and covers non-ethics HR matters), the ethics-ordinance channel (which currently requires a complainant name and a notarized signature), and the Tennessee Comptrollerfraud/waste/abuse portal (an external, anonymous option for allegations of fraud or misuse of public resources).

Cruzen and others said the current ordinance mirrors state law language in many respects and that any change to allow anonymity for ethics complaints would require an ordinance amendment. Theresa Luna, the attorney attending the meeting, reiterated that the cityordinance largely "tracked state law," and that the state standard generally serves as the legal floor for local provisions.

Committee members debated precise wording changes. Members expressed support for adding domestic partners and grandchildren to the ordinance definition of covered family relationships and asked the city attorney to draft proposed language and any needed definitions for domestic partners (for example, whether to require a specific cohabitation period). The committee also agreed to add the word "official" in two locations to make clear the ordinance applies to "official past action" or the "exercise of official discretion," limiting scope to conduct connected to an individual's official duties.

On anonymous reporting, internal-audit staff explained the city previously used a third-party product called Ethical Advocate. The cityinternal auditor said the platform allowed anyone to submit an anonymous report and that the city received both detailed, actionable submissions and vague entries that could not be investigated further without follow-up. "It was a totally anonymous system," the internal auditor said, noting the prior vendor could not identify or provide complainant information back to staff.

Concerns and limits Committee members repeatedly raised the tension between anonymity and public-records rules. Several members noted that records created by or held on behalf of the city are generally subject to Tennessee open-records law and that outsourcing collection does not in itself remove the city's records obligations. Theresa Luna and others said legal review is needed to determine which records would remain confidential and which could be disclosable.

Members also discussed election-year timing language in the ordinance: a provision bars accepting complaints during the period from the last day a person may qualify as a candidate until 11:59 p.m. the day after the election (a period described in discussion as roughly three months). Some members said that language aims to prevent politically motivated filings during campaigns, while others asked whether legitimate complaints should be accepted regardless of timing; the committee did not change that provision at the meeting.

Votes and next steps The audit committee moved and seconded the recommendation to ask the City Council to add grandparents, grandchildren and domestic partners to the definition of personal interest; members voted in favor by voice.

The committee also approved the recommendation to insert "official" into the cited sections to limit the ordinance to official actions or the exercise of official discretion; that motion passed by voice vote.

Finally, the committee approved a motion to identify and vet a third-party vendor to collect anonymous employee ethics reports and to direct the city attorney to research the open-records and legal implications of such a system. Committee members asked staff to return with vendor options and suggested the vendor should be able to gather structured incident details and provide a case-numbered portal so staff could request follow-up information when necessary.

The committees agreed to forward the formal language drafted by the city attorney and to prepare recommendations for the City Council.

Ending Committee leaders said staff will draft ordinance language, investigate definitions (for example, one member asked the city attorney to research Tennessee case law on domestic partners), and return with a vendor-exploration plan and any required legal analysis. The joint meeting adjourned after members voted to move the recommendations forward.