The Governance and Ethics Committee on Oct. 30, 2025, reviewed Council Policy 050 (gifts to elected and appointed officials) and asked staff to return with clarified language and implementation options.

City Attorney and staff-led presentation traced the policy’s history, noting major edits in 2018 that focused the rule on gifts to individual officials, added factors for evaluating acceptance and prohibited gifts from lobbyists. The presenter said the adopted redline lacked clarity and did not include a mechanism to update local wording automatically as state law changes, leaving a mix of local references and state citations that is “confusing,” staff said.

Why it matters: council members receive event invitations, complimentary passes and occasional sponsor-provided tickets that create both legal disclosure obligations and public‑perception concerns. Committee members said rules must be clear and enforceable to avoid selective enforcement or politicized complaints, while preserving officials’ ability to attend community events.

Key points and direction

- Scope and alignment with state law: City Manager Jovan Grogan and staff outlined two approaches: retain a local policy that summarizes and tightens state law or primarily defer to state law and provide guidance materials. The staff noted the FPPC fact sheet and Form 700 already set detailed state requirements, but that summaries can omit nuances and cause compliance problems.

- Applicability to staff and appointed officers: staff asked whether the policy should explicitly cover the city manager and city attorney; the committee requested clarification on that scope.

- Tracking state-law changes: staff recommended, and members discussed, delegating limited authority to update the local policy so it stays consistent with state changes rather than requiring repeated council action.

- Ceremonial exemptions and valuation: staff said ceremonial appearances (for example, presenting an award) can be exempt under FPPC guidance; members asked staff to add concrete examples and clearer rules on how to value tickets or meals associated with events.

- Independent expenditures and campaign-related reporting: Councilmember Amber Park asked that the committee clarify how independent expenditures and campaign contributions intersect with the gift/conflict framework; staff agreed this is a separate but related area needing further work and benchmarking.

- Employee rules and differences: staff noted an existing City Manager Directive that restricts gifts to city employees to a $20 cap, which differs from the higher thresholds in state law and the gift rules that apply to elected officials.

Public comment and tone

Resident Wanda Buck urged the committee to prioritize ethics and simplify rules to reduce public cynicism; other members emphasized creating enforceable rules rather than symbolic ones.

Next steps

Staff will return with a revised policy draft and supporting materials (benchmarks, suggested procedure language, and examples). No formal policy adoption occurred at the meeting.

Quotation attribution

“that item is now scheduled to come forward in your December 1 meeting,” City Manager Jovan Grogan said regarding the consultant’s report on an ethics committee.

“I actually think that these gift policies should apply to pretty much everyone who’s doing a form 700 in the city,” Councilmember Amber Park said during the discussion.

Ending note

The committee did not take final action on Council Policy 050. Staff was asked to prepare a clearer draft that (1) defines scope (including whether it covers the city manager and city attorney), (2) identifies which provisions are local rules versus restatements of state law, (3) includes concrete examples and valuation guidance, and (4) proposes an implementation and enforcement mechanism.