Charter panel revises ethics chapter: council to enact code by ordinance, commission set at seven members

The Charter Revision Commission on Aug. 21 reorganized and approved several substantive changes to the proposed ethics chapter of the Bridgeport charter, voting to move the requirement that the City Council enact a code of ethics into the chapter’s general provisions and to clarify how the ethics commission will operate.

The panel agreed to delete the draft section labeled as the old section 1 and make the current statement of purpose the new section 1, relocating the sentence "The City Council shall enact a code of ethics by ordinance" into the new general provisions. Speaker identified in the record as the Chair (speaker 1) explained the revision was intended to place the statement of purpose first and move technical details into subsequent subsections.

Why it matters: The changes clarify which provisions belong to the charter itself and which may be fleshed out by ordinance, and set governance details that will shape how conflict-of-interest complaints and advisory opinions are handled.

Major votes and rules adopted - Renumbering and relocation: The commission voted to delete the current section 1, make the current section 2 the new section 1 (statement of purpose), and renumber later sections. The voice vote passed. - Commission composition: The panel voted to keep seven members for the Ethics Commission and to limit membership so that no more than four members may be of the same political party. Legal counsel (speaker 7) referenced statutory guidance during the discussion. - Legal-review timetable: Commissioners amended the draft to require a city‑attorney review of "form and legality" within 45 days, replacing a shorter review period that commissioners said had caused delays in the past. A motion to add "within 45 days" passed by voice vote. - Vacancy and transition rules: To avoid a gap between the charter’s effective date and the new commission’s seating, commissioners adopted language that if neither the mayor nor the council timely fills a vacancy, the Ethics Commission itself may, by majority vote, nominate a replacement if a vacancy remains more than 180 days after it arises. - Independent counsel: The commission added a new subsection (f) allowing the city attorney, in consultation with the Ethics Commission, to appoint independent legal counsel when there is an internal conflict of interest in the city attorney’s office, when a novel or complex legal issue arises, or as otherwise required by professional rules; that language passed unanimously.

What the record shows (quoting the transcript) - On moving the ordinance sentence: the Chair said, "The city council, comma, by ordinance, comma, shall enact a code of ethics and establish an ethics commission." (transcript wording used by the Chair during the rewording discussion.) - On advisory opinions and legal review: one commissioner argued the city should allow more time for thorough legal review, saying, "Within 45 days" should replace shorter review windows; the commission adopted that change by vote.

Details and open items - The vote tallies were recorded as voice votes ("Aye") in the public transcript; named roll-call tallies were not recorded in the transcript for most motions. Where precise counts were not recorded in the discussion, this article reports outcomes as recorded (motion passed or motion failed) and notes that detailed counts were not specified in the transcript. - The commission tabled some staffing and resource language for the Office of Municipal Ethics (section 4) for distribution and final action at the next meeting; commissioners agreed to circulate draft language mirroring the legislative office to define staffing, space and budgeting.

Next steps: The commission will circulate the redlined language for the Office of Municipal Ethics staffing and take that item up at a follow‑up meeting before finalizing the charter to refer to the City Council.