Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ethics topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council finds ethics complaint against Mayor Paige Brown lacks merit in 6–1 vote after heated exchange

Gallatin City Council · July 22, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Councilmembers voted 6–1 that an ethics complaint alleging Mayor Paige Brown improperly accessed and disseminated city surveillance footage did not have merit; the complaint and an earlier investigative report were discussed during a contentious portion of the July 21 meeting.

The Gallatin City Council voted 6–1 on July 21 that an ethics complaint filed by Councilman Jovance alleging Mayor Paige Brown improperly accessed and disseminated city surveillance footage did not have merit.

City staff (Miss McCauley) summarized the complaint and the investigative addendum (investigative report dated June 2, 2026), saying the complaint alleges improper access and external dissemination of municipal surveillance footage and references a Chancery Court affidavit. The summary noted the investigative report had previously concluded the original release should not have occurred and recommended procedural changes to avoid future releases.

During discussion the mayor asked Vice Mayor Hayes to preside over this portion of the meeting; several councilmembers exchanged heated remarks on the dais and in the chamber. Miss McCauley explained legal and practical limits on compelling a private citizen to remove a social‑media post and noted an addendum indicating a still image had been removed from one platform but later appeared on another.

Councilman Gervont and others described the social‑media fallout as harmful; some councilmembers pressed for reopening earlier investigative steps and for further fact‑finding about what department heads observed the night the footage was recorded. Several councilmembers urged focusing on corrective steps that staff had already implemented regarding release protocols. A motion that the complaint “does not have merit” passed 6–1 by voice/roll call.

The council did not direct a new independent investigation at the meeting; the motion that passed was to find the complaint did not meet the threshold for further ethics investigation. The investigative report and staff recommendations remain on the record and staff said they had taken or planned steps to change release procedures for surveillance material.