# Intergovernmental Committee - November 13, 2007 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Committee · November 13, 2007 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/242 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/242?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2007-11-13 - **Body**: Committee - **Last revised**: February 1, 2026 - **Length**: 7,318 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Inter-Governmental Committee convened on November 13, 2007, at 1:00 PM with CM Moloney presiding. The committee addressed two informational agenda items during the session, focusing on governance and oversight matters related to municipal boards and commissions. The meeting included a review of existing boards and commissions as well as an examination of financial disclosure requirements for board and commission members. The committee took two votes during the proceedings, though no public comments were heard at this session. Both agenda items were handled as informational presentations, indicating the committee was gathering information rather than taking formal action on policy changes. ## Attendance The Committee meeting on November 13, 2007 had eight members present and three absent. **Present:** • Moloney • James • Blues • Stinnett • Crosbie • Myers • Blevins • Gorton **Absent:** • Gray • DeCamp • Beard No members arrived late to the meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The Committee took action on two items during the November 13, 2007 meeting, with both motions passing unanimously. **Motion to Remove Renaming Whitney Young Park Shelter** CM James made a motion to remove the proposal for renaming the Whitney Young Park Shelter to the Charles Quillen Park Shelter. The motion was seconded by CM Crosbie and passed unanimously. **Motion to Remove Party Affiliation for Boards/Commissions** CM Gorton made a motion to remove the requirement for party affiliation for boards and commissions appointments. CM Myers seconded the motion, which also passed unanimously. Both votes were conducted as voice votes with unanimous consent, and no individual roll call votes were recorded for either motion. ## Contested Items The Committee meeting on November 13, 2007, featured one significant area of disagreement regarding financial disclosure requirements for city boards and commissions. **Financial Disclosure Requirements** A heated discussion emerged over a proposal to expand financial disclosure requirements to additional boards and commissions beyond those currently mandated. The debate centered on whether requiring more volunteer board members to file financial disclosure statements would serve the public interest or potentially discourage civic participation. Committee members expressed concerns that expanding these requirements could create barriers to volunteer service, as potential appointees might be reluctant to disclose personal financial information for unpaid positions. The discussion highlighted the tension between transparency goals and practical considerations about maintaining adequate volunteer participation in city governance. The nature of the disagreement involved weighing the benefits of increased financial transparency against the potential negative impact on volunteer recruitment and retention for various city boards and commissions. *Note: Specific participant names, voting outcomes, and exact timestamps were not available in the provided source materials for this meeting.* ## Review Boards & Commissions Council Member Myers led a discussion on the need to conduct a comprehensive review of the city's existing boards and commissions to assess their current status and necessity. The primary focus centered on identifying which boards remain active and determining whether all existing commissions continue to serve essential functions for the city. A significant portion of the discussion addressed the ongoing challenge of filling vacant positions on various boards and commissions. Myers emphasized the importance of appointing qualified members to boards that currently have open seats, noting that several commissions are operating below their intended capacity due to unfilled positions. Shaye Rabold and Anna Hartje Butcher participated in the discussion, contributing to the conversation about board membership and operational effectiveness. The speakers addressed the practical challenges of maintaining active participation across the city's various advisory bodies. The review discussion highlighted the need for a systematic approach to evaluating which boards and commissions are fulfilling their intended purposes and which may require restructuring or dissolution. This assessment would help streamline the city's advisory structure and ensure resources are allocated to the most effective and necessary bodies. The agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action taken during the meeting. The discussion served to identify the scope of the review needed and establish the framework for future decisions regarding board and commission structure. The conversation laid the groundwork for a more detailed analysis of each board's activity level, membership requirements, and ongoing relevance to city operations. This review represents part of the city's broader effort to maintain efficient governance structures and ensure that appointed positions are filled with engaged, qualified individuals who can contribute meaningfully to their respective boards' missions. ## Financial Disclosure Requirements of Boards & Commissions Council Member Myers proposed expanding financial disclosure requirements to additional boards and commissions during the November 13, 2007 committee meeting. The discussion focused on broadening the scope of which municipal board and commission members would be required to file financial disclosure statements. Glenda George from the Law Department provided background information on the Ethics Act and its current requirements for financial disclosure. George explained the existing framework that governs which positions are subject to disclosure requirements and outlined the legal considerations involved in expanding these requirements to additional boards and commissions. The proposal represents an effort to increase transparency and accountability among appointed officials serving on various municipal boards and commissions. Currently, only certain positions are required to file financial disclosure statements under the Ethics Act, and Myers' proposal would extend this requirement to a broader range of appointees. This was an informational discussion item, with no immediate action taken. The committee received the background information from the Law Department to better understand the current legal framework and the implications of expanding disclosure requirements. The discussion provided council members with the necessary context to consider potential future legislation on this matter. The conversation highlighted the ongoing effort to balance transparency in government with practical considerations regarding the administrative burden of expanded disclosure requirements on volunteer board and commission members. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Remove Renaming Whitney Young Park Shelter the Charles Quillen Park Shelter - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Remove Party Affiliation for Boards/Commissions --- ## Full transcript X̅с̆h̫̐e̖o̤d͍̋l̨,̛̝̗̊h̟ạ̞̊ḷ̙͖ ͖̤͇͟r̤̉͏̗�лав̷̘͎͉͌͗r̠͕̅02͏͐n̡ ̡ͭ͊sn͒í̧ͬ͢r̨̗͖̖̖̒ғh̛̞̲͈̗̑r̳̜͞ ̦̙̝̈́ y̥̠͚̙̾a̵̛̯̖͓͗l̥͈̭l̩̥͙͕͑c̸͕r̙͓͠ h͉͒̐ ̶͖̪ ̋ ̹̩̊s̷̯̣̆ ̱̰͇̊ n̸̟͔̪̘͗͝a̸̙̮̯̾̓͜ ̷̜̀͗ ̢͖̱̈̊͘å̶͓͓ k▽̧͑̽̃ ,͏̡̼̗͇̒ö͔̌ ̴̜̱̩̣̏ ̸̡͉͈͍̞n̲̥͇ an̶͈͚͙̈́̽ ̷̧͈͎̠͜a͓͋ k͈͉͇̒̃əņ̷͍̫̽͛͌n̷ ̶͖̣͎̲̀̾͊'̶̡͙̮̯͔̞̀ ̸̰̥̥͂ t͉͉̰̳̰̣̩̊f̶̦̥͉͂ ̴̢�итель̸̙̞̤̺̍l̵͔�ości̴̷̙͖͂t̵̬̻̤̲͗͒̃p̶͉̘͖͝y̶̲̞̭͖̭̎t̵̼̦̯͛̊͆ ̵̢̦̪͉͂̌s̵̖͔͝e┴̗̦̀m̸͉̣͓̥t̵ conveṟ̵͇ mmm if they don't have an issue, a final report. Maybe the last quarter's worth of minutes from that board commission. Can you restate that again? You want a final report from the board itself? Right. Or a report from us? From the board or commission. Okay. If it had a report, like an annual report or if it was working on a specific issue and it released a final report, if we can have that so we know where they left off. Okay. If they don't have something like that that they issued, if we can maybe get the last quarter's worth of minutes to kind of see what their thought process were when they last met. Okay. And maybe that would help inform us on whether or not they need to reconvene or if we could just put them out to pasture. Okay. Could you speak to where you are in terms of looking at recommendations for the council? Sure. We are not very far along in terms of making recommendations for which boards may no longer be needed. We have been focusing our efforts more on just getting people on boards that appointments haven't been made over the past several years. We have not made any policy decisions or we haven't really been looking into that particular side of the boards and commissions. We've been looking more at just making sure we are implementing what councils have asked us to do in the past with the boards we have. But we can, I think your request right now for those reports will be an excellent way to see what activity boards, you know, what the boards are doing. Because at this stage in the game, I can't speak to what every single board is doing and how often they meet. So the status report is right now, we are not prepared to make any substantial recommendations. But we can tell you, and Ana can speak more because she's been the one who's been heading this up and you've probably noticed from the mayor's reports that we've been bringing to you every week, we're making many more appointments on a regular basis. Yeah, you're making great progress in that regard. Would you like to add anything? As Chase mentioned, I think that we have really been making a concerted effort to be sure that we're appointing people to the various boards that really need people and that have been lacking or having some gaps at this point. So to speak to that, we're really looking at who filled the position, when the term expired, going back and looking at mayor's reports to effectively reconstruct each and every board to be sure we know where we stand and what we need to do to accomplish that. Okay. Are you having difficulty at all finding people that are willing to serve on the boards and commissions? There tends to be some reticence to jump into that role. The fact that it's a volunteer position, they have to really consider the time commitment and the other things is there, do they have to come before the council for a hearing? Sometimes that puts a little fear into some folks when they're not used to doing that. And we are actively seeking the applications to come in in order to consider who is most qualified and would fit in those positions. Okay. And I know that the mayor has always encouraged the council members to submit names for each board and commission that has vacancies. Maybe you're already doing this, but is it something that you can look at in putting those boards and commissions that need people to serve on on the website and maybe do some advertising to let people know that these opportunities are out there to serve the community? As a matter of fact, that's been something we have considered for quite some time. It was a way to be more interactive on our website so that any citizen could look at the list, figure out what it is that that board does, what kind of time commitment, and they could begin to submit those things online. It is something that we are working with the CIO, Rama, to implement as quickly as possible. Okay. Do you still have somewhere in the mayor's office a list of all the boards and commissions with sort of a one-paragraph synopsis of what they do or are supposed to be charged with doing? I have this wonderful book here that has lots and lots of pages of information that is kind of a synopsis. As part of what I've done to go back and look at each board is I've actually gone back to look at the ordinance and verify that the synopsis matches the ordinance and then verify that there's perhaps an amendment that would have made some change to it. So there's a fair amount of fact-finding going on to verify our information. Okay. When you get that updated and you feel comfortable with what you have, is it possible to maybe put that online but also give each one of the council members an electronic version of that? Actually, our intent is we have purchased a software database that everyone would have access to. And it will show you the name of the board, the description, the ordinance that it comes from, the maximum number of members, the type of information that's really required. And you'll be able to scan and see who the members are and what their terms are. And that would be something that is useful to everyone inside the government. And we can talk more about how much of that gets put onto the website. Okay. In the short term, though, we can provide you with the kind of the cover sheet, the synopsis of all the boards and commissions. We provided that to Paul. The summary in your packet here of all the existing boards and commissions we're aware of came from this book that we shared with him. Okay. Do you have at ready disposal that synopsis for each one of these? We have it right here. But would you like for us to make copies of the pages for everybody? Well, rather than that, electronic copy may be better. You can just email it to maybe to Paul, and he could distribute that. That would save a lot of trees instead of maybe everybody doesn't want to look at it. Right. I agree. And if possible, without going a whole lot of extra work, because you're already doing some great work, we don't want you to reinvent the wheel, but if possible, could you include in that the composition of the commissioner board? By that I mean whether it has to have any specific parameters, say, three council members have to be on there or, you know, that kind of thing. I think that the way the sheets are currently structured, it has that information. It has the purpose of the board. It has the number of members and what the makeup of the membership is. Okay. And let me send this to you. If there's any other information you think might be useful, just let us know. Okay. All right. I think you're doing a great job. I don't want to add any more work to what you're already doing, but if you could get that to us preliminarily, that would be great for us to help you find people to serve. But as far as what you're doing and checking out the ordinances and all those kinds of things, I don't want to add anything to your plate. Thank you. Thank you very much. This is not something we had anticipated when we started. Sure. And I guess I'll go back to the chair for questions. Council Member Linda Gortenfletch. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much. I appreciate the work you're doing on this. It seems to me what would be really helpful is a spreadsheet, and I was kind of interested in some of the things that Mr. Myers was interested in, what the board or commission is, just one sentence about what is its purpose. When I looked down through this list, there are a few in here that I couldn't even begin to speculate on what the purpose is. And then whether it's created by charter or whether it's created by council ordinance or resolution. I think that's helpful because if it's by charter, you know, that's a whole different ball game. And then I'm also interested in what Council Member Myers had said about some basic requirements. Does it have to have council members on it? Is there a way you could get that in a spreadsheet? Of course. I know there is, but it sounds like you have to. Yes. I think that information would be extremely helpful for everybody. It would. And to be able to just look at a spreadsheet and see what, you know, what did the council create by ordinance that's harder to get rid of than what just got appointed. Right. You know, that sort of thing. I think it will certainly take a little bit of time, but I think we're much further along than we were several months ago. We're kind of coming up for air. So I think that's something we could put together before your next meeting and provide it for you before the next meeting of this committee. Okay. I really appreciate your work on that. I think it's important that we, at least every decade or so, go through this list. Thanks so much. Thank you. Council Member James. Thank you, Chair. I'm looking right now at a spreadsheet that Artie put together that has that exact information that was sent to us back in maybe June or July. Yeah, I don't know if it's all of them. It's three pages, and it looks like it might be, I don't know, 20 or so per page. So I don't know if that's accurate. But it has the Board of Commission name. It has the membership. It has the appointment. And whether it's with confirmation or not, whether it's, you know, how many representatives of Oberlin County Government and the years of serve of time and the scope, as well as some other detailed information. So Artie may already have that that you can use for reference. Right. Thank you for mentioning that. I know we have provided the council with that information, I guess, the last time was probably in June. That was based out of the old database system. And it was kind of, you know, piece milled together. The new software we have is going to be really, really helpful for everybody once we get it completely set up. Anna and some other folks up in the mayor's office, they've been spending a lot of time going board by board and entering it into a new database that's much more user friendly and intuitive. And so what we'll do is take the information that has already been provided to you, but we'll clean it up a little bit and make sure it's accurate based on the information that you've been putting into the new database. But I think that's probably on the right track, that information that we've provided. Is that helpful? Yeah, I think that sounds exactly what Linda was asking for. And the software, do you know when that will be ready, when will we go live with that software? We've currently got it downloaded on our computers on the 12th floor, at least on Anna's. You can't get sick. We can all go to her computer. Yeah, on Anna's computer. She also has GIS capabilities. You can see some cool stuff. Anyway, you might be able to speak to it. Actually, the software that we purchased is on the LFUCG servers. So I have direct access to it right now and one other person in our office because we are loading and uploading all of the information kind of page by page as we research. So prior to letting anyone else into it, we wanted to be sure that everything was clean and accurate. I anticipate all of the boards are currently in there with the scope, the parameter, the membership requirements. All of those things are already loaded. It is a matter of going back mayor's report by mayor's report for the last eight years and verifying who was appointed and council approved and then figuring out who early departed and who filled an unexpired term and all of those kinds of things to create an effective board. Okay. That's the piece that we're still working on is the upload of the actual member data for everything. Okay. We're probably on the member data 70 percent complete. Okay. All the boards is 100 percent complete. So I think that some of the reports that you're looking for, spreadsheet type data would be much more readily available. Okay. And as you are going through those and discovering that someone who we thought was council approved actually wasn't or those kind of situations, are you immediately letting the mayor know that someone needs to be appointed and so then we're appointing as you discover? Or are we going to expect that at the completion of all the data in the software that we're going to have about 50 plus positions that we need to find people for? Are you going to wait to the end? Are we dealing as we see the vacancies? We are dealing with it as we find issues. So we really are actively pursuing if we find a problem or a gap. Okay. One of the things that I'm looking at is if I'm looking at a group that should have ten members, if one made it through without council approval and that becomes our problem, as long as we still have a quorum, we're in good shape until we can get a reappointment. Okay. Or a new appointment. And do you actually notify the board chair or something if you discover, say there's a board where two or three members are not, they've exceeded their term. Do the boards know that? Some of them do. But as you're finding them, are you informing them as you go through this process? In most cases I am informing. In some cases it is a board that, as we've discussed here, is not as active as another board. They may only meet once a quarter. So they drop down on the priority list, so to speak. So what happens when that board does have members that aren't, that shouldn't be sitting because their term has ended? How do we talk to that board and let them know that, okay, your board may be defunct. I mean, basically you shouldn't be voting on anything if the members aren't sitting as they should. I mean, if we don't have a quorum up here, we can't vote. If someone is sitting up here that wasn't elected to sit up here and has exceeded their term limits, they're not an active member and their vote shouldn't count. Right. The good news is that for the vast majority of the boards and commissions we have, if someone's term has expired, they can continue serving until they are reappointed or someone is appointed in their place. There are a few boards that if we do not appoint someone within a certain time frame, such as the planning commission, then the planning commission can appoint someone on their own. I think there's a 60 or 90-day period, 60-day period. Okay. We ran close to that with one of the appointments we had. So, and that is something, a very valid point you raised, and that's what we have encountered when we came in. We realized that we have several boards where appointments have not been made for two years or more or less. So we've certainly been trying to catch up, and ideally, and we're getting very close, what we will have is as much as humanly possible boards and commissions that are up-to-date. And then what the software will allow for us to do is it will notify us. It literally dings. You know, today is November 13th. Ding. Three months from now, you have these appointments that are going to expire. Then we can go ahead and start communicating that information to you, communicate it to the board, communicate it to, you know, put it up like Council Member Myers was suggesting on the website. That's still several months off, but that is what we're trying to get to. It will make everybody's lives so much easier. That software sounds wonderful. Yeah. Is it specifically for placements of boards and commissions? It is. Ana can talk. She found it, or Neal. It was Neal from Neal Hall from our computer services department. Good job. He's the one who found it, and it was designed for a community who was having the same situation. Municipal boards and commissions database. And I'll tell you an interesting fact. We had been calling several other communities, Louisville, Atlanta, Birmingham, several others and asking them what kind of software they have been using. And they all said, we're having a horrible time, too. You know, it's a huge mess where we are. What are you using? And Ana let them know about the software we had located. And is it Atlanta who's using it now? Atlanta. You know, just one of those phone calls. Anyway, we're making progress. And I know you all kind of get impatient, and so do we, with hearing that. But we really are. Well, I know you're making progress, and I appreciate it. I think that one thing that I'm really stressing, and, you know, I'm very interested in having constituents involved with boards and commissions. I just, when we get to that point where we know that there's a vacancy or know there's an upcoming, I think it would be great if we could get where we have enough time to where a cycle of neighborhood association meetings or something where we can inform those residents that there's an upcoming position and be able to have a description of what those boards do. Sometimes I'll get an e-mail that says we have a position open. We're looking for someone to fill a spot. And I have no clue what that board or commission does, where they meet, how often they meet, who's the contact person that if someone's interested in serving, they can call and say, can you tell me a little bit about the board and how active I need to be, do I need to fundraise, am I going to be expected to do whatever. So I'm looking forward to the software coming out, and please know that I am interested in knowing those openings as they happen. Okay. And I'd like to let everybody on the council know one more thing that's relevant to this conversation. Since we have a CIO in place now, we are looking at updating the website, making it more user-friendly, making it not so internal where people here, we know how to get around it, but the folks don't necessarily. We know for sure, or at least we are now because I'm saying it here on the record, that we're going to add a link on the very front page that says get involved. And under that page, it'll have how to apply for boards and commissions and we can add all the information you had. We're thinking about things like linking to neighborhood associations. If you have other ideas of how citizens can get involved, let us know. We're developing that. It'll probably be about the first of the year when we are ready to launch the updated website. I don't want to say new website, just updated. But get involved or some form of that word will be on the website and we can definitely have the boards and commissions on there. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. We look forward for your report. Next meeting will probably be January. January? Yeah. Okay. And we'll go on to the next item on the agenda. Mr. Myers, I believe that is you on the financial disclosure requirement of boards and commissions. I'll turn it over to you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In looking at this issue, I thought it might be prudent to look at what agencies, boards, and commissions currently are underneath the requirement to financially disclose with the Ethics Commission and thought that there might be a way to adapt the language in Section 25-13, Financial Disclosure, who must file under the Ethics Act. Maybe number three, to just have an objective look at a criteria that if you fall under that criteria, then you would be subject to the disclosure. But before we get into that, if I could have Ms. George from the law department, maybe if you have some history on how the Ethics Act came into being and how it was determined which boards and commissions would fall under the financial disclosure aspect of the Ethics Act. Okay. In 1994, the General Assembly passed legislation which required local governments to have an Ethics Act. And that's in KRS Chapter 65. And it lists in that chapter the minimum number of things that you needed to include in your Ethics Act. And one of those things was a statement of financial interest or a financial disclosure statement. In the course of developing our Ethics Code, there was a question and a lot of discussion and debate about who should be included in the Ethics Act. There was some discussion early on about including all boards and commissions, but then there was a concern, and I don't know that anybody here was actually on the council at that time, but there was a concern about whether or not requiring every board and commission to complete a statement of financial interest would discourage people from wanting to serve on boards. So finally, it was narrowed down to these four. And so that's where we are now. But there isn't really anything that would prohibit us from adding additional boards and commissions. Okay. I do think that it's important, if we're going to have a transparent government, that if you serve on a board or commission or an agency that expends funds or has certain authorities, that certainly the public ought to be able to know, you know, where you're at in terms of a financial disclosure statement. So I'd like to fill out some language for you to look at to see if one number three under Section 2513 would be the appropriate place to do this and also the language that I'm going to put out there if that might suffice, at least for a beginning. Okay. Under number three currently it says, Members and Chief Executive Officers, if any, of the Urban County Government Board of Adjustment, Conference of Planning Update Committee, Ethics Commission, and Planning Commission. And I would like to have you look at changing that to Members and Chief Executive Officers, if any, of any agency, board, or commission which has regulatory authority or has independent authority to expend funds. Okay. And I can give you a hard copy of that. Okay. Thank you. All right. We can certainly take a look at that and see if that would work. But I do have a question. So if you're going to require additional boards and commissions to do the financial disclosure statement, do you not want them to be subject to the rest of the chapter? You're only focusing on filling out the financial disclosure statement? That's actually an excellent point. And depending on how you read the Ethics Act, I guess the question comes down to is are you considered under the Ethics Act if you are on a board and commission? Well, under the definition section of the Ethics Act, it lists who it applies to. And so it's officers and employees of the government. And as far as boards are concerned, it specifically spells out that it's the Board of Adjustment, Comprehensive Planning Update Committee, Ethics Commission, and Planning Commission. So those are the only four boards that Chapter 25 applies to. So then we would be just amending one section to say that everybody else has to fill out this financial disclosure statement. Okay. I agree. And so I don't know if that's what you all want to do. I agree with you that they should be subject to any and all parts of the Ethics Act and not just a financial statement. Okay. Or a disclosure statement. What was that section that you were just talking about? If you look in 25-5, do you have the full chapter? We don't. Okay. We don't have that. Okay. And you and I, if you want, we can meet later and kind of talk about this and flesh all of this out in terms of what you would like for us to do. Okay. Would that be okay? Yes. There was language in there that talked about providing a service to the government. And I kind of thought that maybe if you were on a board and commission that you were providing a service to the government, which would then put you under the Ethics Act. No. No. Not for that. Not for Chapter 25 because it specifically says who it applies to. Okay. Okay. And that's why you're an attorney. Okay. So that's a recommendation I would like to make. I don't know if there's any. It looks like we have one council member that wants to speak. But could you broaden that to that extent that they fall under the entire Act? Okay. Okay. And then maybe come back with a recommendation. Some suggestions. Okay. Thank you. And then also, if you could kind of give us your thoughts on the process for moving forward. I know that when this happened last time, some people left some boards and commissions based on the fact that they would have to disclose. We want to provide ample time for everyone on those boards and commissions and agencies to understand this is coming down the pike. Right. Which is one reason why I just wanted to put this out there today and then ask for a recommendation back at the next meeting. Well, because for the Statements of Financial Interest that will be filled out for 2007, those will be sent out by January 15th of 08. Okay. So. I would like to see this take effect. Whatever change that you come back with, if we can agree on as a committee, pass it on to the full council and agree on it. I'd like to see that take place prior to the distribution of those applications for 08. Will you all have a meeting before then? We have a. January will be the next meeting. Okay. We have a short month next month. Okay. Mr. Chair, what do you think the best way is to get that done then? Do we have her just bring the recommendation back to a work session? Okay. If the committee is amenable to that, can we have her bring the recommendation back to a work session at her earliest convenience? Or maybe I can send you all a memo and then we can decide what action to take after that. Would that work? Is that. I'll send the whole committee something in writing. And then my next question, are you talking about that list of 84 boards and commissions? Is that who you're wanting to put under Chapter 25? Well, I think this language right here that I just gave you will hopefully know that down. I don't think that. Yeah, but we'll still have to kind of figure out which board and commission that actually applies to, so that we'll know who to send the statement of financial interest to. Right. And I'd look for that to come from you. Okay. Okay. Certainly all 84 aren't going to fall under it. Okay. I think it's going to be a pretty short list, but I'll let you. You'll let me figure it out. Okay. Okay. Okay. All righty. That's all I have. Thank you. Council Member Linda Gordon. Thank you, Council Member Richard Maloney. Well, I just had a couple of comments. It seemed to me that when we discussed this several years ago, the reason these four boards that comply with the disclosure, one is the Ethics Commission. Right. And then the other three deal with land and land use issues. And the idea was to appoint people who don't have land issue conflicts. Is that am I, do you remember any of that, Glenda, that discussion? Because these three are directly related to land and property issues. Right. For the Planning Commission, though, there are sometimes people appointed to the Planning Commission who are realtors or who do own land in Fayette County. So what we do in that situation is they disclose and disqualify. So they're not 100 percent excluded from serving on the board. But they have to list if they own property. Right. That's right. And it seemed to me that, and I could be wrong, but I'm remembering that those, the reasons for those boards were that they dealt directly with property issues, which is a little different from, for instance, the cell tower board or the tree board or the Board of Health or some of those. Right. And this will be a big task if we bring in all of these boards and commissions, depending on how many there are, because we're going to have to train all of these people so that they have some understanding about what they can and can't do. Well, that was going to be my next comment is we already know that the mayor's office is working very hard to even identify and put onto paper what the charge of each board is. Right. I mean, it's all in the book, but they're trying to compile that. Right. And I guess I'm a little unsure that we can hurry this through in the next two or three weeks when we don't really have all the information about every board and commission. And just for my final point, I would, I don't know right now if I would support this particular motion because I think we would want to be sure that we were covering actual conflicts and situations where there would be some kind of possible financial gain or something like that and not to be so stringent that our citizens don't want to serve anymore, you know, to make it so difficult. But I'm most concerned about bringing it back really quickly before we have complete board information. That does concern me. So I didn't know if, Mr. Myers, there's a reason that we couldn't get our full board information first to see who's regulatory and who deals with financial issues and et cetera, et cetera, and then go forward with something. Well, I think, first I think we have that information already. We already know what boards exist. What the first part of this meeting was discussing is what boards we want to let go of. So there aren't any new boards that are going to be created by their work. So I think we already know what boards and commissions are there, what their charter is, and then whether or not they have the ability to expend funds or they have regulatory authority. That's already in place. But do we have that in a document that we can know so that Glenda can take it and use it next week? This is what I'm getting at is that she's going to need some time to get all that. Well, I think we do have that document. But also I'll say is that I'm not trying to rush this thing through. I'd like to see it happen before January so that the new round is subject to it. But we've got, you know, a month and a half. I'm not suggesting that she would need to get this done this week or next week. Well, we can always, even though the Statements of Financial Interest go out by January 15th of next year for the people who are on existing boards, if we bring new boards in, we can always still ask them to go ahead and still fill out the Statement of Financial Interest even though we're past that January 15th deadline. When they come in. Right. Okay. So that sounds good to me. But I do think that we have all the information. There's no new boards or commissions coming on board. In fact, we'll probably have less. The ones that are going to be subject to this, I would think, won't be in jeopardy of being defunct. So I think we have the information that the law department could look at to ascertain which should fall under this and which shouldn't. Also, I would add that it might be a good thing. All city employees are under the Ethics Act, correct? Yes. But all city employees don't have to do the financial disclosure. No regular employee has to do the Statement of Financial Interest now. It's just council members, commissioners, division directors, and the mayor. Okay. The reason I bring that up is it might not be a bad idea to have all the boards and commissions subject to the Ethics Act itself, but not the disclosure. Can you do that? Just like all employees are under the Ethics Act, but not the disclosure. Okay. If we had all members of boards and commissions and agencies subject to the Ethics Act, but not necessarily under the disclosure. Okay. And then we would look at those that have regulatory authority and independent authority to expend funds would be the ones that we would look at putting underneath the financial disclosure. And I think that it may narrow down the number of people who are willing to serve. Just like when the planning commission was subject to the financial disclosure, I'm told that everybody left the planning commission that was currently on there. I don't think that's a reason not to do this. I think that if you have the authority to expend funds, if you have regulatory authority, then I think the citizens out there ought to know from where you come. And it's not just about having a land issue dispute or conflict of interest. It's about, you know, transparent government and citizens understanding where people stand when they're serving in that capacity to expend funds, taxpayer funds, or have regulatory authority over citizens. And the statement of financial interest may not be as big of a deal now. At the time when all of this was being discussed, no one knew what the form was going to look like and what you were going to have to disclose. But in the time that I've been doing this, and I've been here for 12 years, I've never had somebody not want to be on a board because they have to fill out this form. Okay. So it may not be as big of a problem now as it was in 1994 when we were trying to figure out what to do. Okay. And if I could add one more thing, I would say that I have, I did ask Jo, she did my survey to forward over to Angela Evans and I had a conversation with her earlier last week, late last week, about what we are trying to look at here. And she has this information and at their next Ethics Commission meeting they're going to discuss whether or not they have any apprehension of us expanding who would fall underneath the financial disclosure. Okay. And they'll do that the first Thursday in December. That's their next meeting. Yes. But preliminarily she said that it sounded like a good idea and it's not going to create more work for them, it's just going to be a few more people have to fill out a form. That's all I have. Okay. And my last question was, can you remind me, we did something a few years ago with I believe code enforcement and building inspection to tighten up the, well, if you will, the ethical component of owning property and then inspecting your own property, that sort of thing. Can you remind me or maybe research what specifically the council did in relation to code enforcement and building inspection? There's some new rule that we, or resolution that we passed, I think, that prohibits that sort of thing. If you're in code enforcement or building inspection, then there's a property disclosure issue. Right. There's a property disclosure form that they're supposed to fill out, but that's separate from Chapter 12. Okay. And that's still ongoing. Do you know? That I don't know. Okay. Do you mind to e-mail me a copy of what it is they have to fill out? Okay. I can do that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any more discussions on that issue? I appreciate it. And I guess you'd be getting back with us pretty soon on that. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go back to the council and we'll just bring it out of that. Okay. Thank you. On the next is the intergovernment item pending. We took care of a couple things today, but I think we're going to bring one of them back next month. Does anybody have any discussion on anything pending? I do. Yes. It's actually not on anything that's showing on our list as pending. However, Jerry Hancock had presented, I don't know if it was to this committee or to full council, about the renaming policy, the parks renaming policy. And my legislative aide was checking. It never went to full council, the adoption. He was supposed to come back with some information and present the final procedure, and it never went through. Got it. And because of that, there's an item on here that's pending that's very related that I'm going to need to leave this in, unless we can make sure that it goes to council, that it is official. That was brought to my attention today. I think last meeting we had a couple months ago, we had a service and intergovernment meet the same day, and it didn't show up on the docket the previous week. But I do have the minutes of that and a motion made, so I'll either bring it out today or next week. I may bring it out next week when we come out of this committee discussion. Okay. That's fine. I will then, with acknowledgement that that will be occurring, is there's renaming there that I would like to remove, request to remove off of the pending items, because that request will fall under the new park naming guidelines. Okay. Thank you. So that was a motion, I guess, right? Yeah, we need a motion on that. Do I have a second? Second. So you're removing Whitney Young. Is that your intent? Yes. Okay. Do we have a second? Second. Okay. I'm just looking at this computer. I guess we have a computer vote on this. Is that correct? Okay. Okay. Go ahead and we'll have a vote on this. We'll do the hand vote then. Okay. Let's go on with the hand vote. All in favor, raise your hand, please. Those opposed. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to just point out the party affiliation for boards and commissions, since we're already on the boards and commissions. I think this got fixed. Do you know if I've seen most of the new forms have the in parentheses, I think. Do you think this is a fixed issue? So we're only asking for party affiliation for the ethics commission. Isn't there one other one that requires that? As I recall, it's only the ethics commission that requires the split. Okay. So we're not asking people to fill that out anymore unless it's ethics commission. Correct. Thank you very much. So I would move that we remove party affiliation issue. Second. Mr. Myers, we'll have another vote. All in favor. Aye. Those opposed. I have passed. Thank you. We're adjourned. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. The proposed new compensation system, is it coming back again to the committee for review? So it should stay in committee. And the high-risk pay supplement was supposed to have been reviewed after a year, and that's why I had asked that it be put in committee. So perhaps we could ask Michael Allen and human resources to come with some sort of an update on that issue. I'll have Paul work on that for us. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you. I move that we remove the tax. Thank you. Thank you.