►
Description
The Committee reviewed Local Law F of 2019
A
Okay,
so
this
is
the
october
23rd
meeting
of
the
common
council
committee
on
operations
and
ethics.
Present
are
myself
richard
conte.
As
chair
committee
members,
tom
hoey,
sonja,
frederick
and
me
okay,
that's
makes
a
quorum
three.
I
keep
on
forgetting
to
count
myself.
I
know
joe
was
not
able
to
be
here
tonight.
He
had
the
procedure
which
he's
just
dealing
with
right
now,
but
he
is
on
board
with
this,
and
I
had
don't
know
about
kelly.
A
Oh
okay
and
here's
councilmember
kimbrough,
so
we
have
four
members
of
the
committee
here.
Also
president,
our
legislative
research
council,
jr
prochardo,
deputy
clerk,
kishanna,
bert
city
clerk,
danielle
gillespie
and
from
corp
council's
office,
brett
williams,
purpose
of
tonight's
meeting,
is
to
consider
local
law
f
of
2019,
which
is
intended
to
adopt
a
comprehensive
ethics,
local
law
for
the
city
of
albany,
so
actually
I'll
just
quickly
review,
I
mean
the
actual
proposal
has
been
out
there
for
a
while
we've
just
never
really
had
a
chance
to
get
to
it.
A
I
will
say
that
I've
asked
for
a
comment
from
outside
parties
and
we've
never
really
gotten
any
or
people
have
said
it
looks
good,
but
I
haven't
you
know
so
I
have
not
never
had
any
negative
comment
on
it.
I
did
have
a
discussion.
I
know
with
marissa
and
dave
gallon
before
this
local
law
was
introduced
back
in
2019.
We
made
some
adjustments
in
you
know
in
accordance
with
that
conversation,
so
that
was
the
conversation
I
had
by
way
of
background.
A
It
is
basically
patterned
after
a
ethical
ethics,
local
law
that
was
adopted
in
yonkers
several
years
back,
which
was
considered
pretty
groundbreak
groundbreaking
at
the
time.
So
that's
you
know
the
president
in
terms
of
it's
kind
of
resembles
the
yonkers
local
law
and
in
a
sense
what
it
does
it's
intended
to.
You
know
we
we
do
have
you
know
ethics
laws
on
place
right
now,
it's
a
combination
of
what's
in
state
law,
mainly
in
general,
municipal
law
resolutions
that
have
been
adopted,
etc.
A
That
you
know
they're
hard
to
find.
The
intention
here
is
to
bring
together
in
one
place,
to
codify
existing
requirements,
but
also
to
establish
some
newer
requirements,
strength
requirements
as
well,
so
it's
not
necessarily
inconsistent
with
where
we
are
right
now,
but
it
does
expand
and
adds
some
additional
provisions
in
there.
A
The
sponsor
memo
did
include
a
comparison
of
current
provisions
that
we
are.
We
currently
operate
under
comparison
with
what
the
county
ethics
law
provides
and
what
this
proposal
is.
So
you
can
see
some
of
the
differences
or
changes,
I'm
just
going
to
really
run
through
some
things
quickly.
It
does.
You
know
strengthen
some
of
the
ethics
provisions
in
terms
of
conflict
of
interest
and
transactions.
A
It
does
strengthen
some
of
the
provisions
related
to
the
use
of
city,
property
or
office.
For
you
know
financial
benefit.
It
includes
a
nepotism
provision
which
we
don't
have
right
now.
It
does
deal
a
little
bit
more
clearly
with
the
issue
of
gifts
with
the
intention
of
influencing
an
action.
A
A
It
also
I
mean
really
hitting
some
of
the
newer
areas.
It
also
establishes
an
ethics
commission
which
we
don't
have
right
now,
which
would
be
comprised
of
five
members
appointed
by
the
mayor,
which
are
confirmed
by
a
super
majority
of
the
council,
and
they
serve
for
fixed
terms.
They
cannot
be
removed
unless,
except
for
cause,
and
then
only
with
also
with
the
consent
of
the
council,
so
that
there's
that
extra
safeguard
built
in
there,
the
ethics
committee
would
be
able
to
issue
advisory
opinions.
A
They
would
be
able
to
hold
hearings,
they
would
have
subpoena
power,
they
would
do
investigations
etcetera.
So
it
creates
a
strong
ethics
board
with
with
some
authority.
A
A
A
A
C
Yeah,
it's
a
pretty
comprehensive
document.
I
might
have
looked
at
a
cover
sheet.
I
never
really
dug
into
it.
I
worked
three
jobs,
but
you
know
it's
my
responsibility
as
council
member
to
to
go
over
this,
but
I
wish
I
was
retired
at
this
point,
so
I
could
spend
a
little
bit
more
time
studying
these
documents.
Anyhow,
I
got
some
concerns.
My
first
concern
is
when
I
got
down
to
the
makeup
having
all
five
members
appointed
by
the
mayor-
I
I
don't
like
it.
C
I
don't
even
with
the
super
majority,
and
I'm
not
talking
about
this
mayor.
Of
course,
I'm
talking
down
the
road.
This
is
going
to
be
a
living
document
and
you
know
carrying
on
people
who
are
appointed
are
going
to
feel
a
certain
loyalty
to
the
person
that
appoint
them,
and
I
just
it
just
doesn't
feel
right
to
me.
I
think
we've
done
other
boards
or
commissions
where
it's
you
know,
coupled
from
the
council
a
couple
from
here
there.
I
think
we
should
try
to
look
at
something
like
that.
C
The
other
thing
is
you
mentioned
about
political
parties,
that
there'll
be
two
one
party
and
two,
and
I
mean
I
don't
even
think
parties
should
be
part
of
it.
I
mean
you
know.
Parties
are
formed
outside
the
actual
position,
so
I
don't
sit
here.
C
I'm
democrat
tom
hoey,
I'm
councilman
tom
hoey
and
I
go
along
with
the
policies
of
the
democratic
party,
but
I'm
a
councilman
first
party
second,
so
that
that
kind
of
bothered
me
when,
when
I
when
I
saw
that
there
was
a
lot
of
stuff
there
richard
I
a
lot
of
legalese,
I
call
it.
You
know
that
I
don't
understand.
I
guess
that's
the
best
way,
and
you
know
it's
great.
When
judy
or
or
mike
song,
you
know
working
with
us,
they
explain
a
little
bit
that
layman
can
understand.
It.
C
C
I
didn't
understand
another
point
that
came
that
I
caught
me
was:
you
know,
campaign
contributions.
I
mean
I
look,
I
know
what
people
got
the
last
series
of
elections
and
you
know
am
I
bothered
that
you
know
contractors
or
developers
are
making
contributions
to
different
people's
campaigns.
Is
that
something
that
can
be
brought
in?
I
mean
we're
really
on
stuff
that
I'd
like
to
understand
to
make
a
an
informed
about,
but
that's
where
I'm
at.
Thank
you.
A
So,
on
the
the
makeup
of
the
ethics
commission,
something
I
struggled
with
trying
to
figure
out,
how
do
you,
how
you
create
an
independent
commission-
and
I
think,
an
earlier
version
had
appointments
outside
the
mayor?
Try
to
do
it
through
a
you
know
this
judicial
system
or
whatever,
and
you
know
typically
they
they
do.
A
I
think
the
appointments
were
not
sure
in
terms
of
the
county
commission,
which
is,
I
don't
know
if
that's
really
active
right
now,
but
I'm
not
you
know,
I
don't
object
to
having
a
makeup
that
might
be
some
council
and
some
mayoral
at
one
time
an
earlier
version
had
a
seven
member
ethics
board,
which
I
think
is
too
large,
and
it's
hard
I'll
tell
you.
A
It's
also
hard
for
us
to
find
people
to
serve
nowadays
and
it's
gonna
get
harder
and
harder
because
I
think
you
know,
in
terms
of
we
have
more
of
a
transient
population
in
some
ways
which
you
know,
makes
it
more
difficult
to
get
people
involved,
and
so
the
idea
of
having
a
super
majority
was
one
way
of
putting
a
check
on
there.
Another
way
is
also
extending
the
the
the
term
out
to
a
very
long
period,
like
maybe
10
years
or
whatever,
which
is
the
way
judgeships
are
to
give
an
aura
of
independence.
A
But
I
don't
have
a
problem
in
terms
of
you
know,
splitting
them
up
as
far
as
political
parties,
that's
kind
of
standard
in
in
ethics.
Things
that
you
have.
You
don't
want
to
give
the
appearance
of
one
political
party
controlling
it
one
way
or
the
other,
and
so
one
way
of
doing
that
is
you
have
you,
you
look
at
political
affiliation
to
further
provide
some
independence
or
the
appearance
of
independence
of
executive
boards,
so
that
that's
not
this
kind
of
a
standard
type
thing.
C
Well,
let
me
just
jump
in
on
that
one
because
you
know
say
in
in
the
city
of
albany,
we'll
just
say
this
10
000
people
and
probably
right
now:
8
000,
those
people
are
democrats,
probably
thousands
of
republicans
and
then
the
smaller
parties.
So
what
that
does
is
give
the
people
that
are
the
8
000
are
going
to
get
less
representation
on
that
board.
If,
if
you
know
what
I'm,
what
I
mean.
A
C
Have
a
problem
you
know,
but
on
the
previous
thing,
with
the
board
the
makeup
of
the
board.
Well,
also
on
that,
does
it
have
to
be
city
residents
that
if
it
was,
you
know,
county
or
you
know
even
outside
that
that
would
be
more
outside
of
it
being
influenced
by
you
know
if
I'm
a
resident
in
the
city
of
albany,
and
I
find
something
against
powerful
political
figure
and
they're
found
innocent
now,
you
know,
am
I
a
target,
and
that
has
to
be
something
that
would
run
through
somebody's
head,
yeah.
A
I
don't
remember
if
there
was
a
city
residency
requirement
in
there.
I
don't
recall
there
being
one
for
the
ethics
board
and
you're
looking
for
people
who
you
know
who
have
that
that
background
as
well
so,
but
we
can
look
at
those
issues
sonia.
E
Thank
you
for
providing
the
analysis.
It's
really
helpful
to
compare
state
law
to
county
law
to
the
proposed
changes.
So
I
have
a
few
points
here
and
I'm
just
gonna
like
keep
looking
down
at
my
notes,
just
some
questions
and
also
recommended
changes
or
some
things
I
might
have
potential
issues
with
the
first
one
is
gifts,
so
I
agree
with
the
proposed
language.
However,
in
the
county
law
it
says,
cannot
accept
gratuities
over
a
nominal
amount.
E
Okay,
okay,
next
one
nepotism
so
just
to
confirm
this
is
not
on
state
law
or
county
law.
E
Okay,
all
right
for
future
employment.
Just
looking
here
so
the
county
says
high
ranking
officers.
G
E
Okay
for
this
one,
so
the
county
says
high-ranking
officers
and
employees
could
not
appear
for
one
year
before
county
or
permanently,
as
particular,
matters
worked
on
while
an
officer,
an
employee
and
then
the
proposed
legis.
The
proposed
change
you
have
is
officers
or
employees
cannot
appear
for
one
year
before
the
study,
so
don't
know
if
we
should
attribute
that
to
only
high
ranking
or
are
you
saying
when
we
say
offers
in
employees
we're
talking
about
everyone
under
city
jurisdiction.
A
All
right,
so
I
think
that
would
be
54-8
which
says
a
city
officer
or
employee
or
a
former
city
officer
or
employee
for
a
period
of
one
year
after
the
completion
of
his
or
her
city,
service
or
employee
shall
not
appear
before
any
agency
of
the
city,
except
on
his
or
her
own
behalf
or
on
behalf
of
the.
D
A
Okay,
so
that,
in
other
words,
it's
meant,
if
employed
by
a
department
you
were
involved
in
dealing
with
and
in
in
the
past,
you
may
have
had
people.
You
know
corporation
council
who
deal
with
zoning
and
deal
with
specific
zoning
issues,
and
there
are
some
examples
of
that
who
left
corp
council
went
to
a
private
law
firm
and
immediately
began
to
practice
in
the
area
that
they
were
practicing
in
when
they
were
in
the
city,
employment
that
could
also
apply
to
people
in
other
departments,
professionals,
planning,
department,
etc.
A
The
intent
is
in
effect-
and
I
think
the
the
county
language
creates
a
permanent
bar
for
matters
that
that
individual
worked
on
that's
a
little
bit
strong.
That
is
stronger
than
what
is
I'm
proposing.
Mine
would
just
be
a
one
year.
A
Prohibition
before
you
can
say
work
for
an
outside
agency
on
an
area
that
you
may.
E
A
The
county
is
stronger,
it
provides
a
permanent
as
I
read
it,
a
permanent
bar
so.
E
You
just
couldn't
you
can
do
that.
I
mean
if
that's.
D
B
Yeah,
there's
there's
variations
throughout
the
state
on
that
one.
I
know
with
senator
assembly
employees
you're,
not
here's
a
two-year
prohibition
and
if
you
ever
work
directly
on
it.
No
it's
just
the
two-year
prohibition
and
then
with
the
state.
Jayco
prohibits,
has
a
two-year
prohibition
going
before
any
board
that
you've
ever
practiced
before
or
works
with.
There's
a
two-year
prohibition,
and
if
you
worked
on
that
particular
case,
there's
a
permanent
bar
there's
variations
of
it.
D
E
Of
the
differences,
okay,
so
financial
disclosure-
here
this
one
I'm
struggling
with,
because
the
proposed
changes
says-
requires
information
of
all
household
members,
not
just
spouse
and
in
case
in
some
cases,
relatives
and
then
it
says,
disclose
exact
amount,
not
categories,
few
exclusive
exclusions
from
categories.
E
A
A
Following
cydia,
this
is
in
54-20
city
offices
and
employees
holding
the
following
duties
or
titles,
et
cetera,
she'll
file
file,
an
annual
disclosure,
the
mayor.
Basically,
your
elected
officials,
mayoral
chief
of
staff,
commissioners
department,
heads
bureau,
heads
principal
deputies,
all
other
officers
and
employees
who
exercise
substantial
discretionary
authority
designated
by
the
mayor
or
rule
by
the
essex
board.
A
The
ethics
board
shall
promulgate
an
annual
disclosure
form
that
will
require
the
following
information
from
the
disclosing
city
officer
employees
to
be
submitted.
So
it
is
one
the
disclosing
city
office
or
employee's
name,
etc.
Their
employment
position,
the
names
of
that
disclosing
city
officers,
employees
or
employees,
spouse
relatives
as
defined
in
household
members,
the
name
and
address,
and
telephone
number
of
any
outside
employer,
the
disclosing
city
officer
or
employee,
each
close
relative
of
the
disclosing
thing
each
household.
A
Et
cetera,
so
it
does,
it
is
a
broader
than
the
current
disclosure
which
does
apply
to
the
individual
and
the
spouse
or
domestic
partner
yeah.
Did
you
have
any
clarification
on
that
or
that.
E
A
There
can
be
a
conflict
within
the
household
that
it.
You
know
it's
not
just
what
is
held
by
the
individual,
employee
or
the
spouse.
You
know
children
or
others
within
the
household
potentially.
A
E
I
won
more
with
the
political
activity
section
and
I
think
tom
might
have
alluded
to
this
as
well
like
as
it
reads.
It's
proposed
no
candidate,
current
office
or
employee
shall
request
that
any
persons
who
have
received
a
financial
benefit
from
the
city
in
the
last
12
months
participate
in
any
political
campaign
activity.
E
So
the
way
I
interpret
that-
and
I
want
to
understand
first
and
foremost,
is
for
example,
if
our
neighbor
works
for
dgs,
they
cannot
do
any
form
of
lip
drop
for
us.
They
cannot
give
you
ten
dollars
for
a
campaign,
etc,
etc,
and,
like.
A
No,
I
mean
that
that's
that's
your
your
right
that
person's
indefinite
right
to
individually
participate
in
the
campaign.
It's
meant,
I
think
more,
if
to
prevent
or
to
deal
with
the
potential
that
someone
is
receiving
a
campaign
contribution
in
return
for
a
favor
that
may
have
been
done.
It
could
be.
You
know
whether
it's
an
application
or
a
zoning
decision
or
things
of
that
nature,
but
anything
that
would
you
know
you.
A
You
can't
prohibit
in
a
city
employee
from
freely
participating
in
a
campaign
or
the
political
process,
and
I
don't
think
in
that
case
there
would
be
any
appearance
that
there
was
some
conflict
there
or
any
kind
of
a
you
know,
a
favor
being
given
one
way
or
the
other.
A
For
me,
I'm
okay,
you
know,
I
think
that
may
have
been
an
earlier
version
and
I
think
that's
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
talking
to
having
some
conversations
earlier
that
kind
of
fell
through,
but
I
think
that
was
language
in
an
earlier
version
which
I'm
okay.
F
Thank
you
and
first
I'll
just
start
with
some
things
that
I
didn't
have
here
on
my
sheet
of
notes
that
popped
up
in
the
during
the
course
of
the
discussion
so
first
of
all
council
member
hoey.
If
there's
any
not
just
on
this
legislation
but
there's
if
there's
any
legalese
and
any
sort
of
legislation
for
the
council-
and
you
want
to
discuss
that
or
get
any
clarification
on
that
jr
is
a
great
resource
for
you,
but
I'm
always
available
as
well
and
to
a
separate
point.
F
I
believe
there
is
a
residency
requirement
for
members
of
the
board
of
ethics.
I
think
that's
section
5421
b2,
okay,
just
to
circle
back!
To
that
point
I
guess
otherwise.
I
will
just
sort
of
start
at
the
top
and
go
down.
F
So
in
section
50,
4-3,
subsection
b,
nothing
substantive
there,
but
candidate
shall
mean
an
individual
who
is
on
the
ballot
as
a
candidate
for
and
federal
state
or
local
elective
office.
I
think
that
should
be
for
any
federal
state
or
local
elective
office.
F
In
sub
in
subsection
f,
I
have
some
slight
concerns
about
the
the
breadth
of
that
language.
When
it's
talking
about
a
customer
or
a
client,
you
know
25
2500.
Excuse
me:
it's
not
a
great
deal
of
money
and
I'm
I'm
just
thinking.
F
F
Any
person
to
whom
a
city
officer
employee
has
supplied
goods
or
services
during
the
previous
12
months
having
in
the
aggregate
a
value
greater
than
2
dollars
this.
I
know
I'm
sort
of
reducing
that
to
an
absurdist
situation,
but
it's
it's
just
not
a
very
large
amount
of
money
and
the
language
is
pretty
broad.
There.
F
Yeah,
so
let
me
just
give
me
one
second
to
find
the
context
where
that
comes
up.
This
is
just
the
definition
section
that
I'm
referring
to
right
now,
but
if
you
give
me
one
second,
I
can
figure
out
where
that
comes
into
play
later
in
the.
C
I
mean
you
can
wait
until
later.
I'm
just
I.
I
don't
understand
what
it
means
that
you
know
this
comes
into
effect.
If
I
make
more
than
twenty
five
hundred
dollars.
F
F
That
might
be
easier
if
we
cover
that
one
when
we
get
a
little
further
down
into
the
law.
But
if
I
don't
talk
about
that
again
remind
me
yeah
in
subsection
k
regarding
household
members,
I
think
this
is
some
of
council
member
frederick's
concerns,
household
member
or
member
of
household
shall
mean
any
person
with
whom
a
city
officer
or
employee
lives
in
a
single
household
unit.
F
I
know
household
has
a
specific
meaning.
As
far
as
say
the
irs
is
concerned,
but
under
this
definition
here
I
think
a
household
could
be
considered
to
include
somebody's
roommate
or
something
like
that.
So
then,
all
of
a
sudden
you're
getting
into
ethical
disclosures
of
your
roommate's
investments,
or
you
know
any
loans
that
your
roommate
has.
F
F
F
You
know
on
reading
reading
that
further,
I
don't
have
any
concerns
here,
I'm
sorry,
but
in
subsection
r
there
are
two
definitions
in
subsection
are
there's
relative
and
there's
close
relative
relative
means:
a
spouse,
domestic
partner,
child
stepchild,
sibling,
half
brother,
half
sister
parent
stepfather,
stepmother
mother-in-law,
father-in-law,
brother-in-law,
sister-in-law,
grandparent
grandchild
uncle
aunt,
niece
nephew.
F
So
it's
a
pretty
broad
definition
of
what
a
relative
means.
A
close
relative
is
more
narrow.
It's
just
a
spouse,
domestic
partner,
child
step,
child
sibling,
half
brother,
half
sister
parent
stepfather
stepmother,
but
there
will
be
situations
later
in
the
code
in
the
local
law,
where
it's
talking
about
gifts,
for
example,
and
it
says
I
think
that
no.
F
City
city,
employees
or
officers
are
not
to
receive
gifts
from
anybody
in
excess
of
a
certain
amount.
Anybody
who
isn't
a
close
relative,
so
I
guess
my
concern
there
would
be
you
know,
then
grandma
can't
give
you
a
gift
in
excess
of
200
or
250
again.
I
know
it
sounds
like
I'm
reducing
this
to
two
of
service
levels,
but
you
know
we
want
to
go
by
what
the
actual
language
of
the
law
is
and
we'll
get
to
that
specific
section.
F
Just
scrolling
down
sorry,
it
is
a
long
loss,
so
the
general
ethics
standards
council,
member
hoey.
I
think
this
is
what
you
were
asking
about.
A
city
officer
or
employee
shall
not
use
his
or
her
official
position
or
office
in
a
manner
which
he
or
she
knows
may
result
in
a
financial
benefit
for
his
or
her
customers
or
clients.
F
That's
paragraph
five
of
subsection,
a
my
concern
there
is,
you
know
if
you're,
if
you
have
a
little
side
business
or
something
like
I
said,
you
know,
it's
called
an
etsy
shop
or
a
craft
fair
or
something,
and
you
know
you're
selling
a
small
amount,
a
relatively
small
amount
of
of
goods
or
services
to
somebody,
then,
all
of
a
sudden
that
person
is
you're
forbidden
from
selling
to
that
person
or
some
sort
of
situation
like
that.
It's
I'm
not
explaining
that
terribly
well.
But
again,
it's
it's.
F
Apologize
54-5,
yes,
and
I
was
specifically
talking
about
subsection,
a
paragraph
five,
but
yes,
545.
A
F
Yeah,
you
know,
but
it
just
makes
a
potentially
makes
a
a
broader
pool
than
maybe
we
want
to
look
at
as
far
as
people
who
would
you'd
be
prohibited
from
dealing
with.
But
I
understand
that
that's
it's
yeah.
A
F
All
right
skipping
down
quite
a
ways
looking
at
section
5412,
I
think
council
member
frederick,
addressed
this
one
as
well.
I
I
too
share
some
concerns
about
the
political
activity
language.
I
understand
what
the
intent
is:
councilmember
conti,
but
I
I
think
council
member
frederick,
did
a
pretty
good
job
of
explaining
my
own
concerns
there.
Just
the.
F
Yeah,
where
was
that
again,
5412.,
okay
and
I'm
looking
at
subsection
a.
F
C
I
I
see
a
problem
with
that.
You
know
you
know
I
might
ask
my
neighbor
who
happens
to
work
for
dgs.
He
can
help
with
my
campaign
and
that
could
be
misconstrued
and
you
know
we
see
that
all
the
time
you
know
in
government
right
now
I
mean
in
the
press
right
now.
People
say
they
think
they're
saying
one
thing
and
the
receiver
is
hearing
something
else.
So
I
think
you
got
to
tighten
that
up.
A
B
E
My
other,
my
other
question
concern
with
that
one
was.
We
are
a
you
know:
government
town,
capital
of
albany.
We
have
a
lot
of
state
state
buildings
here.
You
know
a
lot
of
state
workers.
So
how
do
you
even
know
right
like
to
some
extent
like
we
all
sort
of
have
our
foot
in
the
game
with
the
government?
So
there's
just
a
lot
of
us.
F
And
that
is
the
language
here
is
limited
to
asking
any
city
employee
to
help
campaign
for
a
city
office
that
narrows
the
the
potential
minefield
somewhat.
I
suppose,
but
again
you
know,
maybe
we
want
to
conform
that
with
the
state
or
federal
language.
F
Skipping
ahead
again
quite
a
bit:
well,
can
you
stop
on
b,
please?
Oh,
you
wanted
sub
section.
C
The
next
step,
yeah
item
b
of
5412.,
can
you
talk
about
the
four
thousand
dollars?
What
that
means
and
where
that
number
came
from.
A
Yeah,
that
probably
was
just
something
we
picked
up
out
of
the
the
model
that
we
use
for
yonkers,
but.
C
F
I
mean
at
least
as
I
read
it
sitting
here
right
now.
It
just
says
that
public
disclosure
is
required
when
a
person
has
made
campaign
contributions
to
an
officer
employee
in
excess
of
four
thousand
dollars.
So
it's
not
saying
you
can't
do
that.
It's
just
requiring
public
disclosure
of
those
right
now.
A
A
B
B
C
Can
give
me
you
know
to
me
anything
it's
over
a
hundred
dollars.
You
know
you
got
skin
in
the
game,
you
know
I'm
a
state
officer,
public
officer
and
anything
over
I'm
not
allowed
to
touch
anything
over
75
dollars.
Right
I
mean
that's,
that's
the
law
and
I
understand
that,
but
I
and
again
we
don't
have
to.
I
don't
want
to
dwell
on
this
because
there's
a
lot
of
39
pages,
but
it's
just
something.
It
kind
of
I'd
like
that
tightened
up.
I
mean
some
kind
of
reporting
mechanism,
something
like
that.
C
F
Under
subsection,
a
of
that
provision,
the
following
city
officers
and
employees,
holding
the
following
job
titles
or
descriptions
shall
be
required
to
file
a
signed
annual
disclosure
statement.
I
think
something
to
this
effect
already
exists
to
a
certain
degree,
but
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
this
new
legislation
expands
that
slightly
and
under
this
local
law.
F
A
Yeah,
so
I'm
going
to
back
up
here
I
mean
this
does
repeal
the
existing
one,
which
sets
out
a
disclosure
form
yeah,
and
instead
the
ethics
board
would
design
the
form
and
what's
required,
pursuant
to
what's
here,
I'm
going
to
defer
to
danielle,
but
in
terms
of
because
I
believe
right
now,
she
determines
who,
outside
those
specific
people
receiving
disclosure
form-
and
maybe
you
can
comment
in
terms
of
where
this
might
be
different
than
the
current
requirement.
G
We
put
it
on
the
parking
lot
and
circle
back
and
I'll
pull
it
I'll
pull
it
up.
I
can
tell
you
that
we
share
it
with
the
ida
people
who
serve
on
boards
and
commissions
the
council,
and
then
the
commissioners
and
department
heads
fill
out
the
financial
disclosure
form.
I
don't
know
if
that
was
the
exact
question
that
was
asked
that
I
was
supposed
to
clarify
or
if
you
want
me
to
take
the
what
currently
exists
and
compare
and
contrast
it
well,
it's
really
just.
A
What
do
you,
who
do
you
send
it
to
in
terms
of
the
form,
so
you
you
do
send
id
yeah.
G
Iba
crc
board
people
on
boards
and
commissions
planning.
A
Board
bza
receives
them.
Commissioners,
obviously
department
heads
bureau
heads
I
mean.
Sometimes
these
are.
A
All
city
officers
and
employees
who
exercise
substantial
discretionary
authority
well,
those
would
be
as
those
would
be
designated
by
the
mayor
of
the
ethics
board,
but
I'm
just
wondering
how
far
different
this
then
might
be
from
what
the
current
practice
is.
F
I
guess
I
was
particularly
wondering
about
principal
department
heads
as
well
whether
they're
accompanied
by
them.
A
To
a
commissioner-
and
I
mean
right
now,
we
have
people
who
have
the
title
of
director
things
of
that
nature.
I'm
not
sure
outside
of
a
commissioner
who
might
be
in
the
department
who
might
be
getting
it.
B
A
Yeah
there's
the
income
level,
which
is,
I
think,
is
mandatory
and
then
there's
policymaker,
which
sometimes
the.
B
There
was
always
a
there
was
always.
There
was
always
a
debate
about
that.
I
think
in
this
the
state
they
kind
of
just
said
all
attorneys
had
to
do
it.
A
Yeah
they
could
be.
I
know
in
my
office
when
I
worked
in
the
assembly.
My
boss
finally
decided
that
he's
the
only
policy
maker
as
the
elected
official
and
everybody
who
works
for
him
doesn't
just
make
policy.
A
But
there
was
a
point
when
I
was
having.
So
you
know:
there's
a
difference:
the
policy
maker
or
the
others
fire
they'll
file,
the
long
form
everyone
else,
including
you
know,
regardless
of
policymaker
or
income
files,
the
short
form.
A
To
what
we
have
in
for
city
employees,.
C
A
That's
that's
basically,
the
same
form,
that's
used
by
the
state,
for
you
know
the
universal
form,
except
for
policy
makers,
elected
officials
and
people
whose
income
is
over
a
certain
threshold.
A
Are
similarities
there
might
be
some
additional
information
in
here,
and
you
know
the
ethics
under
this
one.
Instead
of
having
it
in
statute,
the
ethics
board
would
promulgate
the
form.
A
There's
also
a
provision
in
here
that
information
is
not
that
is
not
foilable
or
subject
to
public
disclosure
could
be
rede
would
be
redacted
in
terms
of
public
disclosure
of
those
forms
because
they
are
public
disclosure,
but
the.
A
There
might
be
a
little
bit
more
information
in
terms
of
what
is
outlined
here
than
in
the
current
form.
A
Real
estate
holdings
are
current
loans
in
excess.
We
also
we
have
loans.
Now
there
are
certain
exemptions.
Interest
in
dividends
is
something
that's
listed
in
broad
categories.
Right
now,.
A
Yeah
identification
of
any
position
held
by
the
disclosing
officer
in
the
prior
five
years
with
the
political
party,
that's
going
back
further
than
what
currently
was
required,
any
relative,
disclosing
officer
employee
who
is
a
city
employee?
That's
that's,
you
know
broader
any
identification
of
any
customer
or
client
of
the
employee,
etc.
So
it
is
a
little
bit
broader
in
terms
of
the
information
than
you
might
get
right
now,.
A
And
it
it's
meant
to
again
to
you
know,
deal
with
persons
who
do
have
discretionary
authority
who
do
make
policy
even
on
certain
boards
and
commissions,
like
planning
board
bza
ida.
They
have
discretionary
authority
in
some
respect
in
terms
of
decisions
that
they
make.
A
E
F
And
with
regard
to
disclosure,
particularly
as
it's
discussed
in
subsection
e,
where
it
states
that
the
annual
disclosure
statement
shall
be
kept
confidential
to
the
maximum
extent
allowed
by
law,
certainly
I
think
it's
a
good
thing
to
have
that
language
in
there,
but
I
do
want
to
caution
against
over-reliance
on
the
foil
exemptions.
F
Foil
is
pretty
broad
as
far
as
what
can
be
disclosed.
What
needs
to
be
disclosed
and
the
the
presumption
with
foil
is
that
items
are
disclosable.
So
that's
just
something
to
bear
in
mind.
You
know
I
don't
have
any
specific
items
that
I'm
gonna
say:
shooter
shouldn't
be
included
in
the
disclosure
forms,
but
you
know
just
it's
worth,
bearing
in
mind
that
what
people
think
should
be
confidential
and
what
people
expect
to
be
confidential
is
not
always
what
foyle
thinks
is
confidential.
F
I
guess
is
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
moving
down
to
subsection
g,
where
it
lays
out
the
information
that
has
to
be
disclosed.
F
There
is
a
lot
of
information
there
and
most
of
that
will
be
required
to
be
disclosed
under
foil
if
a
foil
request
is
made.
B
Not
all
of
it
would
have
to
be
required
to
be
disclosed
under
foil.
A
lot
of
it
would
be
redacted,
but
it
would
be
kept
in
house.
B
F
I
was
going
to
talk
specifically
about
paragraph
eight.
I
think
I
already
mentioned
that
to
a
certain
degree
for
just
as
an
example:
identification
of
all
loans
in
excess
of
one
thousand
dollars
made
by
the
disclosing
city
officer
or
employee,
or
that
individual
spouse
household
members
or
children
and
investments
over
five
percent
of
the
stock
etc.
F
You
know
I
I
mentioned
already
my
concerns
about
household
members
and
then
you're
getting
into
children
and
things
like
that
as
well.
I
understand
the
reason
that
those
items
are
in
there,
but
especially
with
regard
to
household
members.
I
think
that
definition
needs
a
slightly
narrower
scope
and
then
paragraph
10,
I
also
sort
of
made
reference
to
before
identification
of
gifs
in
excess
of
200
received
by
this
closing
city
officer
or
employee.
F
Yeah
again
so
that
was
the
difference
between
relatives,
relatives
and
close
relatives.
So
you
know,
as
I
read,
that
any
gift
from
an
aunt
or
an
uncle
or
a
grandparent
or
something
would
have
to
be
disclosed.
F
F
Yeah
yeah
pretty
close
to
the
bottom,
now
yeah,
okay
in
subsection
c
one
it
says
after
hearing
the
ethics
board,
shall
impose
one
or
more
of
the
appropriate
sanctions
as
follows.
F
First
point:
there
is
just
a
copy
editing
thing:
it
says:
impose
a
civil
penalty
in
an
amount
not
less
than
two
hundred
fifty
dollars
nor
more
than
ten
thousand
dollars,
but
the
parenthetical
yep,
let's
say
amount-
is
that
says
one
thousand
dollars.
So
I
assume
that
should
be
changed
to
ten
thousand.
F
My
I
guess
I
have
a
slight
concern
that
it
doesn't
give
the
ethics
board
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
flexibility
in
imposing
sanctions
or
penalties.
Subsection
c
says
that
the
ethics
board
shall
impose
one
or
more
of
the
one
or
more
appropriate
sanctions
as
follows.
So
it
has
to
do
one
of
these
four
things,
as
I
read
that
there's
no
option
to
impose
less
than
250
dollars,
so
you
know
that
the
board
wouldn't
be
able
to
impose
zero
dollar
or
one
dollar
fine.
F
You
know
more
of
a
symbolic
thing,
so
it
just
ties
the
ethics
board's
hands
somewhat.
That
may
be
the
goal,
but
I'm
just
pointing
out
that
that
is
the
way
this
was
written,
that
it
doesn't
provide
for
a
lot
of
flexibility
for
the
board
and
when
read
in
concert
with
section
5435
again
skipping
ahead
quite
a
bit.
F
This
section
talks
about
5429c
talks
about
penalties
can
be
imposed
by
the
board
itself,
but
then
54
35
talks
about
how
ethics
violations
shall
be
punished.
Some
of
that
language
is
similar,
but
some
of
it
is
kind
of
contradictory.
F
I
could
be
wrong
here,
but
I'm
I'm
not
aware
of
anything
in
new
york.
State
law,
that's
considered
a
class
one
offense.
You
have
different
tiers
of
misdemeanors
and
felonies,
but
I
I
to
my
knowledge,
the
phrase
class
one
offense
is
not
something
that
exists
under
new
york
law
and
I'm
happy
to
be
corrected
on
that
point.
If
I'm
wrong,
but
that's
that's
as
far
as
I
know,
but
my
broader
point,
I
guess,
is
that
we
have
this
entire
section
devoted
to
penalties,
but
then
we
also
were
talking
about
different
penalties.
F
And
then
I
would
have
to
look
into
this
to
provide
a
concrete
opinion,
but
I
question
whether
the
ethics
board
itself
can
actually
impose
a
criminal
penalty
on
its
own.
You
know
it
can
certainly
rever
refer
things
to
the
district
attorney's
office,
as
as
it
wishes
for
prosecution
or
for
the
da's
office
to
look
into
things.
But
I,
as
I
sit
here
right
now,
I
question
whether
the
ethics
board
can
actually
impose
a
criminal
penalty
on
its
own
and
then.
F
The
final
point
I
think
I
wanted
to
make
was,
I
think,
the
way
the
law
is
written.
Now
the
ethics
board
can
conduct
an
investigation,
it
can
bring
charges
against
a
person
and
it
conducts
the
hearing
itself.
There's
no
separate
hearing
officer
so
far
as
I
can
tell
so
that
sort
of
gives
rise
to
a
situation
where
the
ethics
board
would
be
investigator,
prosecutor
and
judge
and
jury
all
at
the
same
time,
and
then
it
has
the
ability
to
impose
these
these
fines
and
as
it's
written
potential
criminal
penalties.
C
35
richard
and
I'm
digesting
it
now
so
who
would
determine?
Are
we
going
to
put
the
wording
in
there
that
it
would
be
referred
to
the
d.a
to
prosecute.
F
Councilmember,
that
is
the
way
it's
worded
in
5429
the
other
penalty
provision.
I
think.
F
G
G
I
know
it
touches
on
the
different
things
that
you
may
or
may
not
require
be
required
to
disclose,
but
545
does
a
real
good
job
of
laying
out
laying
it
out
and
providing
a
visual.
A
Yeah
I
mean,
and
the
intent
here
was
that
this
would
give
and
I'm
not
sure
if
other
cities
or
localities
that
have
a
similar
form
if
they
lay
it
out
in
their
code
or
if
they
have
the
discretion.
This
would
provide
that
the
ethics
board
would
have
the
flexibility
and
discretion
to
design
the
form,
and
you
know
include
what
would
you
know
what
would
be
included.
A
You
can,
we
can,
you
know,
leave
a
form
in
code.
The
way
it
is
right
now
maybe
make
some
adjustments
to
it.
I
actually
personally,
when
I'm
filling
out
that
form
that
code.
There
are
some
questions
there,
which
I
find
a
little
bit
confusing
in
terms
of
how
you're
supposed
to
report
certain
things
like
you
know,
interest
or
dividends
and
and
then
the
addresses
and
and
there's
a
microscopic
section
line
that
allows
you
to
list
stuff
and
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
they
mean.
A
A
Legislation-
I
am,
I
am
noting
that
you
know,
as
I
see
on
on
the
facebook
stream
and
as
danielle
has
been
alerting
me.
We
don't
have
any
public
comment,
but
I
I
do
see
some
comments
on
the
facebook
screen
that.
A
A
The
expansion
towards
other
people
in
the
household,
unfortunately,
is
needed
in
my
opinion,
and
I
think
that
the
city
of
albany
doing
this
raises
the
ethical
bar
jessica
wilcox.
I
believe
the
court
system
requires
spouse,
deborah
williams.
Historically,
and
currently
there
is
have
been
many
problems
with
not
including
other
close
relatives.
A
A
But
that
was
just
to
note
that
there
were
some
comments
relative
to
what
we're
talking
about
on
on
the
facebook
page.
So
what
I
think
I
would
like
to
do
as
far
as
moving
forward
with
this
is
to
work
on.
Oh,
unless
tom
you
have
some.
C
A
A
We
we
do
based,
I
think,
that's
under
state
law,
and
we
do
have
that
annual.
We,
you
know,
we
we
do
the
we
watch
the
videos
and
then
take
a
kind
of
a
test
or
q
a
on
it.
Or
do
you
certify
that
we've
completed
a
course,
but
we
do
it
virtually
online.
C
A
C
G
I
believe
the
policies
and
procedures
manual
touch
on
ethics
and
people
have
to
sign
off
and
acknowledge
that
they
received
the
policies
and
procedures
manual
and
in
most
offices,
they're
supposed
to
post
that
the
portion
of
the
general
municipal
law
that
talks
about
what
is
allowed
and
what
is
prohibited.
So
we
have
it
posted
and
the
city
clerk's
office
and
in
vital
statistics,
and
I'm
pretty
sure
it's
throughout
the
city
and
I've
seen
it
posted
in
human
resources
as
well.
A
Okay,
so
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
work
on
some
revisions
and
if
I
could
work
with
brett
and
jr
and
brett,
if
you,
if
you
either
breto
or
a
few
specific
amendments
that
you
can
forward
me
or
ideas,
you
know,
and
then
maybe
we
can
work
back
and
forth
in
some
drafts
trading
back
and
forth
and
try
to
develop
something
that
also,
you
know,
addresses
some
of
what
I
hear
from
other
from
members
as
well,
and
we
can
begin
try
to
tighten
up,
and
I
want
to
go
back
and
look
at
yonkers
again,
because
this
was,
as
I
say,
based
on
what
they
did
and
things
of
that
nature,
and
I
do
have.
A
There
is
guidance
from
nikon
as
well
that
we've
looked
at
so
we'll
then
reschedule
another
meeting
at
a
point
where
I
think
we're
closer
to
having
something
that
reflects
some
of
the
discussion
from
tonight.
Does
that
work.
A
You
know
I
was
thinking
about
that,
but
then
I
didn't
want
to
tie
myself
into
something
because
I
don't
know
how
long
it's
going
to
take,
but
then,
of
course
the
other
argument
is
having
a
follow-up
meeting
is,
gives
you
a
deadline.
A
G
F
Or
what
it's
worth
I'm
scheduled
to
be
off
on
the
13th?
I
you
know
I
I
don't
necessarily
need
to
be
at
the
meeting
in
person.
I
can
submit
my
comments
and
have
one
of
my
colleagues
at
the
meeting
to
discuss
if
need
be,
but
I
I
am
off
that.
F
A
Is
good
danielle?
I
know
that
the
the
violence
prevention
task
force
meets
every
other
thursday.
I
don't
know
if
that's
one
of
theirs
on
the
15th.
B
G
A
Okay,
well,
let's
say
tentatively
on
the
13th.
If
you
can
put
a
hold
on
that
and
then
we'll
we'll
see,
if
we
have,
we
can
turn
that
around
enough
to
make
that
work,
if
not
we'll
just
put
it
off
until
the
following
week
or
whatever
so
tentative,
we
won't
notice
it.
Yet.
I
think
we
would
have
time
to
notice
it
and
we'll
maybe
have
a
better
idea
within
the
next
week
or
so.
If
we're
gonna
we're
within
the
ballpark.
F
C
A
I
want
to
be
able
to
get
things
out
as
soon
as
possible,
so
those
drafts
can
also
be
refined
with
committee
members,
as
we
move
forward,
et
cetera,
we'll
be
doing
track
changes.
So
that's
the
kind
of
documents
that
I
assume
any
other
questions
or
issues.
Yes,.
D
Ellie,
can
you
hear
me
yeah,
I'm
I'm
sorry.
I
have
a.
I
have
a
meeting
already
scheduled
on
the
13th,
which
I
actually
missed
my
last
one,
because
we
had
our
our
last
operations
committee
meeting
so
if
we
could
adjust
that
it
would
help.
If
not,
I
guess
I
could
double
is
the
the
last
time.
A
Okay,
if
there's
no
further
business,
is
there
a
motion?
Oh
sorry,
yes,.
D
No
just
no.
Lastly,
just
I
I
would
earlier
we
were
talking
about,
I
think,
miss
frederick
had
some
comments,
and
maybe
even
mr
holy
about
why
we're
more
restrictive
or
doing
more
stuff
than
the
county
or
the
state
is
with
this
stuff.
I
would
argue
that
we're
closer
to
this
stuff,
so
there's
a
greater
chance
of
these
conflicts
arising
from
where
we
sit
versus
a
county
legislator
or
a
person
that
works
for
the
state.
Just
just
a
comment
so.
A
All
right,
okay,
motion
to
adjourn
a.