►
From YouTube: Rules Committee Meeting 12/3/2018
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
Okay,
we're
gonna
anyone,
okay,
we're
gonna,
close
the
sign-up,
then
for
citizen
comment,
so
everyone
will
get
one
minute
to
speak.
I
will
call
the
first
four
names
if
you'd
please
come
and
line
up
so
that
we
can
move
ahead.
With
this
we
have
Human
Services
Committee,
beginning
at
7:30
tonight
we
would
like
to
try
to
get
to
that
meeting
on
time.
A
B
Junaid
risky
I
was
thinking
back
over
time.
I've
been
involved
in
issues
here
for
a
long
time.
I
was
involved
in
an
issue
with
a
school
board
almost
25
years
ago,
for
over
a
year,
I
had
to
deal
with
them
fixing
their
buildings.
I
was
one
of
the
only
people
in
town
that
actually
was
involved
with
that
and
after
about
a
year,
I
got
frustrated
enough
and
I'm
not
gonna,
go
in
all
the
details,
but
I
called
the
state
spent
about
an
hour
on
the
phone
with
the
state.
B
After
that,
two
weeks
later,
the
district
decided
to
spend
25
million
dollars
to
fix
the
buildings.
Other
people
here,
such
as
Claire
Kelly,
were
involved
with
the
hospital
incinerator.
She
had
to
go
outside
of
Evanston
to
get
what
she
needed.
So
I
guess
my
thought.
To
this
counselor
reasons
we
have
the
options
to
go
outside
the
community
to
get
issues
resolved
if
we
can't
get
them
resolved
here
in
the
meetings
with
the
people
that
sit
here,
we
have
an
option
to
go
somewhere
else
and
I.
B
A
C
Okay,
I
am
very
concerned
that
the
city
is
resisting
a
Freedom
of
Information
request,
which
reveal
the
amounts
paid
by
each
contributor
towards
paying
the
costs
of
the
demolition
of
the
Harley
Clark
mansion
I
recognize
that
there
are
conflicting
views
and
the
feasibility
of
preservation
and
I'm
not
arguing
about
the
merits.
However,
any
vote
relating
to
the
demolition
by
this
council
will
be
tainted
and
crowded
unless
every
stone
Ian's
are
allowed
to
learn.
C
Who
is
really
financing
this
effort
and
until
we
are
able
to
have
a
clearer
insight
into
their
motives
and
their
methods,
we
know
from
other
fire
production
that
certain
very
wealthy
and
influential
supporters
of
demolition
have
resorted
to
highly
questionable
tactics
to
pressure
members
of
this
council.
We
know
that
some
wealthy
supporters
have
made
with
one
local
editor
is
called
veiled
threats
to
undercut
the
fundraising
efforts
for
the
Crown
Center
in
the
foster
school.
Unless
the
council
goes
forward
with
the
demolition
we
know,
that's
the
same.
C
C
A
C
D
Tonight
before
you,
you
are
gonna,
be
thinking
about
the
seriousness
of
allegations
against
a
older
person.
This
has
been
something
over
the
course
of
months
that
has
gone
on.
I
hope
that
we
can
see
a
rules
committee
that
can
seriously
take
this
on
and
seriously
send
a
message
of
what
is
not
acceptable
to
the
community.
Thank
you.
A
E
Evening
madam
chair
rules,
committee
I'm,
Ally,
Harned
resident
of
the
second
Ward
and
represented
of
a
safe
Harley
Clarke,
an
organization
that
consists
of
hundreds
of
volunteers
as
well
as
twenty
7476
voters.
I,
don't
think
I
need
to
tell
you
to
have
integrity
about
the
discussion
you'll
have
tonight
because
you
all
have
it
tonight
is
just
a
matter
of
applying
it.
We
appreciate
your
service
and
we
all
very
much
appreciate
the
citizens
who
are
appointed
by
the
mayor
to
serve
on
the
board
of
ethics.
E
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
some
quotes
to
help
guide
you
in
what
you'll
be
discussing
tonight.
First,
the
part
of
the
ethics
violation
that
I
feel
is
most
egregious
in
my
mind,
was
soliciting
donations
from
an
eighth
ward
resident
because
to
quote
Alderman
Rainey,
they
want
to
be
able
to
say
they
have
the
financial
support
from
all
the
wards,
currently
short,
eighth
and
third
Ward,
so
I'm
out
beating
the
bushes
for
a
few
small
contributions.
Can
your
family
help
with
a
small
donation,
so
listening
donations
itself
is
not
the
worst
thing
in
the
world.
E
They
know
many
in
those
people.
Many
people
in
this
room
and
solicit,
as
well
as
give
donations
for
many
great
causes.
The
part
that
ties
us
together
with
the
abuse
of
power
is
Evanston
lighthouse,
students
website
and
in
comments
from
the
representatives
that
we
have
heard
here.
They
say
we
are
a
group
of
volunteers
representing
all
wards.
This
links
the
donation,
solicitation
email
to
the
outcome,
because
how
many
of
you
would
have
voted
for
demolition?
Thank
you.
You're
tops
up
great.
F
Sent
each
of
you
an
email
earlier
today,
I'm
hoping
that
you
read
it
I
just
want
to
read
a
paragraph
for
it
from
it.
I
feel
very
strongly
that
you
all
work
hard
to
appoint
people
to
boards
commissions
and
committees
for
a
purpose.
I
also
feel
very
strongly
that
you
all
work
very
hard
to
do
your
jobs.
You
may
agree
or
disagree
with
the
Board
of
Ethics
findings
and
decisions,
but
that
is
not
your
job
tonight.
Your
job
tonight
is
not
to
relitigate
the
charges
against
alderman
Rainey.
F
F
Should
you
dismiss,
alter
or
override
their
findings
and
decide
that
you
are
the
sole
authoritative
body
in
Evanston
city
government
you'll,
be
sending
a
strong
message
to
Evan
stone
Ian
so
that
there
is
a
fox
guarding
the
henhouse
situation
in
our
city
I
end
with
true
gratitude
and
faith
gratitude
for
the
work
you
do
for
the
time
you
put
in
for
the
time
you
have
taken
to
read
this
and
for
faith
that
you
will
do
the
right
thing
tonight.
Please
also
take
a
look
at
what
Ali
has
just
handed
out
to
you.
F
G
With
the
time
limitation,
I
had
I'm,
just
gonna
read
a
couple
of
paragraphs
from
a
letter
sent
to
you
by
Parikh
law
group
who,
as
the
lawyers
representing
ms
Laurie
Keenan
and
Miss
Clara,
Clara
Kelly,
and
their
ethics,
complaints
against
alderman
Rainey,
contrary
to
the
Evanson
code.
It
is
my
understanding
that
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
and
their
report
for
the
upcoming
vote,
or
advising
nothing
more
than
a
mere
censoring
of
Alderman
Rainey,
be
the
only
penalty
imposed
pursuant
to
the
ethical
violations.
G
This
would
not
only
be
contrary
to
the
Board
of
Ethics
recommendations,
but
it
would
also
be
in
violation
of
the
Avastin
city
code.
It
appears
that
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
do
not
have
a
clear
understanding
of
the
Evanston
city
code
and
are
either
misunderstanding
misleading
or
misrepresenting
the
remedies
available
in
direct
conflict
with
the
advice
rendered
by
the
city
manager
and
legal
department.
The
evidence
the
code
makes
it
clear
that
censoring
Alderaan
mein
Rainey
is
not
capitalized,
not
the
only
option
available
to
the
Rules
Committee.
G
The
advice
of
the
city
manager,
illegal
Department,
is
incorrect
and
contrary
to
the
Aventine
code
of
ethics,
I'll
skip
to
the
next
paragraph,
citing
special
violations.
In
fact,
the
Allison
city
code
of
ethics
clearly
allows
for
the
penalty
to
be
imposed
specifically
section
1
10-9
of
the
Evanson
code
of
ethics
pertains
to
sanctions,
quote
in
addition
to
your
faculty.
That
may
be
applicable
whether
I'll
just
read
the
code.
A
G
H
Hi,
chairman
Fisk
members
of
committee,
my
name
is
John
Mohr
I
just
want
to
echo
what
others
have
said,
especially
generator
about
why
the
Rules
Committee
should
vote
for
recusal.
The
Board
of
Ethics
found
excuse
me
that
alderman
Rainey
gave
the
appearance
of
a
conflict
of
interest
and
showed
an
partiality.
The
only
way
to
implement
meaningfully.
The
board's
recommendation
here
is
for
the
rules
committee
to
support
her
refusal.
H
Otherwise
her
continued
participation
in
the
Harley
Clarke
votes
will
taint
the
deliberative
process,
violate
due
process
and
undermine
the
confidence
in
the
integrity
of
the
decision
making
of
the
City
Council.
As
Jen
said
pretty.
Clearly
the
code
plainly
accounts
or
allows
recusal,
since
it
speaks
to
other
disciplinary
that
may
action
that
may
be
taken
censure
will
not
do
it,
because
it's
very
clear
that
alderman
Rainey
has
prejudged
the
Harley
Clarke
issue.
For
that
reason,
recusal
is
imperative.
Failure
to
do
so
also
is
going
to
call
into
question
any
City
Council
action
related
to
the
vote.
I
J
I'm,
sorry,
all
right.
Thank
you
good
evening.
I'm
gonna
speak
about
the
the
appeal
to
the
preservation
commission's
unanimous
decision
to
deny
demolition
of
the
Harley
Clark
mansion
and
I
would
hope
that
you
would
all
agree
that
you
should
send
that
appeal
actually
to
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee,
because
it's
consisted
of
seven
aldermen
and
according
to
the
code,
it
says
that
it
should
be
sent
to
a
committee
that
consists
of
all
aldermen.
What
is
the
definition
of
all
I
mean?
Seven,
seven
is,
is
all
aldermen.
J
J
You
sent
the
Edgemere
court
application
directly
to
the
full
City,
Council
and
I
would
hope,
and
there
was
some
several
aldermen
that
voiced
opinions,
that
you
should
follow
the
rules
and
first
send
it
to
Planning
and
Development,
and
then
the
full
council,
so
I
would
hope
that
you
would
learn
from
that
lesson
and
send
it
to
Planning
and
Development,
because
it
does
consist
of
all
Alderman's.
Thank
you.
That's.
A
K
A
L
L
As
the
Ethics
Board
recommended,
alderman
Rainey
needs
to
be
prohibited
from
any
more
votes
on
Harley
Clarke.
We
got
to
this
point
because
I
believed
I
was
doing
my
civic
duty
by
voicing
an
opinion
about
Harley
Clarke
in
June.
Rhaenys
response
to
my
letter
was
to
call
it
mean
and
accuse
me
of
not
appreciating
benefactors
and
to
forward
it
to
those
wealth
to
the
wealthiest
donors,
to
demolition
with
contemptuous
remarks
to
those
donors.
L
A
M
A
N
One
of
the
complainants
I'm
here
tonight
to
ask
you
to
uphold
the
findings
and
remedies
of
the
Ethics
Board,
which
recommended
that
alderman
Rainey
either
be
recused
or
prohibited
from
discussing
or
voting
on
a
Harley
Clark,
as
has
been
recommended
by
the
Ethics
Board.
It's
not
true
that
councils
only
remedy
with
respect
to
aldermen
Rainey's
violations
is
censure.
Section
1,
10-9
D
of
the
city's
code
sets
forth
options
in
addition
to
censure,
specifically
quote
suspension
and
removal
from
office
and
other
disciplinary
action,
as
determined
by
the
appropriate
City
Authority.
N
The
Ethics
Board
is
probably
the
most
fair
and
impartial
board
in
the
community.
They
don't
always
find
against
the
defendant
and
rarely
so
severely
to
quote
ethics
board.
Member
karrina
bjurman,
the
mocking
of
a
constituent,
the
use
of
a
City
email
for
fundraising,
the
use
of
City
email
to
advocate
the
use
of
profanity
and
aggressive
language,
the
releasing
of
information
otherwise
requiring
a
FOIA
request.
The
actively
and
disruptively
avoiding
alternate
viewpoints,
while
in
a
voting
position
and
maintaining
a
voting
position
in
light
of
the
above
described
activities.
N
All
combined
give
the
appearance
of
a
conflict
of
interest
and
lack
of
impartiality
that
we
expect
from
the
city
of
Evanston
code
of
ethics
relating
to
pending
legislative
issues
and
find
that
alderman
Rainey
has
violated
the
codes
requirement
of
impartiality,
I'd
like
to
say
that
mayor
emailed
me
after
five
weeks
of
not
hearing
from
him
and
I
emailed
him
again,
and
he
said
the
reality-
is
we
have
a
long-established
process
within
the
city
to
handle
threats,
disputes
conflicts
and
ethics
by
filing
an
ethics
complaint.
You
will
avail
yourself
to
that
process.
N
Similarly,
if
you
file
a
police
complaint,
you
will
avail
yourself
to
that
process.
Hannity
said
if
an
hourly
employee
and
a
retailer
food
establishment
in
town
had
spoken
to
a
customer
in
the
same
way
that
alderman
rainey
spoke
to
me,
threatening
me,
don't
mess
with
me,
don't
mess
with
me
and
saying
you
and
a
public
meeting
they
would
lose
their
job
as
public
servants.
I
would
hope
that
we
hold
our
elected
officials
to
a
much
higher
standard
than
that.
N
We've
often
heard
that
the
citizens
maligned
and
characterizes
vitriolic,
but
it's
not
me
who
has
sworn
and
threatened
an
alderman
I'm
here
tonight
asking
for
justice
in
the
name
of
democracy,
that
you
uphold
the
findings
of
the
Ethics
Board
with
regard
to
alderman
Rainey
that
she
recuse
herself
or
be
prohibited
from
voting
or
discussing
Holly
Clark.
Thank
you.
A
O
O
Christopher
Kruger
died,
yeah,
Avenue
I
do
support
the
findings
of
the
Ethics
Board.
It
seems
that
if
there's
no
efficacy
to
the
decision
of
the
Ethics
Board
I
wonder
why
we
have
it,
and
so
I
have
no
reason
to
suspect
your
findings.
I
address
this
to
all
the
aldermen,
all
the
other
persons
I'm
less
concerned
with
who
speaks
then
who
they
are
speaking
for
so
twenty-seven
thousand
five
hundred
four
hundred
and
seventy
six,
twenty
seven
thousand
four
hundred
and
seventy
six
Evanston
citizens.
O
P
Good
evening
I'm,
Claire
Kelly
and
one
of
the
complainants
who
filed
charges
against
alderman
and
rainy
for
violating
our
code
of
ethics.
You
know
we're
in
a
serious
crisis
right
now
in
this
town,
where
the
citizens
are
feeling
very
alienated
from
our
city
government,
where
we
are
feeling
that
our
individual
voices
are
being
dismissed
and
disregarded,
and
not
only
through
us
as
individuals,
but
through
our
commissions
through
our
boards
as
well,
and
so
tonight.
I
think
it's
really.
We
were
told
also
in
regard
to
civic
duty.
P
I
was
also
the
mayor
recommended
to
me
as
well
that
you
know
if
I
had
some
issues
or
distrust
that
I
should
file
a
complaint
and
I
did
and
I'm
a
Spanish
teacher
I
work
all
day,
but
I
did
it.
I
took
out
long
hours
on
my
evening
to
file
this
complaint
to
do
the
research
and
I
hope
you're
not
going
to
just
simply
widen
that
gap
tonight
between
you
all
and
the
citizens
by
disregarding
once
again
another
recommendation
by
one
of
our
boards
I
mean
this
is
so
important.
P
Please
please
uphold
the
recommendation
from
our
Board
of
Ethics
and
prohibit
and
Raney
from
voting
any
further
on
any
matters
related
to
the
Harley.
Clark
and
I
have
one
more
question:
I'm
sorry.
This
is
unrelated
to
my
one
minute,
so
our
attorney
we,
we
should
be
allotted
than
our
time.
To
finish
our
attorneys
comments.
Also,
if
art
Newman
is
going
to
be
get
up
and
speak,
we
would
also
like
that
opportunity.
Can
we
be
afforded
that
opportunity
chairman
we'll
see
we'll
see?
Yes,
thank
you.
Miss.
A
A
Q
Hello,
I'm,
Nick
Agnew,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
echo
with
Jennifer
shader
mic
neighbor
for
a
long
time.
You
guys
do
a
great
job
in
a
lot
of
ways.
You
also
frustrate
a
lot
of
us
in
a
lot
of
ways
and
that's
to
be
expected,
but
you
have
a
hard
job
I
want
you
guys
to
know
that
I'm
impressed
by
a
lot
of
the
decision-making
that
goes
on
here
and
then
I'm
just
made
by
a
lot
of
it.
That
goes
on
air,
that
ethics
committee
I
learned
so
much
sitting
there
props
to
them.
Q
Please
do
not
dilute
their
message
their
decision
and
don't
drown
the
voices
of
the
city
of
Evanston
that
has
told
you
almost
75
to
80
percent
on
what
they
want.
Finally,
Judy
I
have
supported
you
you're,
my
friend
you're,
my
neighbor
I
have
seen
you
through
good
through
bad
I,
have
believed
in
you
and
yours
past
I
want
to
bring
you
back
to
the
time
when
Mark
tandem.
There
was
issues
with
fundraising
that
there
was
an
appearance
of
impropriety
Judy.
Q
There
is
an
appearance
of
impropriety
here
with
Ann,
Rainey
and
I
want
to
bring
you
back
to
that
time
that
you
Claire
and
I,
and
others
were
swimming
in,
that
you
were
against
it.
I
was
against
it.
Claire
was
against
it.
Many
others
were
I.
Want
you
to
bring
yourself
back
to
that
time,
because
we
have
a
parallel
going
on
right
here.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Okay,
that's.
R
R
Wally
bob
wits
and
miss
Mason
cup
conclude
that
the
only
action
available
to
the
city
is
sense
here
and
that
the
and
the
Board
of
Ethics
recommendation
is
merely
advisory.
First,
it's
not
true
that
the
council's
only
remedy
with
response,
sir
and
Rainey's
violations
is
censor.
Section
110
90
of
the
city's
code
sets
forth
options,
including
other
disciplinary
action,
as
determined
by
the
appropriate
City
Authority.
A
A
A
A
T
Chair
members
of
the
committee
good
evening,
you
have
a
memorandum
before
you
from
corporation
council
and
myself
and
I.
Think
given
given
the
matter
every.
Would
you
would
mind
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
read
the
memorandum.
In
short,
I'm
number
20
of
2018,
the
Board
of
Ethics
issued
two
separate
advisory
opinions
stemming
from
complaint
number
18,
BOE,
zero,
zero,
two
and
18
BOE
zero
zero.
Three.
T
Following
a
hearing,
the
Board
found
that
Albin
Rainey
violated
the
code
of
ethics
attached
for
your
reference
are
the
advisory
opinions
issued
pursuant
to
the
city
code
section
one
dash
10-8
paren
hi,
the
Rules
Committee
is
the
appropriate
City
authority
to
review
the
advisory
opinions
to
determine
if
any
action
will
be
taken.
Section.
T
Ten
point:
four
of
the
rules:
an
organization
of
the
City
Council
provide
quote
any
alderman
who
does
not
comply
with
the
Evanston
code
of
ethics
may
be
censured
by
a
majority
vote
of
members
present
at
a
city
council
meeting
and
if
I
may.
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
since
this
has
been
questioned
by
some
members
of
the
public,
the
board
of
ethics
and
the
code
of
ethics
covers
many
officials.
T
Employees
of
the
city,
not
just
members
of
the
City
Council,
to
my
knowledge,
only
the
City
Council
and
its
rules
has
a
any
violation
of
the
Code
of
Ethics
and
any
issues
arising
from
that,
and
so
in
your
councils
rules.
There
is
only
one
option
presented.
As
has
been
said,
the
code
goes
on
to
other
options,
other
issues
that
could
be
raised,
but
the
City
Council
has
chosen
through
its
rules
to
identify
only
one
measure
in
that
is
censure.
T
If
the
council
were
to
choose
to
do
something
different,
they
would
first
have
to
address
the
issue
of
your
rules
before
any
other
matter
could
be
taken
place.
Just
to
finish.
The
memorandum,
the
city
code,
council
rules
and
robert's
rules
do
not
contain
a
definition
of
censure.
The
dictionary,
however,
includes
among
its
definitions
of
century
resolution
by
a
legislative
body
expressing
disapproval
of
a
government
official
is
intended
to
be
a
public
admonishment
either
by
resolution
or
motion
for
the
describe
conduct
as
quoted
above
censure
is
the
only
option
provided
by
the
council
rules.
T
The
Board
of
Ethics
issued
an
advisory
opinion
which
has
no
legal
effect
and
cannot
be
enforced
by
the
City
Council,
meaning
the
directions
provided
in
the
opinion,
including
refusal
from
voting
our
advisory
to
the
respondent.
Madam
chair
members,
the
committee
we
are
provided
for
you,
the
reports
from
the
Ethics
Board
and
miss
Mason
cup
and
I
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Miss.
Do
you
understand
at.
U
This
point
good
evening,
chair
fisken
members
of
the
Rules
Committee
I,
just
wanted
to
supplement
with
the
city
manager
said
under
the
city
code,
1,
10,
9,
subsection
D
in
part,
many
of
the
speakers
have
addressed
that
it
does
say,
may
be
subject
to
censure,
suspension,
removal
from
office
or
employment
or
any
other
disciplinary
action,
as
determined
appropriate
by
the
city
authority.
I
wanted
to
give
some
context
with
this
city
code
section
in
relation
to
your
City
Council
rules.
First
of
all,
suspension
speaks
to
employees.
U
My
understanding
is
that
the
City
Council
certainly
can't
suspend
an
elected
official.
The
city
personnel
rules
for
employees
have
elevated
levels
of
discipline.
Suspension
speaks
to
employees,
and
that
is
the
relief
in
part
that
could
be
thought.
I
didn't
seek
to
explain
further
removal
from
office,
because
that
opinion
certainly
doesn't
even
come
close
to
that.
So
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
that
that
is
what
the
city
code
says
and
so
I
address
more
specifically
censure
because
it
applies
to
elected
officials.
V
Thank
you
and
I
do
appreciate.
You
know
the
comments,
emails,
correspondence
and,
and
some
of
the
conversations
we've
had,
but
in
looking
at
the
ordinance
itself,
tend
to
subsection
C
and
tend
to
establish
what
the
powers
of
the
of
the
ethics
committee
are
and
subsection
C
allows
them
to
evaluate,
make
findings
of
fact
and
issue
advisory
opinions.
So
clearly
they
issue
advisory
opinions,
they're
not
binding
opinions,
but
before
that
is
the
to
me
is
the
important
aspect
here
with
relation
to
these
penalties,
the
findings
of
fact.
V
Now
they
did
that
we
have
a
bunch
of
findings
of
fact
in
this
in
these
in
these
two
memorandums
but
subsection
9,
10,
10,
9
D,
that's
that's
an
extra
penalty,
so
you've
got,
you
know,
penalties,
you
know
and
in
provisions
throughout
the
code,
we've
got
the
council
rules,
but
it
says
in
addition
to
any
other
penalty
that
may
be
applicable,
an
officer
employed.
So
that's
in
addition
to
this.
So
this
is
extra,
an
officer
or
an
employee
who
intentionally
violates
any
provision.
So
I
read
these
through
several
times.
V
I
did
not
find
any
findings
of
fact
that
alderman
Rainey
intentionally
did
this
I
found
that
they
made
findings
that
these
things
happen.
But
this
is
an
additional
penalty
for
somebody
who
intentionally
does
it
so
in
other
words,
they
knew
about
it
and
they
intended
to
do
it.
So
it's
it's
plain
reading
of
the
ordinance,
and
so
these
are
the
extra
things.
V
If
you
do
it
on
purpose
or
everybody
could
just
you
know
mock
me
and
laugh
at
me,
but
you
know
we
heard
person
after
person
saying
we
need
to
follow
the
rules
and
I'm
reading
the
rule
that
says
who
intentionally
violates
any
provision
and
I
read
the
findings
of
fact,
and
there
was
no
finding
of
fact
that
it
was
intentional.
So
that's
the
rule,
so
that
leaves
us
with
the
conversation
about
this
sure,
which
is
what
the
council
rules
provide
for.
V
A
S
I
just
have
a
question
for
the
city
attorney
I
mean
I,
read:
read
your
memo.
I
read
this
letter
from
the
attorneys
I
appreciate
you
addressing
section
1,
10
9
d:
did
you
make
a
statement
to
the
Ethics
Board
about
where
they
could
go
when
it
came
to
any
kind
of
you
know
disciplinary
measure
based
based
on
their
findings?
S
You
know
because
I
know
everybody
up
here
has
a
lot
of
respect
for
our
boards
and
commissions
and
all
of
the
citizens
that
serve
on
those
boards
and
commissions
and
take
very
seriously.
You
know
any
findings
and
recommendations
that
they
make
to
the
City
Council,
and
you
know
we're
talking
up
here
about
you
know
censure.
Maybe
if
the
council
wants
to
go
there,
the
the
only
place
that
the
council
can
go
unless
I
guess
if
they
suspended
the
rules.
As
you
said
and
said,
they
want
to
take
a
different
action.
S
U
Can't
speak
for
this
specific
complaint
because
I,
don't
I
am
NOT
the
board
liaison
attorney
to
the
Board
of
Ethics,
but
more
generally,
I
can
state
that,
in
this
opinion,
in
all
of
the
past
opinions,
for
example,
in
0:03
complaint
number,
18,
BOE
0:03
it
states
and
number
10.
This
is
an
advisory
opinion.
It's
repeatedly
stated
that
this
is
advice
contained
within
the
opinion.
That's
issued.
U
Eleven
11.1
indicates
that
an
alderman
is
expected
to
vote,
yay
or
nay
on
all
matters
when
present,
except
on
any
matter
which
involves
a
direct
personal
pecuniary
interest
or
conflict
of
interest.
But
it
states
an
ultimate
is
expected
to
it
doesn't
say
it
doesn't
have
a
mandate
and
and
the
council
rules.
This
is
what
the
language
indicates,
that
this
is
the
remedy.
That's
available
for
10.4.
W
I
Know
for
those
who
don't
know
me,
my
name
is
art.
Doom
and
I,
served
on
the
council
for
14
years
and
I
want
to
tell
you.
Ann
Rainey
is
an
elected
official
there's
a
difference
between
an
elected
official
and
a
city
city
employee.
When
you
read
the
ordinance
okay,
the
ordinance
applies
to
both.
It
is
very
confusing,
but
elected
officials
get
to
be
biased
if
somebody
wanted,
when
I
was
the
first
Ward
Alderman,
if
somebody
wanted
to
build
a
15-story
building
on
Warrington,
Avenue
I
wouldn't
listen
to
anybody
on
that.
It's
not
going
to
happen.
I
Elected
officials
can
have
opinions
and
what
the
what
I
would
suggest
to
you
is
the
Ethics
Board,
the
everybody
works
hired
around
here
and
they
looked
at
these
facts
and
they
came
up
with
what
their
viewpoint
was
when
they
looked
at
a
very
complicated
ordinance.
Okay,
when
you're
at
when
you're
an
officer
in
the
parking
office,
we've
got
to
treat
everybody
the
same
okay,
when
you're,
an
elected
official
you
can
advocate,
you
can
take
positions,
you
can
decide
you're
not
going
to
answer
phone
calls.
You
can
decide
you're
not
going
to
answer
letters.
I
The
only
people
you're
responsible
to
are
the
85
8,500
people
that
elected
you
now
be
very
clear
here.
The
the
board
did
not
find
any
conflict
of
interest.
Alderman
Rainey
isn't
accused
of
having
any
personal
interest
in
hire.
Lee
Clark,
none,
there's
no
family
member.
That
has
any
interest.
There's
no
nothing.
Ann
Rainey
is
doing
the
same
thing
that
she's
done
for
30
years.
She's
voting
our
conscience.
She
believes
that
the
city
shouldn't
spend
any
more
money
on
Harley
Clark.
I
There's
people
here
who
disagree
with
her,
but
unless,
unless
you
somebody
here
found
on
a
city
board
that
she
has
a
financial
interest
in
keeping
the
building
taking
the
building
down
a
family
member
has
a
financial
interest
you're
bound
by
your
rules
and
your
corporation
counsel
and
city
manager.
Have
this
exactly
right.
Things
get
emotional
in
this
town.
I
Well,
when
one
maple
avenue
we
were
going
to
put
movie
theaters
on
it,
I
got
hundreds
of
communications
that
I
was
going
to
ruin
the
city
things
get
tough
and
elected
officials
have
the
right
to
make
decisions
now.
I
would
suggest
to
you,
you
may
there
may
be
some
of
you
here
who
say:
well,
maybe
Ann
Rainey
shouldn't
have
acted
that
way.
That
does
not
make
a
violation
of
ethics.
That
does
not
empower
the
rest
of
you.
They
have
her
not
vote
on
a
certain
subject.
She's
doing
the
same
thing,
she
always
did.
I
She
has
a
position.
She
believes
in
it
strongly.
Things
got
very
hot
around
here
ants
and
she
was
subject
to
a
lot
of
criticism
and
there
was
things
that
went
on
and
maybe
a
mistake
was
made
which
she
apologized
for
by
the
way.
Okay,
but
that
doesn't
make
this
council
doesn't
give
this
council
the
authority
that
disenfranchise
8500
people
on
the
issue
of
Harley
Clark.
I
So
what
I
would
suggest
to
you
and
all
due
respect
this
ordinance,
which
says
employees
and
elected
officials,
two
very
distinct
groups
very
easily
confused
with
the
language
you
got
to
have
an
ordinance.
My
suggestion
is
for
elected
officials.
You
got
to
have
an
ordinance
for
the
city
employees
because
they
do
have
to
treat
everybody.
The
same
and
aldermen
doesn't
have
to,
and
so
I
want
to
tell
you.
You
are
bound
by
the
rules,
a
group
of
aldermen
who
doesn't
like
how
another
aldermen
acts
can't
stop
them
from
voting
period.
I
Okay.
So
what
I
would
suggest
you?
If
you
want
to
go
revisit
the
ordinance
you
should
do
it,
but
I
want
to
say
one
final
thing
about
alderman,
Rainey
and
I've
disagreed
with
her
on
hundreds
of
issues.
Hundreds
we
spent
eight
years
together,
but
alderman
Rainey
has
spent
thousands
of
hours
on
behalf
of
the
city
doing
what
she
feels
best
is
for
the
people
of
the
eighth
org.
She
has
a
ton
to
be
proud
of
in
her
service
to
this
city.
I
Nothing
to
be
ashamed
of
can't
she
make
a
mistake
in
the
heat
of
something
maybe,
but
she
has
every
right
and
the
only
person,
people
she's
responsible
to
are
the
voters
of
the
eighth
ward
and
people
in
this
room
may
not
like
it,
but
that's
what
democracy
is
about.
So
what
I
would
suggest
to
you
rewrite
your
ordinances,
okay,
but
the
heat
of
one
issue
and
what
the
vote
was
on
an
issue
doesn't
empower
this
council
or
anybody
else
in
the
community
to
take
away
in
Alderman's
vote
so
I.
I
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
I
know.
You'll
do
the
right
thing
and
the
last
thing
is
whatever
you
do,
whatever
you
do,
you're
voting
the
best
interest
of
the
people
of
Evanston,
not
what
one
group
comes
to
say
at
a
specific
time
because
it
may
happen
to
them.
It
may
happen
to
any
one
of
you
where
you're
on
the
wrong
side
of
a
big
group.
It
could
happen.
Thank
you,
Thank.
N
X
They
just
speak
over.
Her
I
mean
that
way.
So
now
it's
my
turn
to
speak
because
I
haven't
spoken
so
that
you're
heard
you
it's
it's
I
didn't
tell
your
attorney
couldn't
speak,
but
it's
my
turn
to
speak.
Do
I
not
get
a
chance
to
speak
or
do
only
the
attorneys
get
to
speak,
but,
okay!
Well
right
now,
it's
my
turn
to
speak
and
I.
Think
when
your
attorney
spoke.
The
first
time
I,
listened
I
didn't
speak
either.
Do.
X
You
do
thank
you,
have
the
floor.
Can
we
need
a
little
order
here?
I'm
gonna,
listen
to
five
minutes
of
him.
I
didn't
love
it
either,
but
I
listen
and
I
was
respectful,
but
I
didn't
speak
at
all.
Miss
Kelly,
yes,
I
am
raising
my
voice
because
it's
pretty
rude
to
be
sitting
up
here.
I
didn't
disrupt
anyone
when
they
spoke
I
turn
my
light
on
and
I'm
waiting
to
speak
I'm
speaking
now,
all
right.
So
my
question
I
have
several
Corporation
Counsel.
X
So
we
have
the
city
code,
which
you
I
think
one
ten
nine
and
then
you
referenced
the
council
code,
so
I
know
it.
There's
been
other
discussion
and
different
topics
where
the
city
code
and
the
council
code
have
not
had
the
same
language.
So
can
you
explain
how
we
rectify
those
two?
Because
there
is
a
couple
things
when
I
know?
Sometimes
we
have
to
update
our
council
rules,
but
can
you
just
clarify
how
we
mesh,
when
the
council
rules
and
the
city
code
does
not
read
the
same
way?
I.
U
Would
be
happy
to
adjust
that
so
certainly
the
city
code
and
the
council
rules
need
to
be
read
together,
but
the
city
code
is
the
law
of
the
city.
However,
the
remedies
that
are
provided.
That's
what
I
was
trying
to
address
earlier,
the
remedies
that
are
provided
in
Subsection
D,
our
suspension,
notes,
our
censure,
suspension,
removal
from
office
and
other
disciplinary
action.
Disciplinary
action-
and
this
is
it
applies
in
this
context-
to
employees.
U
You
it
implies,
it
applies
to
employees
and
it's
elevated
levels
of
discipline
within
the
city's
personnel
manual.
So
that
is
what
I
believe
the
city
code
and
I
feel
pretty
strongly
about
this.
That
is
what
the
city
code
is
speaking
to.
If
this
complaint
were
about
a
city
employee,
they
could
be
subject
to
suspension.
U
X
W
X
U
Ethics
Board
said
that
alderman
Rainey-
this
is
I'm
just
paraphrasing
this,
but
it's
under
under
number
nine.
The
Ethics
Board
indicated
that
all
the
marae
need
be
prohibited
from
participating
in
and
voting
on,
matters
underlying
and
related
to
Harley
Clark
mansion.
That
is,
their
recommendation
and
advisory
opinion.
All.
U
But
in
context
basically
the
the
City
Council.
This
is
why
I'm
saying
is
you're
limited.
It
says
only
censure,
however,
and
I'm
elected
official.
If,
if
there's
a
conflict
of
interest
under
11.1,
they
are
expected
to
recognize
the
conflict
of
interest
and
recuse
from
vote,
but
the
council
doesn't
have
the
power
to
mandate
that
they
act
on
that
all.
X
Right
and
so
where
it
says
here
at
the
end
of
that,
if
there
is
a
conflict
of
interest
in
any
matter
before
the
council,
consultation
with
the
board
of
ethics
ethics
is
available.
Correct,
okay,
okay,
so
thank
you
for
that
clarification.
I
do
agree
with
mr.
Newman
that
we
definitely
need
to
update
our
code.
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
our
Board
of
Ethics
has
appropriate
training.
I
do
think
that
we're
going
to
have
citizens
serving
these
manners.
X
We
need
to
provide
them
great
clarity
and,
unfortunately,
I
think
now
we're
in
the
space
where
we
realized
that
in
hindsight-
and
so
you
know
kind
of
shame
on
us
for
that,
I
would
just
encourage
the
chair.
I
guess
to
you,
know
mr.
Newman
as
eloquent
as
he
was
I
it
was.
It
was
a
little
overkill
for
me.
X
A
That
that's
fine
mr.
Newman
was
appearing
tonight
on
behalf
of
Alderman
Rainey
yeah
and
an
alderman
Rainey
is
not
speaking
to
this
issue,
so
she's
recused
herself
yeah,
so
she's
recused
herself
on
the
discussion.
So
that's
why
alderman
Newman
received
more
time
than
a
regular
commenter
at
citizen
comment
aldermen
suffered
in
Thank.
Y
U
The
sanctions
and
penalties
that
are
contained
in
one
ten
nine
in
if
so,
some
of
the
allegations
alleged
prohibited
political
activities.
Those
carry
a
potential
fine.
Of
course
they
didn't.
They
didn't
even
find
that
they
had
jurisdiction
in
those
matters,
but
the
corporation
itself
has
a
duty
to
defend
elected
and
appointed
officials
in
these
matters.
There
is
a
past
precedent
for
that,
and
so
the
city
has
to
hire
an
attorney
so
that
she
can
be
represented
and.
U
A
S
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
do
think
for
fairness
and
everything
else
that
since
we
gave
an
attorney,
you
know
for
alderman
Rainey.
You
know
for
mint
four
minutes
to
talk
that
you
know
doing
so,
for
those
that
you
know
have
a
different
opinion
about
the
code
and
the
regulations
may
just
be
helpful.
Certainly
to
me.
A
A
A
G
We
read
it
alright,
first
off
I.
Thank
you
off
the
city
of
Evanston
for
your
service.
My
name
is
on
each
Parikh,
obviously
I'm
not
on
each
parade
I'm
just
reading
on
his
behalf.
My
name
is
Annie
sprig
and
I'm.
An
attorney
represents
MS
Laurie,
Keenan
and
Miss
Clara
carrot
for
the
ethics,
complaints
against
alderman
Rainey.
Recently,
the
absent
Board
of
Ethics
addressed
the
complaints
of
my
clients
and
ultimately
found
ethical
violations
by
alderman
Rainey
based
on
City
Code,
section
subsection,
1,
10,
4,
C,
3
B
and
subsection
1
10
4,
C
1.
G
It
is
fine
it
in
its
findings
in
order.
The
Board
of
Ethics
recommended
that
alderman
Raina
be
prohibited
from
participating
in
voting
on
matters
related
to
the
Harley
Clark
mansion
I
understand
that
the
matter
shall
be
next
be
considered
by
your
committee
this
evening
and
I'm
writing
today
to
express
concerns
with
the
advice
that
is
being
provided
to
you
by
the
city.
G
Specifically,
I
was
along
to
learn
that
the
city
that
the
Avastin
city
manager,
a
legal
department,
are
not
supporting
the
recommendation
from
the
eveson
Board
of
Ethics
regarding
Alderman,
reins
prohibition
on
proceedings
involving
the
Harley
Clark
mansion,
contrary
to
the
Evanson
code.
It
is
my
understanding
that
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
in
their
report
for
the
upcoming
vote
are
advising
that
nothing
more
than
a
mere
censoring
of
Alderman
Rainey
be
the
only
penalty
imposed
pursuant
to
the
ethical
violations.
G
This
would
not
only
be
contrary
to
the
Board
of
Ethics
recommendations,
but
would
also
be
in
violation
of
the
city
of
the
Evanston
City
Code.
It
appears
that
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
do
not
have
a
clear
understanding
of
the
Evanston
city
code
and
are
either
misunderstanding
misleading
or
misrepresenting
the
remedies
available
in
direct
conflict
with
the
advice
rendered
by
the
city
manager
in
legal
department.
The
Evanston
City
Code
makes
it
clear
that
centering
aldermen
alderman
Rainey
is
not
the
only
option
available
to
the
Rules
Committee.
G
The
advice
of
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
is
incorrect
and
contrary
to
the
Evanston
code
of
ethics,
prohibition
and
recusal.
With
respect
to
specified
political
activities
are
standard
and
common
recommendations
from
ethics
boards
around
the
state,
as
the
Board
of
Ethics
has
already
determined
alderman
Rainey's.
Prohibition
against
involvement
in
matters
pertaining
to
the
Harley
Clark
mansion
is
likewise
a
legal
and
appropriate
response
to
alderman
Rainey's
ethical
violation.
In
fact,
the
Evanson
code
of
ethics
clearly
allows
for
this
penalty
to
be
imposed
specifically
section
one
10,
nine.
G
You
know
the
Avastin
ethics
code
of
ethics
pertains
to
sanctions
and
penalties,
and
states
quote
in
addition
to
any
other
penalty
that
may
be
applicable
whether
criminal
or
civil,
an
officer
or
employee
who
intentionally
violates
any
provisions
of
this
chapter,
may
be
subject
to
sense.
Your
suspension,
removal
from
office
or
employment
or
other
disciplinary
action,
as
determined
by
the
appropriate
City
Authority.
Accordingly,
the
representation
by
the
city
manager
and
legal
department
appears
to
be
inaccurate,
as,
as
evidenced
by
the
city's
very
own
code
of
ethics.
G
Additionally,
believing
that
a
simple
censure
would
prevent
violations
like
those
found
against
alderman
Rainey
from
occurring
again
is
misplaced.
I
think
aldermen
suffered
and
made
that
very
clear.
The
violation
at
issue
here
pertained
to
the
unethical
conduct,
largely
with
respect
to
the
Harley
Clark
mansion
and
as
the
board
of
ethics
correctly
found.
The
only
way
to
prevent
such
conduct
in
the
future
is
to
prohibit
alderman
Rainey
from
participating
in
these
matters
should
alderman
Rainey's
conduct
be
allowed
to
continue
with
and
remedies
like
those
recommended
by
the
Board
of
Ethics
I
fear
the
rent,
I
fear.
G
The
residents
will
continue
to
lack
faith
in
Evanston's
government
in
question.
Whether
procedures
codified
by
the
city
code
are
being
properly
followed.
I
encourage
your
committee
can
consider
the
points
raised
here
and
determining
the
appropriate
penalty
for
their
alleman
Raines
ethics
violation.
I
understand
the
aldermen
Rainey
sits
on
the
committee
and
I
can
only
request
it
not
to
be.
Can
this
not
be
considered
in
your
analysis,
I
trust.
This
committee
will
be
well
institute.
The
most
appropriate
repercussions.
I
think
your
advance
for
respect
in
this
matter.
G
If
you
have
any
questions
or
comments,
please
that
don't
have
to
contact
me.
I
guess,
I'd
make
one
more
comment
before
I
see
some
more
time
is
it?
The
point
of
this
is,
is
I
think
you
all
know
what
really
happened
and
I
think
you
all
know
what
what
you
really
can
do
or
can't
do
and
I
think
what's
at
stake
here
is
the
faith
of
your
citizenry.
What
you
decide
to
do,
I,
really
do
think
that's
more
important
than
you
guys
really
think
it
is.
V
I
want
to
apologize,
I
held
up
a
letter
saying
we
got
the
letter,
so
I
appreciate
you
eating
wherever
you
want
that
letter.
The
first
letter
read
we
didn't
I
did
not
have
so
I've
got
the
Kingsley
letter.
I
hadn't
received
the
other
letters
appreciate
having
that
one
right:
okay,
okay,
Corporation
Counsel
I,
looked
at
the
findings,
just
one
double
shaved.
The
the
Ethics
Board
did
not
make
any
affirmative
findings
that
there
was
an
intentional
violation.
Is
that
correct
that
correct?
Okay?
V
W
V
V
V
So
that's
the
kind
of
stuff
that
we
constantly
endure
and
that
just
is
part
of
the
context
for
all
of
this,
and
you
know
we're
trying
to
advocate
for
you,
but
you
kinda
have
to
like
think
about
how
you're
advocating
for
yourselves
now
these
things
I'm
not
comfortable
with
what
happened
you
know
in
my
home
or
with
my
friends,
I'd
use
certain
language
that
I
don't
use
in
public.
So
it's
not!
Okay
to
you
know.
V
In
my
opinion,
it's
not
okay
to
approach
a
constituent
in
the
context
of
a
meeting
and
say
something
like
that:
I'm
uncomfortable
with
the
email.
Is
she
also?
So
you
know
those
are
things
that
happen:
I
wouldn't
have
handle
them
that
way,
but
I'm
just
interested
in
hearing
what
the
what
the
rest
of
the
group
has
to
say
about
it.
But
you
know,
as
far
as
you
know,
what
can
or
can't
happen.
I
follow
the
rules.
V
I
want
to
follow
the
rules,
I'm
not
going
to
start
making
stuff
up,
and
the
rules
say
what
they
say.
All
the
men
flemming.
Your
point
is
extremely
well
taken.
This
ordinance
needs
to
be.
It
needs
a
lot
of
work.
I
watched
the
videos,
Thank
You
mr.
coin,
the
of
those
meetings.
They
were
very
long,
a
lot
of
time.
V
Energy
and
work
went
into
on
behalf
of
everybody,
including
Altima
training,
but
I
feel,
like
the
the
Commission,
didn't,
have
a
good
quality
product
to
work
with,
in
terms
of
the
actual
ordinance
that
they're
trying
to
apply.
So
that's
not
fair
to
them
and
that's
something
we
can
correct,
but
unfortunately,
after
the
fact,
so
all
of
that
said
I'm
just
kind
of
hearing
interested
hear
what
my
colleagues
have
to
say.
Z
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
I
echo
alderman
Fleming
and
Aldrin
Wilson's
points
about
the
fact
that
we
need
a
clear
ethics
ordinance
and
we
need
to
have
training
for
our
Board
of
Ethics
and
clearly
we
need
to
have,
as
a
former
Oldman
Newman
said,
and
ethics
ordinance.
That
applies
to
city
staff
and
employees
and
then
an
ordinance
that
applies
to
us,
because
our
roles
are
different.
When
I
look
at
the
findings
or
the
the
decision
of
the
Board
of
Ethics
and
they
base
their
decision
on
deciding
that
all
my
rhenium
was
not
impartial.
Z
Z
Someone
could
just
as
easily
have
brought
an
ethics
complaint
against
me,
because
I
have
signal
spoken
advocated
talk
to
my
town
hall
meetings
spoken
to
people
on
the
street,
emailed
people
on
my
position
on
Harley
Clarke,
which
is
the
opposite
of
all
the
Romanies
position.
But
I've
made
it
clear
from
the
beginning
that
on
the
Harley
Clarke
I
don't
want
to
demolish
it,
and,
and
so
impartiality
is
not
part
of
our
job.
Z
In
order
to
gather
the
votes,
we
need
to
pass
some,
and
so
you
know
when
I,
when
I
read
this
I'm
I'm
just
confused
and
puzzled,
none
of
us
should
vote
on
anything
having
to
do
with
Harley
Clark
on
the
basis
of
impartiality,
not
on
one
of
us,
because
we've
all
expressed
our
opinion,
we've
all
voted
on
it,
so
I
am
I,
am
very
confused
with
that.
Do
I
also,
as
alderman
Wilson
said,
when
I
have
acted
in
the
same
way
and
behaved
in
the
same
way.
Z
No,
not
necessarily
but
many
of
the
things
that
are
described
here
are
all
part
of
our
jobs,
which
is
to
discuss
our
opinions
by
email
to
to
actively
try
to
change
viewpoints
here
on
the
council,
while
we're
voting
or
in
attempting
to
vote.
And
yes
as
alderman
Wilson
said
I,
we
don't
you
I,
don't
agree
with
using
profanity,
but
that's
not
what
they
found
here.
What
they
found
was
that
they
said
that
alderman
Rainey
had
demonstrated
her
impartiality.
Well
so
have
I.
Z
So
I
would
like
to
hear
please
you
know:
I
I'm,
I'm
here
and
I.
Have
the
mic
and
I
listen
carefully.
So
I
I'm
I'd
like
to
hear
what
my
fellow
aldermen
have
to
say
as
well.
I
have
other
things
to
say
later
on
this
evening,
but
on
the
basis
of
impartiality,
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
how
any
of
us
are
impartial.
AA
AA
I
certainly
am
big
supporter
of
our
boards
and
commissions
and
the
time
that
our
boards
and
commission
members
put
into
the
job
but
I
think
we
clearly
need
to
have
a
big
conversation
about
the
word
impartiality
since
that's
such
a
big
part,
the
Code
of
Ethics
I,
think
when
all
of
us,
when
we
first
get
an
issue
before
us,
we
that's
the
only
time
when
we
are
impartial
and
weighing
the
issue,
learning
about
it
and
making
up
our
minds.
But
then,
once
we
have
a
position,
then
we
are
advocates
for
that
position.
AA
AA
AA
Then
we
are
out
there
advocating
for
it
and
as
alderman
Winn
just
mentioned,
you
know
we
all
some
of
us
were
ending
up
on
different
sides
of
that,
but
we
have
the
same
fervor
and
belief
that
we're
that
the
decision
we
have
is
the
one
that's
the
best
for
our
community,
so
I
guess
I
just
have
a
hard
time
then
trying
to
follow
the
recommendations
from
the
board
of
ethics.
Given
that
I
have
this
fundamental
disagreement,
I
guess
over
this
question
of
impartiality,.
AB
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
I,
think
I'd
agree
with
some
of
the
comments
that
were
said
for
my
fellow
colleagues,
I'm
elected
to
make
decisions
and
I
tell
people
all
the
time.
I
have
to
make
50
decisions
every
other
council
meeting,
and
then
we
move
on
to
the
next
topic,
and
so
within
that
I
would
move
that
we.
AB
Possibly
table
this
or
add
it
to
our
Rules
Committee
in
January
to
take
a
look
at
the
codes
and
then
we
can
flush
it
out
a
little
bit
more,
but
I
think
just
based
on
the
comments.
There's
really
nothing
here
for
us
to
vote
on.
Madam
chair
is
what
I'm
gathering
from
the
comments
that
I've
heard
so,
okay.
A
So
alderman
Braithwaite
I
think
if
we
receive
and
file
the
report,
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
in
the
middle
of
last
year
the
conversation
with
Alderman
Fleming
I
expressed
my
concern
about
where
about
the
interpretation
of
the
code
of
ethics.
At
that
time,
I've
talked
to
you,
my
colleagues
on
the
council.
Long
before
any
of
this
happened
about
how
I
felt
the
code
of
ethics
was
confusing.
Sure.
W
A
I
was
not
sure
that,
with
a
confusing
code
that
the
board
really
could
understand
exactly
what
they
were
doing.
Certainly
the
public
didn't
understand
the
code,
and
neither
did
we
so
clearly.
We
need
to
go
back
and
do
that,
and
so
my
my
hope
is
that,
right
now
the
tentative
agenda
for
the
Rules
Committee
and
in
January
is
looking
at
the
code
you
take
over
in
February.
A
So
we'll
ask
the
football
on
on
to
you,
but
thank
you
I
from
what
I
hear
from
folks,
including
our
corporation
council,
it
may
make
most
sense
to
have
a
code
for
employees
and
code
for
elected
officials,
I,
think
that
will
only
help
tonight.
Unfortunately,
the
Board
of
Ethics
was
supposed
to
make
their
annual
report,
but
the
chair
could
not
attend.
She
had
conflict
tonight.
She
will
come
in
January
and
it
will
be
interesting
to
hear
a
little
bit
from
her
in
the
annual
report
from
this
year.
A
X
I
had
another
question
of
corporation
council,
so
I've
read
this
a
lot
and
I
know
that
people
in
the
audience
keep
saying
abuse
of
power
and
and
I
don't
see
that
in
the
findings
listed
here.
So
can
you
please
again
just
say
what
they
what
their
unanimous
findings
were
because
I
don't
see,
abuse
I,
know,
people
have
mentioned
it,
and
but
I
don't
see
it
listed
here
as
their
finding.
U
X
X
You
know
on
the
diet
and
out
in
the
audience
and
I,
don't
think
you
know
many
live
up
to
my
personal
standard,
but
that's
not
what
I'm
here,
for
so
the
part
about
impartiality,
I
I,
understand
that
we
we
are
partial
I,
also
understand
when
citizens
expect
us
to
be
impartial
in
the
sense
of
not
helping.
You
know
someone
or
another
build
their
case
in
a
way
that
we
haven't
done
it
for
each
person.
So
I
say
frequently
in
my
ward
meetings:
I
make
decisions
and
somebody
hated
and
someone
loved
said:
I
mean
it's.
X
You
know
flipping
a
coin
and
and
I
am
paid
or
elected
to
make
decisions.
I
do
think
that
the
citizens
expect
us
to
make
those
decisions,
I
guess
in
a
lack
of
a
better
term
and
in
a
in
an
honest
manner
that
doesn't
give
more
of
a
head
start
to
one
group
versus
the
other,
and
it's
part
of
the
reason
why
I
personally
don't
be
with
developers,
because
I
just
think
it
leaves
too
much
room
for
people
to
accuse
me
of
stuff
I'm
not
doing
so
in
the
matter
of
the
email.
X
I
think
everyone
understands
where
you
send
us
an
email,
it's
public,
it
can
be
for
you.
You
know
it
is
what
it
is,
but
with
the
issue,
its
impartiality.
I
do
agree
with
what
my
colleagues
are
saying:
I
mean
half
the
thing,
it's
about
lots
of
things,
but
what
I'm
in
this
I
tried
to
have
opinions
at
our
fair
and
I
tried
to
not.
You
know,
help
one
person
more
than
I'd
help.
X
Another
and
I
think
that
that
for
me
becomes
the
issue
and
we
look
at
the
emails
to
talk
about
helping
to
fundraise
and
helping
to
build
a
case
for
one
group
I.
Definitely
you
know
like
some
things
more
than
I,
like
two
other
things:
I
was
not
necessarily,
you
know
opposed
to
Harley
Clark
remain
standing,
but
as
I've
told
people
you
know
the
the
one
group
that
came
for
when
we
had
a
very
public
process
for
reuse
of
the
building,
didn't
have
the
money.
X
I
wouldn't
get
the
insurance
and
I
told
them
that
when
I
met
with
them
before
the
RFP
was
even
closed,
so
people
can
find
me
for
that.
But
I
was
clear.
The
whole
time
with
them
and
I
did
not
go
out
and
actively
solicit.
Another
group
I
did
meet
with
the
doones
group
when
I
decided
that
I
was
not
supporting
the
lighthouse
group,
but
I
did
not
work
harder
for
one
group
than
the
other,
so
I
think
my
assumption
is
that
it's
what
our
citizen
base
expects
of
us
and
I
expect
the
same
thing.
X
So,
while
I'm
still,
you
know,
I
I
can
understand
the
citizens
in
terms
of
wanting
us
to
represent
everyone
fairly
and
we're
not
going
to
make
everyone
happy,
and
you
know
some
people
you
work
with
more
than
the
others.
I
do
think
that
we
should
at
least
condone
or
conduct
ourselves
in
a
manner
that
isn't
you
know,
kind
of
using
information
from
one
group
to
build
the
case
of
another
I.
Do
agree
with
that.
So,
in
terms
of
what
we're
being
asked
to
do
tonight,
I
guess:
censor
censure
is
our
only
option.
X
U
X
X
V
V
You
know,
I,
think
everybody
has
to
kind
of
be
careful
what
you
wish
for,
if,
if
we're
gonna
go
back
and
look
to
every
council
member
who
somehow
either
you
know
some
in
some
ways
supported
saving
the
building,
you
know
that
might
not
get
you
very
far.
You
know,
and
that
might
put
you
in
a
place.
You
don't
want
to
be
put
you
in
a
place.
You
really
don't
want
to
be
so
you
know
you
have
to
have
faith
that
we're
gonna.
Do
what
we're
supposed
to
do.
V
You
know,
like
I,
talked
about
all
this
stuff.
You
know
people
say
things
to
us,
that's
just
the
deal.
You
know
what
I
don't
like
it,
none
of
us
like
it,
but
that's
the
deal
and
we
chose
to
do
this.
We
chose
to
choose
to
continue
doing
it,
but
we
have
to
just
kind
of
take
what
we
hear
process
it,
and
you
know,
notwithstanding
the
fact
that
people
who
support
the
building
say
oh
I'm,
so
terrible
for
trying
to
tear
it
down
and
I.
Didn't
do
that.
V
I
have
to
dismiss
that
and
I
know
it's
frustrating
and
I
get.
You
know.
I
get
angry,
but
I
have
to
compartmentalize
that
and
I
think
that's
what
all
nine
of
us
are
required
to
do
on
a
regular
basis.
Now
you
might
decide
at
some
point.
You
know
what
certain
Ultimates
not
doing
that
they're
not
doing
that
and
I'm
gonna
run
or
I'm
going
to
you
know,
support
somebody
else.
That's
why
we
have
the
electoral
process,
but
you
know
that
so
that
impartiality,
part
it's
just
and
I'm
not
getting
there.
V
I
am
very
uncomfortable
with
what
happened
at
the
at
the
at
the
hearing
and
again
I.
You
know,
hopefully
I'll
never
do
anything.
I
don't
think
I
will
but
I
miss
Keenan
height
I
saw
it.
I
saw
that
all
the
videos
I
saw
everything
that
there
was
to
see
and
and
and
what
I'm
saying
is
I'm
not
comfortable
with
what
happened.
So
again,
all
of
these
things
in
this
list
aren't
options
for
us,
but
you
know
I.
Just
don't
think
that
that
was
appropriate
conduct.
S
This
is
interesting
because
normally
I
don't
vote
on
anything
and
I.
Think
alderman
Rainey
has
suggested
a
couple
times
that
perhaps
the
mayor
should
be
removed
from
the
Rules
Committee
thanks
a
lot
for
not
acting
on
that
Ang's.
So
so
I'm
gonna
I
am
gonna,
have
a
vote
tonight
and
you
know
a
lot
of
times.
People
email
me
and
say
on
the
Harley
Clarke
debate.
S
Unlike
you
know,
my
colleagues
up
here,
I
haven't
had
to
vote
on
this
I
haven't
had
to
take
a
position
on
you
know
the
dunes
or
Evanston
lake
house
and
lake
house
and
Gardens,
but
I
throw
that
out
that
I
throw
that
out
there
am
I
conflicted
or
not,
I
think
the
question
tonight
is
about
what
is
a
conflict
of
interest?
How
do
you
define
you
know,
impartiality?
S
You
know
I've
read
all
the
materials
I've
received
lots
of
emails
from
people
and
I
appreciate
it.
Here
are
the
facts
in
my
in
my
mind,
first
alderman
Rainey
long
before
she
was
supporting
demolition
of
the
mansion,
supported
saving
the
mansion
and
it
was
with
private
investment
in
the
mansion
and
Colonel
Pritzker's
proposal
long
long
ago.
S
She
didn't
support
the
Evanston
Lake
house
and
garden
proposal,
and
she
was
pretty
forthcoming
in
that
she
did
give
money
a
hundred
dollars
to
a
group,
the
dunes
group
and
she
did
support
and
that
option
she
did
encourage
others
to
give
money
to
that
group.
In
her
ward,
using
her
City
email,
she
did
swear
at
a
resident
at
a
meeting
that
I
was
chairing
in
the
back
and
in
those
you
know,
and
and
then,
and
so
those
are
there.
Some
of
the
facts
right.
S
My
thoughts
you
know
on
all
of
this
is
that
you
know
alderman
Rainey
is
promoting
and
advancing
an
interest
that
she
agrees
with.
That's
what
all
of
these
folks
up
here
and
do
on
a
variety
of
issues.
All
the
alderman
do
that
no
different
than
alderman
Revell,
promoting
and
advancing
the
Evanston
Lake
house
and
Gardens
earlier
in
the
process
when
they
when
they
were
up-
and
you
know
when
she
was
advocating
and
working
hard
to
advocate
that
hey,
we
should
have
a
two-month
RFP
process
and
we
should
really
give
them
really
give
them
a
shot.
S
That's
what
aldermen
do
again
on
a
variety
of
issues.
Well,
I!
Don't
appreciate
that
alderman
rainy
at
times
tries
to
provoke
and
insight
in
bully
people.
I
will
tell
you
this
alderman
Rainey
cares
very,
very
deeply
about
her
ward
and
about
the
city
of
Evanston,
despite
aspects
of
her
style
and
I
personally
find
unbecoming.
The
constituents
of
her
Ward
have
repeatedly
elected
her
to
be
their
representative
in
my
18
months.
I
am
not
aware
of
alderman
Rainey,
taking
any
position,
including
on
Harley
Clark,
to
enrich
herself
personally.
S
Ethics
laws
are
in
large
part,
intended
to
make
sure
that
government,
employees
and
elected
ones
are
not
using
their
positions
to
enrich
themselves.
Well,
I
resent
that
alderman
Rainey
has
not.
You
know
personally
apologized
to
her
colleagues
up
here
for
getting
us
into
this
situation
through
using
her
City
email
to
encourage
other
people
to
give
too
cause
into
using
profanity
I.
Think
that
would
have
been
the
right
thing
Alderman
to
come
up
here
and
do
I,
don't
think
we
should
deny
constituents
of
her
Ward
a
vote
on
the
Harley
Clark
to
disenfranchise
the
eighth
ward.
S
Those
that
would
like
to
see
us,
not
surprisingly,
you
know,
take
a
different
position
on
Harley
Clarke
then
alderman
Rainey
has
have
you
know.
Written
have
come
up
and
spoken
to
eliminating
her.
From
that
conversation,
you
know
and
applying
the
rules
or
the
the
recommendation
of
the
Ethics
Board
I
am
supportive
of
censoring
alderman
Rainey
as
a
firm
message
that
she
must
modify
her
behavior
to
fit
in
with
the
standards
of
others
on
this
council
and
work
harder
to
uphold
those.
Y
W
Y
An
individual
aldermen
can
make
the
choice:
correct,
recuse
himself,
I'm,
just
gonna,
respectfully
request
that
you
consider
that
alderman
raining
I
understand
where
we
are
in
this
process
and
that
if
that
was
something
that
you
were
gonna
do
you
would
have
done
it
sooner,
but
I
think
if
you
look
at
all
the
time,
energy
expense
that's
been
put
into
this.
It's
a
silly
issue.
It's
a
bundle
of
bricks,
let's
put
it
behind
us
and
do
more
important
things
with
our
time.
W
Y
A
person
could,
but
all
the
men
could
choose
to
recuse
himself
without
an
admission
that
they
do
have
a
countess
correct.
So
it
wouldn't
be
a
conflict
of
interest.
It
would
be
an
admission
of
a
conflict
of
interest
or
just
be
a
voluntary
choice
in
the
interest
of
the
city
that
we
all
serve
to
recuse
yourself
from
voting
on
this
issue.
So
we
can
move
on
to
more
important
things.
Correct.
X
Alderman
Flemming
I
was
just
gonna
say:
can
we
can
we
call
the
question?
Is
there
a
question
to
call
yes.
X
AB
T
I
look
to
the
corporation
council
to
make
sure
I'm
saying
this
correctly,
but
it's
a
standard
practice
before
a
matter
under
Robert's
Rules
of
Order
that
if
no
action
is
required
or
desired
by
the
governing
body,
then
the
this
is
the
case.
It
was
a
report
that
the
report
is
then
received
by
the
City
Council
by
the
Rules
Committee
and
placing
it
on
file
then
indicates
no
further
action
received.
U
AC
T
U
My
preference
is
that
you,
you
Dec,
actually
take
a
vote
on
what
you
want
to
do,
but
if
it's,
if
it's
accept
in
place
I'm
found
that's
not
provided
for
within
the
rules,
it's
as
a
written
report
of
any
action
taken.
So
then
the
report
would
read:
no
action
was
taken.
They
accept
it
in
placed
on
file.
It's.
A
Z
Z
U
G
A
U
V
W
AB
Z
I
just
wanted
to
finish:
I
believe
it
it
should
be
made.
It
should
be
made
clearer
that
by
receiving
and
putting
on
file,
the
council
is
voting
no
on
censure.
If
we,
if
you
vote
YES
on
that,
you're
voting,
no
and
censure
I,
think
that's
very
confusing
to
leave.
The
motion
like
that
and
I
would
suggest
that
the
maker
of
the
motion
modify
the
motion
to
be
very
clear
in
terms
of
what
the
outcome
is
and.
U
U
A
A
A
A
A
A
AB
A
AA
U
A
S
AC
S
A
So
look
the
motion
passes
five
to
four
okay,
we're
gonna
I.
Just
did
yes.
N
Z
Z
AC
U
S
Z
Yeah
aldermen
win:
okay,
I'd
I
would
like
when
we
come
back
in
January
for
our
January
meeting.
I
would
like
us
to
put
on
that
a
discussion
of
the
use
of
profanity
by
any
member
of
the
City
Council
towards
any
other
member
of
the
City
Council
towards
the
city
staff
and
towards
any
member
of
the
public,
while
they
are
acting
as
an
alderman.
Z
A
Meredith
I'm
sorry
alderman
Braithwaite.
Thank.
A
AB
A
AB
Reason
that
I
didn't
vote
no
is
because
I
think
we've
all
experienced
bad
language
in
many
different
places,
and
so
I'm
actually
going
to
look
to
the
public
on
this
and
I
would
love
to
receive
an
email.
I
have
received
the
same
threats,
bad
behavior,
foul
language
and
I.
Think
if
we're
going
to
really
focus
on
the
public
setting
of
a
meeting
that
what
happens
if
a
resident
uses
that
same
type
of
language
and
threatening
tone
towards
it
right,
no
right
right,
right,
right.
G
AB
All
bulletproof
over
here,
none
of
us
have
families
or
feelings
when
people
use
profanity
and
threaten
us
there.
That's
there
you
have
it.
I
would
like
to
be
able
to
explore
that
civility
on
behalf
of
the
residents
and
that's
what
I'm
directing
our
corporate
cop
I
would
like
to
research
that
to
see
if
there
any
municipalities
that
have
that
civility
rule
with
their
native
public
saying
yes,.
Y
T
She
remembers
the
committee,
the
Corporation,
Counsel
and
I
have
prepared
a
memorandum
regarding
the
appeal
process
to
the
Preservation
Commission
on
decisions
of
just
certificates
of
appropriateness
pursuant
to
the
city
code,
section
2,
8,
8
g7
the
authority
to
review,
grant
or
deny
appeals
of
certificate
of
appropriateness
pursuant
to
the
subsection
shall
vest
in
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee.
So
long
as
the
membership
of
SEC
committee
consists
of
all
seated
aldermen
otherwise
said
authority
rests
with
the
council
or
to
do
the
authorized
committee.
T
Since
the
planning
development
area
does
not
consist
of
all
seated
aldermen,
the
City
Council
holds
the
power
to
review
the
request
for
an
appeal
and
accepted
subsequently
hear
the
appeal.
We
are
asking
that
the
council
confirm
this
understanding,
there's
a
matter
that
is
proposed
to
come
back
to
the
council
at
your
next
meeting
on
December
10th,
based
on
the
previous
understanding.
That
matter
would
be
placed
before
the
full
City
Council,
rather
than
go
to
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee.
T
Since
the
current
makeup
of
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
does
not
consist
of
all
seated
aldermen,
so
we're
asking
this
evening
for
the
confirmation
of
what
is
the
practice,
we
all
recognize
that
this
language
is
not
as
clear
as
it
should
be
and
I
know.
The
law
department
has,
on
its
docket
an
opportunity
to
review
this
language
at
a
future
time.
Is
that
correct
as
mace
ago.
U
A
Z
Z
But
when
I
look
at
in
the
past-
and
it's
interesting
that
we
have
former
alderman
Newman
here
and
when
we
have
had
appeals
from
the
Preservation
Commission
before
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
has
looked
really
in
great
detail
at
the
issues
of
preservation,
about
with
respect
with
respect
to
the
applicant
and
when
I
think
about
the
times
when
we've
had
this
come
before
us.
That
took
a
lot
of
time
on
the
part
of
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
and
I.
Z
S
Thank
you,
ma'am
sure,
I
guess,
listen
to
you
alderman
Winn
and
then
I'm
unclear.
My
understanding,
City
Attorney,
was
that
in
the
past,
when
there
have
been
appeals
of
the
Preservation
Commission,
they
have
come
to
the
full
City
Council
Alderman
when
I
thought
they
in
this
understood
that
you
were
saying
that
they
have
come
to
a
Planning
and
Development
Committee.
Z
U
What
did
you
find?
Alderman,
wen
and
members
of
the
Rules
Committee,
the
Community
Development
Director
did
some
research
along
with
her
staff
in
the
past,
appeals
for
at
least
the
last
ten
years
have
all
gone
to
the
full
City
Council.
So
we
did
check
past
practice
to
ensure
that
her
interpretation
is
correct.
Now,
maybe
that
was
prior
to
the
adoption.
We
even
went
all
the
way
back
to
the
mid
90s,
and
that
was
still
the
case
yeah.
So.
S
S
Council
I
had
had
several
email
exchanges
with
Alderman
Fisk
and
alderman
Rainey,
and
not
surprisingly,
and
consistent
with
our
prior
email
communication,
both
alderman
Fisk
and
Rainey
vehemently
and
definitively
stated
that
I
was
wrong
and
that
it
should
go
to
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee.
Alderman
win
also
concurred.
S
You
know,
as
she
stated
sort
of
with
that
it
wasn't
sort
of
publicly
vociferous
in
her
opinion,
so
Alderman
when
I
appreciate
I
appreciate
that
I
am
NOT
standing
up
here
today
and
telling
you
I
know
definitively
whether
this
should
go
to
the
full
City
Council
or
to
go
to
Planning
and
Development.
All
I'm
asking
is
that
we
have
an
honest
conversation
and
give
some
direction
here
to
the
full
body
on
where
this
appeal
of
the
Preservation
Commission's
finding
on
Harley
Clark
should
go.
A
So
the
decision
was
on
it,
demerit
917
edge
mayor
to
send
it
to
the
full
City
Council,
and
that
to
me
establishes
some
precedent.
There
I
did
ask
staff
if
they
would
check,
because
it
it
could
be
at
some
point
and
alderman
Newman.
You
may
remember
this
at
some
point.
Glad
you're
here
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
I
believe
consisted
of
all
the
members
on
the
City
Council
for
a
short
time.
It
didn't
never
did
I
thought
I,
remembered
everybody's.
A
There
was
a
short
time
because
no
one
wanted
not
to
be
on
P
and
D,
because
that
was
where
the
action
was
and
I
asked
the
staff,
if
they
could
tell
me
when
that
was
it
was
sometime
in
the
90s
I.
Think.
My
guess
is
that
that's
where
the
wording
came
from,
but
I
don't
know
that
and
I
don't
have
I'm
not
going
to
take
the
time
to
try
to
figure
it
out.
But
I
do
think
that
now,
with
its
mere
court
and
we've
created
a
precedence
and
a.
U
Little
bit
of
legislative
history
and
mm,
or
yes,
2006
ordinance,
one
1706
alderman
walt
woolen
ola,
noted
that
one
of
the
concerns
of
the
Preservation
Commission
is
that
the
City
Council
could
change
from
presently
being
all
nine
aldermen
to
a
decreasing
number
in
the
future.
Yeah
aldermen
motion
to
amend
the
ordinance
to
state
that
all
nine
aldermen
be
present
on
the
planning
plan.
Indian
Development,
Committee
aldermen
will
actually
alderman
win
actually
motion.
U
A
S
T
A
W
A
Okay,
item
item
six
and
I'm:
just
going
to
go
to
the
items
that
we
really
need
to
cover
tonight
and
we'll
just
have
to
put
some
of
this
on
the
agenda
for
January,
like
manager,
so
direction
on
to
the
board
of
ethics
on
Appeals
and
motion
for
reconsideration
regarding
rehearing
issues.
Mr.
city
manager,
yes,.
T
Once
again,
a
memorandum
from
the
Corporation
Counsel
myself
on
page
27
of
your
packet
of
the
board
of
ethics,
has
made
a
request
to
the
Rules
Committee
for
some
guidance
regarding
a
respect
to
a
motion
for
reconsideration,
the
the
board
of
ethics.
I'll,
just
read
the
the
memoranda.
Given
the
topic,
the
administration
of
the
Code
of
Ethics
is
silent
on
appeals
to
the
Board
of
Ethics
decisions.
T
Typically,
the
city
code
addresses
appeals
and
outlines
the
process
to
appeal:
a
decision
on
November
5th
2018,
an
individual
filed,
a
motion
for
reconsideration,
viewed
as
an
appeal
by
the
board.
Following
a
hearing
on
October
24th,
the
Board
found
that
it
cannot
conduct
an
appeal
because
the
board
cannot
review
its
own
decision
on
appeal.
In
addition,
the
board
sought
clarity
and
if
an
appeal
can
be
afforded
the
board
reviewed
the
motion
for
reconsideration
and
addressed
it
and
their
findings
and
is
detailed
at
the
bottom
of
the
page.
T
There
saying,
therefore,
the
Board
of
Ethics
asked
us,
the
Rules
Committee,
to
make
a
determination
on
how
one
appeals
a
decision
of
the
Board
of
Ethics
and
if
the
matter
should
be
addressed
by
the
Rules
Committee
or
referred
to
the
City
Council,
who
couldn't
point
a
hearing
officer
and
hold
a
hearing
on
this
matter.
So
the
this
is
a
request
from
the
board
of
aspects
asking
for
guidance.
K
My
name
is
Sean
Jones
and
I
am
representing
alderman
Robyn
Ruth
Simmons
I
will
state
for
the
record
of
the
outset
that
I
instructed
my
client
not
to
be
here,
because
I
don't
believe
it's
appropriate
for
her
to
even
be
sitting
up
here
when
a
matter
concerning
a
Board
of
Ethics
claim
against
her
is
pending
before
you.
Obviously,
some
here
disagree
with
that
and
apparently
we
just
broke
a
four
to
four
tie
with
autumn
and
rainy
voting
not
to
censor
herself.
K
There
has
to
be
all
I'm
saying
is:
there
has
to
be
a
better
way
to
conduct
Board
of
Ethics
hearings
and
to
deal
with
these
matters?
My
clients
first
received
a
board
of
ethics
complaint
in
2017.
The
Board
of
Ethics
dealt
with
that
and
found
no
impropriety
again
board
of
ethics.
Plate
was
filed
on
February
February
11th
2018.
It
was
heard
on
March
20th.
It
was
heard
on
June
19th,
August,
21st,
September,
25th,
October,
24th
and
November
20th.
K
K
There's
that
you
all
have
discussed
it,
and
hopefully
you
will
revisit
your
your
code
of
ethics,
but
part
of
that
has
to
be
streamlining
this
process
so
that
a
client,
whether
it
be
an
employee,
whether
it
be
an
elected
official,
doesn't
have
to
go
through
seven
or
eight
hearings
on
a
single
board
of
ethics,
complaints,
I
trust
that
you
will
do
the
right
thing
and
decide
that
there
is
no
right
to
an
appeal.
That's
seven.
K
Eight
hearings
is
enough,
but
I
also
would
say:
I
echo
some
of
what
you're
saying
that
we
as
a
community
need
to
do
better.
We
need
to
treat
our
elected
officials
better.
We
need
to
be
more
civil
as
a
whole.
I
hope
everyone
will
take
it
to
heart,
but
I
also
hope
that
you
will
do
the
right
thing
and
say
that
there
is
no
appeal
that
accept
them
place
this
on
file
and
let's
move
on
seven
hearings
is
enough.
Thank
you.
AB
AB
A
AB
V
A
AD
Also,
she
was
not
informed
of
this
agenda
item
so
I'm.
Reading
a
comment
from
misty
Wittenberg.
The
complaint
inform
18
Board
of
Ethics
0:01,
who
can't
be
here
tonight
because
she's
celebrating
Hanukkah
with
her
family,
the
advisory
opinion
that
you
are
reading
tonight
is
not
representative
of
Miss
Wittenberg's
complaint,
both
the
consideration,
the
arguments
provided
and
the
findings
were
drafted
by
the
respondents.
Primary
legal
has
listed
on
the
city
website
and
provided
to
the
board
in
memos
dated
March,
20th
and
May
22nd.
AD
Z
I
I
would
like
to
comment
that
I
do
think
that
when
we
bring
back
our
ethics
ordinance,
we
need
to
have
a
provision
in
it
that
provides
for
the
equivalent
of
a
rule
11
and
which
prohibits
constant
filing
of
frivolous
complaints,
and
you
know
in
the
Code
of
Civil
Procedure.
If
you
are
prohibited,
anyone
is
prohibited
from
continually
filing
a
complaint
and
on
penalty
of
sanction
from
a
judge
and
I.
Think
in
this
instance,
I'd
like
to
find
out
what
other
board
of
ethics
have
done.
Clearly,
this
can't
be
the
first
time
this
has
happened.
Z
I
think
it's
unfair.
We
need
to
have
some
some
ability
to
stop
someone
from
weaponizing
abortive
ethics
complaints
and
causing
the
type
of
repeated
hearings,
and
that
that
all
Monroe
Simmons
has
had
to
go
through.
They
reached
a
decision.
We
need
to
reach
conclusion
and
we
should
not.
We
should
we
need
to
have
something
in
our
rules,
just
as
we
have
in
Federal
Rules
of
Civil
Procedure
that
prohibit
you
from
making
a
slight
modification
and
filing
again
that's
a
waste
of
the
time
of
the
board
of
ethics.
Z
S
A
W
W
AA
Just
I
would
I
just
wanted
to
echo
what
alderman
one
was
saying
that
we
can't
let
the
code
of
ethics
being
used
as
a
tool
to
harass
elected
officials,
and
one
suggestion
that
we
might
look
at
would
be
whether
some
of
the
complaints.
When
you
look
at
the
details,
some
of
them
could
be
handled
administratively
because
some
of
them
very
clearly
weren't
issues
that
fell
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Board
of
Ethics
and
so
the
then
it
could
have
streamlined
what
the
Board
of
Ethics
did
have
to
deal
with.
X
Golden
Fleming
am
I
only
in
reading
this
I
I,
don't
know
if
it,
even
if
it's
the
city
or
the
complaint,
quite
frankly
or
as
alderman,
suffered
and
said,
you
know
the
amount
that
we
as
taxpayers,
I
pay
taxes
to
pay
for
outside
counsel.
X
In
a
case
like
this,
where
you
know
it's
the
continuation
of
what
I
understand
to
be
kind
of
the
same
case,
I
do
think
again.
We
need
to
look
at
our
ethics
board
and
there
does
need
to
be
some
kind
of
ability
for
people
to
have
to
appeal
or
to
refill.
You
know
their
case,
but
in
this
case
the
dusting
like
it
has
gone
through.
It
has
gone
through
as
much
as
it
can
with
our
current
Ethics
Board,
with
the
information
they
have
is
if
Miss
Wittenberg
has
a
new
case
to
bring
forward.
X
Obviously
that's
available
for
her,
but
I,
don't
I,
just
don't
see
the
benefit
of
having
the
same
people
with
the
same
rules.
Look
at
what
I
assumed
to
be
the
same
facts
and
assume
they're
going
to
come
up
with
another
another
harm
decision,
as
I
have
for
mr.
Newman
I
appreciate
mr.
Jones,
but
I
I,
don't
oh
I
lost
my
head.
I
was
gonna
chastise
you
and
I
forgot
what
I
was
gonna
say,
but
I
do
think.
X
I
want
us
again
to
remain
clear
of
of
accusation,
so
my
thing
to
you
was
just
I:
don't
think
it
for
me
makes
a
difference
whether
or
not
she
lost
the
previous
case.
I
mean
it
could
be
a
neighbor
who
just
doesn't
like
you
I,
think
we'd
have
to
make
sure
we
use
our
ethics
board
and
code
appropriately
and
we're
not
taking
people
through
there
unnecessarily,
but
I.
X
Don't
think
that
as
an
attorney,
you
need
to
mention
that
this
was
maybe
the
reason
why
she's
going
through
that
process,
but
I
would
also
say
in
this
case
I
will
not
support
on
the
continuation
of
this
case.
Okay,
so
let's
call
the
question.
Oh
and
my
last
thinks
our
judges
I
do
want
to
make
sure
I
don't
know,
but
according
to
miss
Welch
I
do
just
want
to
encourage
staff
to
make
sure
that
people
are
notified.
X
When
there
is,
you
know
their
case
or
you
know,
their
topic
is
gonna,
be
an
agenda
decided
and
I
asking
if
we
did
or
not
I
just
want
to
say
publicly
I
want
to
make
sure
people
are
notified.
We've
had
that
with
the
seatback
cases
where
people
say
they
don't
know
that
it's
coming
before
the
Human
Services
and.
A
A
T
X
W
T
Is
on
the
very
last
page
of
your
packet
I
think
this
was
largely
consistent
with
past
practice.
I
think
the
council
had
talked
about
a
joint
and
having
a
meeting
in
the
first
meeting
in
February
about
that
affordable
housing.
So
that's
reflected
there
and
I.
Think
as
we
do,
we
kind
of
take
the
Presidents
Day
weekend
the
and
the
Martinville
Martin
Luther
King
weekend,
January
February
kind
of
based
on
the
business
before
so
there
have
been
cancellations
of
those
meetings.
So
we
just
point
that
out,
but
otherwise
we'd
ask
that
the
council,
okay.
A
A
S
Oh
America
to
think
thank
you,
madam
chair,
the
one
we
talked
about
last
year.
That's
several
people
had
a
challenge
with
is
Spring
Break,
the
Monday
of
Spring
Break,
and
if
you
went
with
the
public
school,
Spring,
Break
I
think
not
sure.
If
that's
the
18th
of
the
25th
this
year,
we'll
find
out
I'm
again
if
it
works
for
everybody,
I
can
tell
you,
I've
got
a
problem
with
you
know:
I
got
a
problem
with
both
of.
AB
AB
Y
T
Z
T
A
Y
T
So
well
all
have
been
suffered
in
the
mayor
and
I
have
been
talking
about
when
to
have
the
meeting
that
didn't
happen
prior
to
that
meeting.
So
we're
gonna
try
to
have
a
goal-setting
meeting
our
objective
setting
meeting
for
the
city
manager
in
January
and
then
once
we've
done
that
scheduled
the
next
one.
Okay.
So
so
we'll
come
back
with
a
revised
schedule,
aveiro.
Y
X
A
T
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
you
have
four
Mondays
in
January
mayor
Haggerty
is
asked
that
we
look
for
a
time
for
the
city
manager
goal
objective
setting
as
a
date,
and
then
then
we
would
have
a
Rules
Committee
meeting
I.
Don't
would
not
propose
the
7th
just
because
of
holidays.
I
think
that
that
would
just
take
away
additional
staff
time
to
prepare
for
the
meeting.
So
then
we
have
the
21st
of
January,
which
is
the
third
Monday.
We
could
have
that
be
the
rules.
The
Martin
Luther,
King
holiday
I,
believe
is
the
week
before.
T
No
it's
not
so.
We
were
already
looking
at
the
22nd
of
January
for
the
third
week
meeting,
so
we
could
have
rules
on
the
22nd
and
potentially
the
city
manager
discussion.
Although
I
don't
know,
if
you
want
to
try
to
do
both
on
the
same
evening,
if
not,
we
will
likely
need
to
find
a
non
Monday
sometime
in
the
month
of
January
for
one
or
the
other.
T
A
U
A
T
A
T
A
P
P
Okay,
so
what
is
lobbying
lobbying
is
essentially
communicating
and
writing,
or
in
or
orally
speaking
with
the
intent
to
influence
decision
of
a
government
person
of
a
city
staff
or
government
person.
It's
a
legal
activity.
It's
an
exercise
of
the
First
Amendment
right
to
petition
the
government,
but
ultimately
it
is
about
communicating
with
government
officials
or
government
employees
to
influence
their
decisions
trying
to
it's
also
about
trying
to
influence
city.
Well,
it's
primarily
about
influencing
city
officials
on
behalf
of
another
individual
or
entity
and
I
want
to
say,
I
mean
next.
P
Lobbying
is
also
does
a
lot
of
good
in
society
too,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
I
point
that
out
that
many
of
our
many
sectors
of
our
society,
children,
elderly
and
others-
have
been
positively
impacted
by
lobbying.
So
I,
just
wanna
make
be
real
clear
on
what
lobbying
is
that
encompasses?
Unfortunately,
it's
taken
on
sort
of
a
vilified
profile,
so
lobby
ordinance
in
Evanston
would
reflect
good
government.
It
would
I
think
I
just
went
backwards.
Sorry,
okay,
so
lobbyists
the
lobbyist
doesn't
have
lobbyists
on
a
calling
card.
P
A
lobbyist
could
be
like
the
director
of
economic
development
for
an
institution
usually
frequently
their
lawyers
lobbyists,
but
a
lobbyist
is
always
determined
by
his
or
her
activity,
meaning
trying
to
meeting
to
try
to
influence
government
or
staff
city
government
staff
to
influence
decisions.
Again,
as
I
said,
lobbyists
can
make
really
valuable
contributions
to
informed
an
effective
government
lobbies,
a
lobbyist
lobbies
on
behalf
of
another
person
and
usually
for
some
sort
of
compensation,
but
not
always
so
you
don't
always
have
to
get
paid
to
be
a
lobbyist
and
I've
attached.
P
P
Affairs
between
the
residents
and
the
city
right
now,
the
city
government,
in
the
lack
of
trust,
I,
really
hope,
we'll
consider
moving
this.
But
we
do
have
the
city
of
Chicago
right
next
to
us
and
so
that's
a
fabulous
resource
and
we
have
like
I,
said
their
executive
director
has
prepared
pro
bono
to
work
with
the
city
of
Evanston
to
help
Evanston
set
up
the
best
possible
Lobby
ordinance.
P
Sorry,
okay,
so
who
is
not
a
lobbyist
or
who
is
exempt
from
lobby
ordinances
just
to
clarify
people
who
represent
themselves
homeowners,
citizens,
taxpayers
are
exempt
from
registering
as
lobbyists
the
press
is
exempt.
So
if
a
newspaper,
the
roundtable,
writes
an
editorial
in
favor
of
something
that's
not
considered.
P
The
point
of
a
lobby
ordinance
is
secrecy
right
so
that
we
minimize
secrecy
so
that
the
residents
have
a
right
to
know
how
you
all
are
being
influenced
what
meetings
you're
having
with
what
lobbyists
etc,
so
that
we
have
a
better
sense
as
to
understand
why
you're
making
the
decisions
you
are,
how
does
a
lobby
ordens
work
people
register
annually,
usually
through
a
board
of
ethics?
That's
the
case
of
Chicago.
Sometimes
it's
through
a
clerk's
office,
as
in
New,
York,
City
and
frequently
you
also
just
have
independent
Lobby
commissions.
P
Registered
lobbyists
then
provide
periodic
disclosures
quarterly
every
six
months,
whatever
is
determined
by
one's
particular
jurisdiction
and
when
they
make
those
reports
they
report
on
who
they're
lobbying
for
like
who
their
client
is.
If
they've
been
paid
to
lobbying.
If
so,
how?
Much
again
you
don't
always
have
to
receive
payment,
though
to
be
a
lobbyist
which
government
officials
in
departments
you've
lobbied
and
what
matters
you've
lobbied
on
and
then
a
list
of
gifts,
meals,
etc.
P
It's
data
portal
on
lobbying
just
to
give
you
an
idea
so,
for
example,
and
it's
really
the
excessive
I
want
you
to
wanted
everybody
to
see
the
accessibility
and
how
important
this
would
be
for
residents.
So
I
could,
for
example,
say
I
wanted
to
know.
I
see,
Airbnb
is
trying
to
is
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
about.
Maybe
changing
zoning
or
something
for
Airbnb,
ease
and
I
want
to
know.
P
If
there's
someone
in
town
lobbying
I
can
put
in
their
portal,
I
can
put
Airbnb
and
then
I'm,
given
the
name
of
the
lobbyist
and
with
that
was
so
it's
real
nice
like
as
a
resident
or
someone
who's
concerned.
You
can
do
that
without
falling
to
see
if
there's
lobbying
going
on
and
then
I
can
take
that
name
and
put
it
into
search
lobbyists
I
would
enter
that
person's
name.
P
That
was
next
to
the
Airbnb
and
then
I
get
a
whole
list
of
their
of
that
person
that
lobbyists
activities
for
Airbnb,
for
example,
so
very
user,
friendly,
yeah
and
I
just
wanted
to
show
also
some
of
the
the
point
of
a
Lobby
ordinances
there's
teeth
in
it.
It
is
binding.
So,
for
example,
if
you
fail
to
register
as
a
lobbyist,
just
this
is
a
recent
case
of
a
lobbyist
for
uber
that
failed
to
register.
That
was
found
to
be
communicating
lobbying
Rahm
Emanuel
on
his
personal
email
and
every
day
that
he
acceded
I.
P
P
Studying
this,
they
travel
around
the
nation,
comparing
notes
with
other
attorneys,
so
I
think
it's
a
fabulous
resource
in
speaking
at
in
depth
with
Steve
Berlin.
He
did
mention
San
Francisco.
He
thought
that
that
was
a
little
bit
more
comprehensive
and
robust.
So
I
I
also
looked
at
plenty
of
other
ones,
much
smaller
and
towns,
much
smaller
than
Evanston.
There
are
thousands
of
ordinances
and
hundreds
and
hundreds
for
towns
that
are
much
smaller
than
Evanston
again.
This
is
about
building
trust.
P
It's
about
shedding
light
on
our
understanding
of
why
our
elected
representatives,
as
well
as
city
staff,
make
the
decisions
they
do
so
again
about
costs
in
terms
of
setting
up
a
lobby
ordinance.
Mostly
all
the
costs
would
be
offset
through
fees
and
again
you
set
fees
so
that
they
would
so
that
they
would
appropriately
pay
for
registration
fees.
They
can't
be
too
high.
The
idea
is
not
to
hit
the
lobbyists
hard
with
really
exorbitant
fees.
I
think
Illinois
did
that
and
got
sued
by
the
ACLU
because
they
set
them
too
high.
P
So
the
idea
is
to
make
it
accessible.
So
the
fees
I
think
Chicago
is
$350
registration
and
then
there's
fines,
and
then
you
also
save
a
lot
through
lawsuits.
There's
a
correlation
with
fewer
lawsuits
with
the
cities
that
have
Lobby
ordinances
or
provisions.
It
could
be
a
provision
as
part
of
your
ethics,
ordinance
and
I
said
the
first
year.
Might
be
a
little
bit
higher
at
when
you
set
up
the
website
the
portal,
but
otherwise
the
cost
is
not
an
issue.
P
Okay,
so
who
enforces
it
and
ministers
it
that
varies
from
city
from
municipalities,
municipality
in
Chicago.
It
is
the
board
of
ethics.
It's
a
provision
within
the
board
of
ethics
and
I.
Believe
it's
in
a
packet
that
I
put
together
that
you
have
and
other
places
such
as
New
York,
it's
the
clerk's
office
and
other
places.
It's
an
independent
lobby,
Commission
and
just
thinking
loosely
and
talking
about
it
with
Steve
Berlin
of
Chicago,
the
executive
director.
Maybe
something
for
Evanston
would
be
maybe
an
independent
commission
that
would
work
in
conjunction
with
our
legal
department.
P
So
we
would
just
need
to
determine
the
most
efficient
and
cost-effective
means
to
administer
the
lobby
ordinance.
So
there
is
Steve
asked
me
to
share.
He
said:
please
share
his
contact
information
with
all
of
you,
so
that
you
could
contact
him
to
work
with
him
to
set
up
a
Lobby
ordinance
moving
forward.
I
hope
that
we
really
can
in
Evanston
create
greater
openness
and
trust
with
our
Evanston
city
government
and
advance
the
principles
of
good
government
I.
P
Ask
tonight
that
you
direct,
please
direct
the
legal
department
with
assistance
and
experts
such
as
the
executive
director,
Steve
Berlin,
to
draft
a
lobby
ordinance
or
Lobby
provision
for
consideration
at
a
future
City
Council
meeting
I
hope
you
will
all
seriously
consider
moving
forward
on
this
to
restore
trust
in
our
city
and
trust
in
your
decisions.
Thank
you.
S
Thank
thank
you.
Miss
Kelly,
I
have
a
question,
so
you
know
I,
think
you're,
considering
any
new
ordinance.
We
need
to
understand.
You
know
what
problem
we're
solving
and
so
can
you,
you
know,
give
us
examples
of.
You
know
problems
that
exist
here,
concrete
examples
that
you
know
this
ordinance
would.
W
P
Know
at
the
point
is
it's
about
secrecy,
it's
about
when
people
what
I
can
say
that
there
have
been
many
decisions
taken
here,
they've
been
very
unpopular
and
so
people
wonder
I
will
say
people
wonder
you
know.
Why
are
wise,
City
Council,
making
this
decision
when
so
many
people
have
poured
out
saying
no,
the
album
great
example
right
John,
nobody
wanted
the
album
in
town
I.
You
know
we
probably
should
have
had
a
referendum,
but
we
didn't.
P
We
didn't
get
it
together
to
have
a
referendum
to
show
you
that
in
fact
the
silent
majority
did
not
want
the
oppinion
either.
But
people
wonder
about
things
like
that
right.
They
want
to
know
so
they
stopped
wondering
if
you
have
the
lobby
ordinance.
We
say:
oh,
no,
okay,
so
this
was
it
you
two
people
would
have
an
opportunity,
then
to
it
would
help
to
sue
those
tensions.
I
think
when
there's
very
own,
particularly
that
would
be
probably
the
one
scenario
when
you
have
a
City
Council
and
city
staff
working.
P
S
P
Correct
so
now
there
are
there.
Aren't
you
guys
might
like
this
one?
Some
cities
do
in
fact
have
grassroots
Lobby
laws.
Some
cities
do
have
that
word.
The
grassroots
organization
registers
a
Chicago
doesn't
most
do
not
because
of
what
it
entails.
It's
you
know,
because
of
the
nature
of
grassroots
I.
Won't
you
know,
give
you
a
lecture
now
about
what
grassroots
means,
but,
but
some
actually
do
have
that
if
that's
the
kind
of
thing
you're
referring
to
okay.
S
So
Orion,
let's
use
another
example
of
the
potential
development
on
the
library
parking
lot.
You
have
developers
there.
You
have
two
important
structures
next
to
it,
the
Women's
Club
in
the
Frances
Willard
house,
with
all
of
them
and
all
of
them
have
to
register,
because
I
can
tell
you
regarding
that
particular
project
I've
met
with
them
all
because
they
call
me
up
and
pretty
much
I
meet
with
a
lot
of
people
right
as
the
mayor,
and
you
know,
people
have
different
person.
You
know
perspectives
up
here.
Mine
is
as
an
elected
official.
S
S
P
A
busy
of
a
financial
interest
right,
that's
exactly
right!
So
in
that
case,
like
I
say
it
depends
on
what
the
activity
is.
So
if
he
is
meeting
representing
all
the
shareholders,
whatever
representing
other
people
but
going
to
push
for
this
would
be
kind
of
like
a
it's
close
to
a
probe.
There's
also
procurement,
lobbying
lobbying
again
Tom.
P
You
know
you
know
more
about
this,
probably
feel
free
to
jump
in
and
help
me
out,
but
so
yes,
so
someone
like
that
would
also
have
to
register
as
a
lobbyist
because
they
are
trying
to
move
an
agenda
forward.
That's
going
to
be
voted
for
on
behalf
of
others,
not
just
a
single.
So
if
you're
a
single
resident,
you
don't
know.
S
W
P
S
P
If
they
were
going
up
up
to
you-
and
let
me
go
back
to
this,
I
think
that
in
that
case
they
are
not
per
se
trying
to
I,
don't
know
about
the
Women's
Club
I
can't
say:
I
know
that
individuals
and
residents
and
taxpayers
and
citizens
representing
themselves
no,
but
maybe
if
they
are
representing
the
Women's
Club
others
besides
themselves,
then
then,
yes,
is
that
correct?
Do
you
know
like
if
food,
if
they're
right,
if
they're
most
thing
most
of
the
time,
it's
that
they're
being
compensated?
T
Y
Think
any
ordinance
that
you
or
mr.
Berlin
or
whoever
would
draft
wouldn't
cover
the
circumstance.
You're
not
gonna,
cover
every
circumstance
that
you're
talking
about
correct
and
that
we
don't
have
kind
of
like
routine
and
repeating
interests
that
appear
before
us.
The
way
that
you
would
have
in
in
Springfield,
where
it
you
know,
come
all
that
is
it
as
a
team
of
lobbyists.
We
don't
have
that
whatever
thing
so.
P
I
think
people
feel
like
we
do
because
of
the
amount
of
development
that's
been
happening
and
and
also
I
have
to
address
it.
I'd
be
remiss
not
to
address
the
most
obvious,
AB,
northwestern
and
I
just
want
to
say
really
quickly.
I
go
way
back.
My
great-great
grandfather,
a
Hainan
turtle,
was
in
the
first
graduating
class
of
five,
my
son's
a
senior
there.
P
I
did
graduate
work
there,
but
just
simply
because
northwestern
is
in
this
town
that
alone
that
enormous
institution
only
because
of
northwestern,
we
should
have
a
lobby
ordinance,
if
only
because
of
Northwestern,
not
to
mention
all
the
developments
that's
had
that
have
been
going
on.
We
should
know
when
northwestern
when
people
are
meeting
on
behalf
of
Northwestern's
economic
development
or
whatever
else
in
the
interests
of
Northwestern.
P
P
That's
trying
to
meet
with
an
official
come
again
the
definition
I
think
you
know
what
it
is.
It's
communicating
in
any
form
writing
or
speaking,
to
influence
a
decision
decision
in
City
Council
for
others,
and
that
would
mean,
if
you're
employed
by
northwestern
but
you're
moving
it
for
a
northwestern
whoever
the
others.
All
the
people
are
northwestern's,
absolutely
you
would
register
and
that
would
be
a
huge
benefit
to
our
town.
Y
Let's
try
to
think
of
like
a
workable
registration
framework.
I,
don't
think
you're
gonna
get
enough
fees
to
cover
the
cost
city
of
Chicago.
It's
a
350-mile
error
fees
right.
This
is
worth
paying
mm-hmm
here,
I,
don't
think
people
with
one-off
issues
would
necessarily
pay
it
I'm
trying
to
think
of
just
things
that
we've
had
in
the
last
year.
Yeah.
P
Y
Y
P
P
P
And
developers-
and
we
have
think
like
an
I
said
when
we
have
developments
going
on
when
we
have
northwestern
everybody,
knows
northwestern
lobbies.
Give
me
a
break,
you
know.
Are
you
something
to
tell
me
Northwestern,
never,
lobbies,
City,
Council
or
city
government?
Are
you
gonna
say
that?
Can
any
of
you
honestly
tell
me
right
now
that
Northwestern
has
never
had
anybody
come
to
you
and
meet
with
you
to
lobby
on
their
on
their
behalf
right.
P
A
For
the
residents
so
I
mean
I.
Think
that's
what
the
Nu
City
Committee
is
for
to
give
the
residents
of
that
area
in
the
t.
1
t
2:
u
1
r1
zoning
district
a
way
to
understand
and
hear
from
northwestern
directly
about
any
advance
planning
that
they
have.
That
will
impact
the
residential
neighborhood
that
surrounds
the
university.
P
P
Right
yeah,
oh,
you
have
a
board
of
ethics
to
Judi
anyway.
I
think
this
is.
This
is
very
concrete
and
again
talents
much
smaller
than
this
habit
and
it's
not
costing
them
their
meeting
again.
You
set
your
fees
to
appropriately
pay
to
pay
for
appropriate
administrative
fees,
and
you
and
you
work
from
there
and
what
you
do.
P
Is
you
create
a
again
you're
gonna,
create
more
trust,
you're,
going
to
create
more
transparency,
you're
going
to
shed
light
on
what
is
influencing
all
of
you,
as
well
as
our
city
staff
and
there's
absolutely
no
reason
we
shouldn't
do
this
I
get
in
towns.
Much
smaller
do
this
and
it's
not
bankrupting
them.
It's
not!
It's
not
splitting
them
in
the
red,
alder
birth
weight,
I.