►
From YouTube: Ethics Commission Meeting 030823
Description
Ethics Commission Meeting 030823
A
B
A
A
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much.
Okay,
I
subsection
B
on
item
four
is
going
to
be
the
presentation
of
the
legal
sufficiency
which
is
it
was
reviewed
by
outside
independent
Council,
acting
as
the
ethics
compliance
officer.
This
is
regarding
the
ethics
complaint
filed
by
Patricia
G
Soto
honor
about
February
9th,
and
this
was
alleging
certain
violations
of
the
City
of
Laredo
ethics
code,
particularly
section
201
titled
conflicts
of
interest
in
section
202,
titled,
unfair,
to
advancement
advancement
of
private
interest
and
matters
related.
There
too,.
B
Mr,
chairperson
for
the
record,
this
is
Lisa
Paul
and
I'd
like
the
record
to
reflect
that
I'm
going
to
recuse
myself
from
participation
or
any
discussion
regarding
this
item,
even
though
I
am
not
legally
required
to
do
so.
There
is
a
familial
relationship
regarding
one
of
the
persons
named
in
the
complaint
and
to
avoid
any
appearance
of
impropriety
I'm
going
to
recuse
myself
and
I
would
ask
if
the
minutes
reflect
that
I
am
going
to
leave
Chambers
during
the
discussion
of
this.
C
The
complaint
detail
and
the
application
of
the
ethics
code
sections
to
that
complaint,
so
essentially
the
complaint
that
was
raised
by
miss
Patricia
Soto
was
that
on
January
24th
2023
during
a
council
meeting
of
councilman
cigarroa
Melissa
and
Alyssa
cigarroa
were
required
to
recuse
themselves
from
any
discussion
on
that
item.
That
particular
item
was
regarding
the
discussion
of
a
health
care
assessment
report.
I
did
review
the
entire
city
council
meeting
for
January
24th
2023.
C
What
that
consulting
company
did
was
Justice,
evaluate
the
health
care
needs
for
Laredo
there
weren't
any
contracts
discussed
no
bids
that
were
going
to
be
taken.
Nothing
of
economic
proposal
was
brought
out
in
that
meeting.
It
was
simply
hiring
a
private
consulting
company
to
do
a
report
on
the
Health
Care
status
and
needs
in
Laredo
and
presented
to
the
city
council
for
future
reference.
C
However,
the
next
step
in
that
process,
you
need
to
evaluate
whether
the
conflict
of
interest
section
was
triggered
company
of
interest.
Only
your
deals
with
again
economic
interest,
business,
tangible
business
interests-
were
any
business
ties
between
the
person
and
the
councilman
in
this
case.
Yes
they're
related,
but
that
lawsuit
mentioned
my
doctor,
Ricardo
cigarroa
was
contained
within
the
report
that
doesn't
really
raise
any
economic
interest
dealing
with
councilman
or
himself
either.
The
report
did
make
a
very
concerted
statement
to
say
that
it
was
a
an
allegation
that
was
made.
C
It
wasn't
discussing
the
merits
of
any
lawsuit.
It
clearly
doesn't
have
any
legal
weight
for
any
Court
to
give
it
any
weight
or
any
substance
in
any
possible
lawsuit
against
Dr
Ricardo
cigarroa.
The
requirement
for
a
recusal
in
the
ethics
code
is
that
it
does
have
to
involve
some
type
of
economic
interest
to
require
recusal
or
a
disclosure
that
you
have
a
conflict
of
interest
because
somebody's
going
to
be
receiving
a
monetary
benefit
or
an
economic
benefit
or
rising
out
of
that
report.
C
I
did
want
to
note
for
the
Ethics
Committee
the
City
ethics
code
and
does
not
have
any
mention
or
any
definition
for
when
an
abstention
is
required.
It's
silent,
it
doesn't
say
when
somebody
has
to
abstain
from
voting.
Recuser
requires
no
participation,
no
voting
abstention.
You
can
participate,
but
you
cannot
vote
on
the
final
account
in
this
case.
A
city
ethics
coach
is
completely
silent
on
abstention,
so
I
did
look
at
the
Texas
government
code.
Local
government
code
and
their
requirement
for
an
abstention
is
also
revolving
around
an
economic
interest.
C
It
doesn't
raise
any
issues
regarding.
Do
they
have
a
familiar
relationship?
Are
they
related?
It
has
to
tie
into
an
economic
interest
between
the
city,
councilman
or
the
elected
official
and
the
person
making
that
comment.
So
in
this
case
there
really
wasn't
any
economic
interest
that
was
brought
in
the
healthcare
report.
Like
I
mentioned
it,
I
did
read
it
of
consequence.
In
this
case
it
was
only
page
64
that
mentioned
that
lawsuit
by
Dr
Ricardo
cigarroa.
C
He
called
it
a
baseless,
lawsuit
back
and
forth
regarding
the
allegations
made
in
that
lawsuit,
but
that's
what
they
were
allegations
nothing's
been
proven
in
court
and
certainly
whatever
comments
were
made
at
city
council
are
not
going
to
be
evidence
in
a
trial
of
law
or
in
a
court
of
law.
So
for
those
reasons,
I
don't
think
that
they
were
required
to
recuse
themselves.
They
did
before
the
vote
was
taken
about
striking
that
portion
of
the
report.
Councilman
Melissa
cigarawa
did
State
or
request
advice
from
Council
about
whether
she
should
abstain
from
voting.
C
C
So
their
comments
that
were
made
were
not
part
of
the
final
decision
making,
but
they
did
participate
according
to
what
I've
seen
in
the
city,
ethics
code
and
the
Texas
local
government
code,
they
were
not
required
to
recuse
themselves
because
there
was
no
economic
tie-in
to
the
comments
that
were
made
and
abstention
also
deals
with
economic
interest.
There
wasn't
any
such
discussion
at
that
city,
council
meeting
between
the
public
doctor
and
the
two
city
councilman
that
spoke
out
about
that
issue
in
the
report.
C
So
for
those
reasons,
I
don't
think
it's
legally
sufficient
to
trigger
something
within
the
city
ethics
code
AS
drafted
now
that
would
require
them
to
either
recuse
themselves
or
abstain
themselves.
They
did
abstain
at
the
end,
but
no
comments
were
made
during
that
meeting
regarding
whether
the
abstention
was
tied
into
an
economic
interest.
The
direct
comment
from
the
city
attorney
was
that
they
were
being
required
to
abstain
because
of
the
family
relationship,
but
nothing
else
other
than
that.
C
D
C
So,
in
this
case
they
are
related
within
the
ethics
code
provisions
because
it's
brother-in-law
with
a
second
degree
and
first
degree,
father
daughter,
so
clearly
they
are
within
the
people
that
are
triggered
to
recuse.
But
the
next
step
is
you
have
to
be
recusing
yourself
from
an
economic
interest.
Are
you
going
to
do
something
here
or
comment,
something
that's
going
to
affect
your
economic
interest
of
a
your
family
member?
What.
D
C
C
And
there
is
nothing
in
the
Ethics
Committee
that
talks
about
abstinence
and
I.
Don't
know
if
that's
going
to
be
modified
at
a
later
date,
but
there's
nothing
and
the
Ethics
Committee
discusses
abstention.
It
only
discusses
recusal,
so
I
went
to
the
local
government
code
and
that
only
talks
about
abstaining
when
there's
an
economic
interest
and
not
just
a
family
relationship.