►
From YouTube: Ethics Commission Meeting 8/23/2018
Description
Ethics Commission Meeting 8/23/2018 10:00 AM
B
A
B
A
C
A
D
D
D
I
just
asked
this
commission
only
because
of
the
technical
aspects
of
the
things
we
talk
about,
sometimes
that
the
chair
recognizes
you
before
you
speak.
That
way,
we
understand
who
is
speaking
and
what
the
they're
trying
to
say.
It's
just
a
pain
for
Diane
and
I
to
go
through
the
minutes.
Try
and
figure
out
who's
saying
one
went
so
I
would
just
ask
that
we
be
all
sensitive
to
that.
You.
D
D
D
D
Right
so
I
sent
around
a
PowerPoint
I
think
we
haven't
pulled
up
or
ready
to
be
pulled
up
here.
I
made
the
basic
edits
that
I
understand,
judge
Wenzel
ones
raised
a
couple
times
very
easy
stuff
that
I
could
go
through
and
relatively
straightforwardly
change.
That
doesn't
mean
of
a
compass
everything.
This
Commission
has
discussed
or
Wenzel
men's
comments
throughout
this
process.
It's
designed
for
discussion,
but
I
think
it
was
easier
to
have
something
that
we
could
all
edit
as
we
go
here.
D
It's
literally
just
our
ordinance
copied
and
pasted
into
powerpoints,
and
then
I've
highlighted
the
edits
that
I've
I
recommend
it
or
we've
misspelled
something.
You
know
little
things
like
that
too.
So
my
proposal
is
just
to
go
through
it
slide
by
slide
and
and
go
through
it
kind
of
with
a
fine-tooth
comb
and
see
what
your
thoughts
are.
If
we
want
to
change
anything,
the
judge
can,
of
course,
weigh
in
and
go
from
there.
So
I
do.
D
D
We
could
change
to
a
minister
I've
also
not
changed
it
throughout.
Only
because
of
this
very
reason,
right,
I
didn't
know.
If
you
want
an
officer
administrator,
I
thought
investigated
was
thrown
around
at
one
point,
whatever
you
guys
want
to
what
a
amended
to
I
was
just
suggesting
officer,
because
that
seemed
to
be
the
consensus
from
last
night.
E
We're
looking
through
some
of
the
suggested
revisions,
one
of
the
things
that
got
taken
out
or
is
the
review
of
statements
of
economic
interest
I
mean
when
those
are
in
there,
then
that
was
kind
of
like
alright.
So
it's
kind
of
something
more
than
just
a
straight
investigative
type
of
process.
Right
now,
I
think
that's
primarily
what
it
is
is
investigating.
E
D
F
D
B
D
C
D
C
A
D
E
D
As
we
go
through,
this,
just
I
forgot
I
should
have
said
this
at
the
top.
Anything
that's
not
addressed
in
what
I've
added
to
the
slides
I
would
recommend
you
do
a
vote
on
and
then
at
the
end,
we'll
just
say
all
the
edits
in
the
PowerPoint
will
do
it
omnibus
motion
at
the
end
and
then
we'll
go
from
there
just.
A
A
F
D
So
that
I
can't
speak
for
the
reasons
the
County
Board
added
that
language
in
when
we
first
passed
us
I,
don't
know,
but
if
you
want
to
recommend
to
change
it,
we
can
recommend
to
change
it.
Obviously
this
needs
to
go
to
executive
and
county
board
again,
so
they
might
deny
that
request,
but
I,
don't
I
can't
speak
for
their
intent.
D
D
D
D
F
D
B
D
A
F
D
So
on
this,
one
I
just
simply
took
out
the
second
responsibility
of
the
ethics
officer
now,
which
would
be
reviewing
statements
of
academic
interest
in
disclosure
forms
of
any
person.
Subject
to
this
article,
the
reasoning
was
I
believe
the
county
clerk
has
already
statutory
required
to
do
that.
If
he
has
any
concerns,
of
course,
he
can
come
before
this
commission
and
make
those
concerns
or
the
appropriate
state
agency.
It
seemed
a
little
redundant,
probably
just
to
carry
over
from
another
ordinance
as
well
and
then
I
believe
judge.
D
B
A
D
B
B
F
D
D
Having
read
this
just
now,
it
actually
kind
of
echoes
the
concern
that
dr.
Baker
varies
about
with
or
without
cause,
because,
if
you'll
notice,
it
says,
may
remove
a
commissioner
for
case
of
incompetency
in
compensating
the
collective
duty
of
malfeasance
in
office.
Those
would
be
the
reasons
that
would
be
justifying
someone
being
removed
so
in
a
way
that
it
without
cause
we
took
up
previously
seem
to
be
null
and
void.
Okay
right.
B
D
E
A
D
So
the
only
thing
I
added
here
based
on
some
discussion
we
had
would
judge
buns
woman
was
taking
out
the
word
attorney
in
subsection
2
and
replacing
with
office.
Department
of
Bureau
I
can
struggle
to
find
a
situation
where
an
attorney
be
the
Prosecuting
Authority
just
independently.
Usually
though,
through
a
commission
or
a
department,
or
you
know
some
sort
of
a
governmental
agency,
either
our
office
or
the
AG
or
you
know,
places
such
as
those.
So
the
word
attorney
seemed
clunky
to
me.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
point,
but
so.
A
D
Well,
I
see
no
reason
why
a
member
of
the
Commission
can't
independently
file
a
complaint
if
they
notice
something
untoward
in
any
department
in
the
county,
they
would
have
probably
some
issues
with
accusal
and
biased
and
all
that
when
it
comes
to
hearing
the
complaint.
But
if
you
see
something,
there's
no
restriction
on
you
saying
something:
I
think
the
concern
there
is
the
Spanish
Inquisition
effect
right.
You
kind
of
go
through
the
each
department
and
looking
at
one
things
from
one
perspective
right.
C
C
D
B
A
B
B
E
E
B
E
B
D
B
E
D
D
A
No
I
understand
every
bite.
Word
is
but
before
you
would
begin,
you
know
if
I
get
a
complaint
like
again
so-and-so
wouldn't
I.
The
first
thing
to
do
would
be
to
contact
the
complainant
and
ask
if
they
are
making
this
and
before
you
would
go
on
I.
Don't
know,
I
mean
if
if
the
complaint
is
going
to
get
it
witnessed,
he
could
go
next
door
to
his
neighbor
and
say
witness
this.
You
know
well.
D
D
A
B
B
B
D
B
D
D
D
A
E
Again
not
really
specifically
on
this,
but
looking
at
this
talking
about
a
complaint
against
the
various
you
know,
whatever
covered
under
the
statute,
when
I
was
going
back
through
it.
While
we
were
going
through
the
prior
complaints,
it
seemed
that
the
only
areas
that
are
specifically
in
this
statute
are
one
political
activity
and
two
was
the
other
one.
Can
you
remember
that,
but
it
was
only
like
who
thing
yeah,
gift
ban,
yeah
and
then
I.
D
I
did
make
some
changes
once
we
get
to
the
whistleblower
section
of
the
ordinance
at
the
end,
that
says
a
whistleblower
complaint,
I
think
was
the
language
can
be
sent
to
the
state's
attorney
the
auditor
at
the
department
head
and
the
Ethics
Commission,
which
would
imply
that
you
have
anything
that
would
fall
in
a
whistleblower.
That's
my
one
change
that
I've
made
in
this
topic,
but
it
doesn't
mean
it
is
the
only
change
we
can
make
if
we
want
to
clean
this
up.
I
just
didn't
feel
comfortable
doing
that
without,
but
from
this
commission,
though,.
A
A
B
D
D
My
personal
opinion
about
how
judge
winds
have
been
conduction
himself
in
the
previous
complaint
would
qualify
as
properly
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
we
can't
quantify
it
a
little
closer
effects.
The
Commission's
will
but
I
also
hesitate
to
say
it
should
be
within
30
days,
which
should
be
within
two
weeks.
Just
because
the
nature
of
the
complaint
and
frankly
the
judges
schedule,
might
prohibit
that.
D
D
A
D
B
D
So
in
this
section,
I
removed,
based
on
commentary
from
Judge
Benjamin
that
part
of
the
ordinance
that
requires
that
this
commission
forward
any
complaint
to
the
appropriate
legal
authority
on
its
own
volition,
reason
being
I
think
there
is
no
requirement
to
do
so
and
just
by
the
very
nature
of
this
body
doing
it,
they
might
imply
some
sort
of
sense
of
guilt
and
I
don't
feel
like.
That
would
be
an
appropriate
thing
to
tarnish
the
reputation.
This
commission,
just
by
saying
the
Ethics
Commission,
is
forwarding
a
complaint
to
the
Attorney
General,
for
example.
D
E
D
B
D
F
D
Administrative
body
or
a
judicial
body
must
have
two
things
in
order
to
proceed.
They
have
to
have
personal
jurisdiction
and
subject
matter
jurisdiction.
Personal
jurisdiction
just
means
that
the
body
has
the
authority
under
opiate
law
to
hear
the
complaint
as
it
applies
to
this
person.
Okay.
So,
for
example,
if
a
complaint
was
filed
about
someone
who
does
not
work
for
the
county
most
of
the
time,
that
would
be
inappropriate
in
this
context.
Right.
F
D
D
B
D
My
take
on
how
that
reads,
and
please
feel
free
to
disagree
with
me
here-
judge
my
reader.
That
is
a
call
back.
If
you
will
to
the
previous
language
that
says
this
body
will
record
the
complaint
to
the
appropriate
Prosecuting.
Authority
I
miss
it
so
I
think
that
would
be,
if
we're
going
to
take
that
section
out,
as
we
already
have,
this
will
probably
something
we
should
strike
as
well.
That's
the
way
I
read.
E
D
E
B
B
E
B
E
That's
my
understanding.
Some
of
this
language
was
taken
some
from
some
other
ordinances.
Therefore,
their
definition
of
the
ultimate
jurisdictional
authority
might
be
in
another
ordinance
that
we
don't
have
incorporated
here,
but
if,
if
that
other
ordinance
basically
was
talking
about
the
person's
employer,
yeah.
A
E
D
D
D
B
E
D
D
Of
a
circuit
court
judge
or
an
associate
court
judge
and,
by
extension,
the
powers
to
hold
someone
in
contempt
Jordan,
you
know
all
that
kind
of
side
stuff.
You
don't
have
that
sort
of
authority
or
power.
So
that's
why
I'm
saying
subpoena
is
the
way
to
think
about
it.
But
it's
not
quite
the
same
level
of
strengths
that
a
subpoena
would
hold
here.
E
D
A
D
D
C
D
C
E
Judge
ones,
if
I
have
a
question
number
three
again
that
we
ready
we're
at
a
stage
where
conclusion
of
the
preliminary
investigation
I
issued
a
written
summary
report
delivered
to
the
chairman,
the
Commission,
the
complaint
in
the
respondent
and
then
they're
suggesting
that
I
make
or
you
know,
I
could
make
a
recommendation
for
corrective
or
disciplinary
action.
I,
I
guess
my
concern.
Is
you
know
it's
almost
like
all
right.
This
is
my
investigation.
You've
done
something
wrong.
This
is
how
it
should
be
corrected.
It's
almost
like
I've
absconded
the
whole
process
so.
E
Whereas
I'm
thinking
you
know
I'm,
not
I
would
think.
Ultimately
you
could
have
a
process.
You
know
we
make
this
original
referral.
Maybe
after
discussions
there
you
know
you
come
to
an
agreement
that,
yes,
something
needs
to
be
done,
then
maybe
you
could
ask
for
input
from
myself
or
whoever's
in
this
position
as
to
recommended
corrective
action,
but
I
guess
I
have
a
little
bit
of
a
problem
saying
you
know
this
is
my
own
preliminary
investigation
and
because
of
it,
this
is
what
should
happen
again.
E
E
E
So
then
I
guess
what
I
would
think
you
would
want
to
occur
is
a
discussion
by
the
Commission's.
You
know
they
can
maybe
contact
the
individual
or
their
attorney
and
say
you
know.
We
think
we
need
to
discuss
this
because
we're
gonna
have
to
proceed
to
hearing.
Are
you
amenable
to
working
out
some
type
of
resolution
to
the
issue
right
and,
if
not
and
if
they
say
yes,
then
the
Commission
could
presumably
asked
myself
or
whoever's
in
this
position.
What
are
your
recommendations
as
far
as
corrective
action?
What.
A
D
Alright
I
think
we've
got
some
sort
of
workable
language
here.
For
you
all,
the
judge
and
I
are
recommending
that
we
remove
entirely
section
3
and
then
in
section
5
remove
any
resulting
recommendation
and
make
that
sentence
appropriate.
So
any
other
information
that
the
ethics
officer
deems
appropriate
and
relevant
to
the
plumeria
investigation
and
the
finding
of
that
investigation
you'll
make
it
a
full
sentence,
as
opposed
to
kind
of
coming
up
and
then,
additionally,
after
that,
the
Ethics
Commission
may
request
a
recommendation
on
any
corrective
or
disciplinary
action.
It
should
take.
D
A
E
D
A
A
A
E
D
D
E
A
D
B
D
And
a
new
sentence
following
that
one,
the
Ethics
Commission,
may
request
the
ethics
officer
for
a
recommendation
for
any
corrective
or
disciplinary
action.
It
should
take.
That
puts
the
onus
on
the
Commission
to
request
a
recommendation,
as
opposed
to
a
requirement
to
the
ethics
officer,
provide
one.
C
E
E
C
D
A
D
D
D
D
B
B
D
A
B
E
E
D
A
D
F
D
A
C
D
D
B
D
A
So
the
decision
of
the
Commission
to
dismiss
a
complaint,
a
complaint,
not
the
complainant,
no
not
talking
about
the
person
losing
your
job,
but
the
fact
that
we
say
we
don't
want
to
hear
a
complaint.
Is
that
what
that's?
Referring
to?
It's
not
subject
to
the
administrative
review
under
the
Illinois
Code
of
Civil
Procedure
right.
D
D
B
D
D
D
Activity
beyond
that,
to
anything
that
would
be
covered
by
the
whistleblower
protections,
so
you
know
harassment
so
we're
bullying
anything
like
loads
of
things.
We
fall
into
that
caveat,
I,
don't
know
where
the
judge
stands
and
whether
that
language
would
be
sufficient
or
not,
but
I
think
you're
covered
and
had
a
lot
more
to
talk
about
than
just
those
two
things
based
on
this
change.
E
Is
there
a
again
just
once
men
and
I,
don't
have
necessarily
that
second
from
me,
but
the
powers
of
the
Commission?
Does
it
specifically
say
you
know
a
certain
mrs.
I
guess
it
makes
reference
to
a
couple
of
those
two
sections,
the
gift
ban
and
political
activity?
If
that's
where
it's
really
is
there
a
way
to
just
reference
this
you
know
divisions,
division,
seven
in
there
remember
off
the
top
of
my
head.
A
D
D
Not
required
to
do
so
if
they
choose
the
commission
route,
of
course
they
would
have
to
go
through
the
process
we've
already
been
through
today,
but
you
know
finally
complaint
and
all
that
if
they
choose
to
go
to
the
department
head
or
the
auditor,
there
are
statutory
reasons
for
having
that
language
in
there
as
well.
They
can
handle
it
that
route
in
addition
to
this
route.
D
So
it's
it's
up
to
the
employee
or
the
officer
how
they
want
to
proceed
and
get
their
issues
addressed,
whether
they
feel
it's
appropriate
to
come
here
or
just
kind
of
handle.
It
hang
on
a
minute.
Should
we
be
spending
this
money
would
be
an
odd
River
thing
or
what's
going
on
here,
you
know,
address
it
in-house
to
make
sure
they
have
a
appropriate
concern
first
or
if
they
feel
like,
for
whatever
reason
they
can't
do
that,
then
they
can
come
here
in.
F
D
We're
not
sitting
down
with
each
individual,
employee
and
explaining
that
would
be
too
arduous.
However,
it
is
addressed,
presumably
monthly
I,
don't
I'd
magically,
not
party
to
department
head
meetings,
but
it
is
discussed
at
length
in
those
meetings
regularly
and
also
the
county
is
also
passing
changes
to
its
County
handbook.
Pretty
much
as
we
speak,
that's
a
process
we're
going
through
now
and
any
changes
to
department
policy
would
have
to
be
addressed
to
employees
and
one
of
the
substantive
changes
throughout
our
handbook
is
references
to
the
Commission.
D
A
E
Speak
to
it.
Okay,
if
you
go
back
to
second,
it's
not
going
to
be
on
your
handout
there,
but
section
2,
dash,
255
powers
and
duties
limited,
that's
the
powers
and
duties
of
the
Commission,
and
it
makes
specific
reference
to
the
division
to
political
activity.
Division
3,
which
is
gift
ban,
so
my
suggestion
would
be
to
add
division
7,
which
is
you're.
A
B
E
E
E
D
D
It's
prohibited
political
activities.
So
that
is
one
no
because
we
were
not
discussing
changing
this,
but
by
extension,
we
are
referencing
that
so
Division
two
is
prohibited
political
activities,
which
you
have
jurisdiction
over
right
now,
as
we
sit
regardless
Division
three
is
gift
fans,
so
you
can't
bribe
me
to
not
prosecute
a
case
kind
of
stuff
right
and
division.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
A
B
D
Just
on
a
personal
note,
I
do
want
to
say,
I
appreciate
your
patience
with
me
these
past
few
months
for
what
I
hope
there
are
obvious
reasons:
I've
tried
to
take
a
step
back,
but
that
doesn't
mean
I
wasn't
paying
attention
or
trying
to
address
your
concerns.
It
just
means
I,
didn't
feel
appropriate
to
be
in
the
room.
So
with
that
I
think
you
can
move
on
any
agenda.
Ok,.