[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6605306,"mediaKeyId","2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6","parentId",2987073,"title","Board of Ethics approves March minutes; schedules May agenda items including sanctions, council engagement","audioSeconds",501,"startMs",19000,"endMs",520000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6&start=19&end=520","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6/thumbnail_19000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6605306/Denton-City/Denton-County/Texas/Board-of-Ethics-approves-March-minutes-schedules-May-agenda-items-including-sanctions-council-engagement","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6605306-73f12d86812ba70d44bbdc0a1902aed2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165398&Signature=Kxq4jHqjLGbQ6kl-Abt02h5bmvSZZ8Cav94YScYqeXBf~IPsCvBNRQYA9CWsvI2eyS2gC1EY53SIOYxKC0ij-Eim43t-LxlvjZFb3gbezidxLzae7UEASW1Iio~FqfqvWTHaWEyacS6OdNqxSLWnrDwduQJ5aXtw9m1QuifSTcfc5AJLvrlmk7tECzVNN3P9TKfpkQwWy2llkSBPp~uHJGiMYkTcZ18wQ8JVvF79JIycHM4Vz2Eq-foXvDPZiRi2zeNHqRToxgMp8iB0uvFrAC7xCAD7L~vHctepxa1n-S~KuZuHxpHcXqGjYiln01wej0xQJZZH~UNxd9Us5WifAQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Denton","date","2025-04-14T00:00:00Z","article","The Denton Board of Ethics approved its meeting minutes from March 10, 2025, and identified several agenda items to consider at its May meeting, including sanctions and how city council members should interact with ethics-board members.

At the start of the April 14 meeting the board considered agenda item BOE25-017, approval of minutes from the March meeting. A board member moved to accept the minutes as presented; Andrea (first name only) moved and Zeltner seconded. Chair called for the vote and “Aye” was recorded; Chair declared the minutes approved and “the minutes stand as written.”

Later in the meeting members reviewed potential future meeting topics. Madison (staff) confirmed that the sanctions discussion the board requested previously is set to return in May. Board members expressed interest in several items for future consideration: a discussion about rules of engagement for how city council members may contact or approach board of ethics members; pursuing a joint meeting between the board and city council to clarify expectations and communication; and revisiting monetary limits and other sanctions language that council members had previously questioned.

Madison noted the board’s March proposals are on the city council agenda for adoption the following day; those proposals include items the board prioritized previously. Board members agreed to prioritize the sanctions discussion and to schedule time at the May meeting to discuss how council members should approach ethics-board members. Staff said it could prepare a management report with options for scheduling a joint meeting and any existing council guidance on communications with boards and commissions.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Denton - Board of Ethics on 2025-04-14 5:30 PM - Apr 14, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Board approved minutes from its March meeting and discussed future topics for May, including returning sanctions language, possible joint meeting with city council, and rules for council members approaching ethics-board members.","taxTitle","Denton City, Denton County, Texas","taxId",2787,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6605311,"Board of Ethics directs staff to redraft ex parte-communications language for clarity",136,543000,679000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6&start=543&end=679","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6/thumbnail_543000.jpg","/articles/6605311/Denton-City/Denton-County/Texas/Board-of-Ethics-directs-staff-to-redraft-ex-parte-communications-language-for-clarity","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6605311-a36ac3d52731cdd7c0635b8302139e33/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165398&Signature=GFIumRX0ooVc7tklkoDthcMQvGCx22m5V6zAiADY44L8Gm9uRLeEHE77qsC3iuiFxUTx-P6xKM9av5S5ASkEwd7GsPtYhXNdfkn1rzo2l4sRe0Y3PnF5hupyEq~1~H3g8gUTCF3xmgr-oVwD7XYVMGOxJGhynBSTB01bgeeCb7nKbcE6YO59mPPDWFhg0gwyHk29ovRYJH2TgRcPT830IscA6qYBUmy3eMOoe5UUoUTfNkg9kKtGlfkr~GX3CPcJ7uC-xvLpowNfo27qF3aVqAD~57WwXCllWQK82yn0qyRfo7uA5qghgSc20avvZDz9INWdfUG-8tIuT-KenD9J6Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Denton Board of Ethics instructed staff to prepare clearer ordinance language about ex parte communications in ethics complaints, with members asking the code to avoid legal jargon and specify when restrictions begin and end.

At the April 14 meeting, staff presented the current ethics ordinance language about ex parte communications under City of Denton Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article 11. Members raised concerns that the term “pendency” is legalistic and could confuse residents who must follow the code. A board member suggested changing the phrase to “after a complaint has been filed and is pending before the board of ethics,” saying “I think that would be a lot more clear.” Another member recommended the wording “after a complaint has been filed and until the complaint has been resolved by the board of ethics.”

Madison (staff) and Scott (city attorney) explained the practical limits: while the words can be clarified, some complaints remain subject to open-records requests even if not publicly posted, and not all persons covered by the ethics ordinance are city employees or public officers who would qualify for closed-session employment deliberations. The board reached informal consensus that staff should return a draft redline replacing “pendency” with clearer terms and setting a clearer end point (for example, “until the complaint has been resolved by the board of ethics”) for ex parte restrictions.

There was no formal recorded vote on the language change; staff said the redline would be presented at a future meeting for board review. Any change to the ordinance would require city-attorney review and council adoption before taking effect.

","Board members agreed staff should propose clearer ordinance wording about ex parte communications, replacing the term 'pendency' with language such as 'pending' or 'until the complaint is resolved.' Staff will return a redline in a future meeting.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6605316,"Denton Board of Ethics votes down proposal to allow closed preliminary-assessment panels",2269,1124000,3393000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6&start=1124&end=3393","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987073-5fe3e060ae3ed4fcd4bce2b68bcf98f6/thumbnail_1124000.jpg","/articles/6605316/Denton-City/Denton-County/Texas/Denton-Board-of-Ethics-votes-down-proposal-to-allow-closed-preliminary-assessment-panels","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6605316-0914ce477ec86036a439a4584fbc1c66/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165398&Signature=MvZcXa4DqNIIVdiC2oyZ80rHDDMVCgMzJCeAvsCqE1IUfPG-xkPCKkBHXSpCqWrtlfJ~446TsTPkMkKJNQYYLb4-~uIlrP2lqhyy6DwsjwlL2X7K9jPc12Nk1cnyotYgNrseFBEQClwm0eUliSMulGVN80IwmMspL7lQ2op--1DX5SgEy4Q5HhWpmwqlyHzRJt~C6U9YWmYw36sMd-Q1eHqZbj9wbuhv7sRJzZ~d~rN9sFBxyzHQ0y27qJErGml3gBIgdHQuQ~1RBwTkxfdU3MJVaP1ymv5xR6ldqGv44evBRlhurjASoml0E3LV-gV7kX8Ymrhuc-LviwT8exB5cA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Denton Board of Ethics debated whether preliminary-assessment panels for ethics complaints should be allowed to meet in closed session but voted down a motion to launch a code change to permit it.

The board’s discussion on April 14 focused on whether members should be able to hold a short closed-session meeting to review complaints before opening a public hearing. Diane (last name not specified), a board member, made the motion “that we have closed meetings prior to our open public meeting on complaints” for preliminary assessments; Kenneth Adams seconded. Chair (name not specified) restated the motion as a direction to staff to draft ordinance language to allow preliminary assessments to occur in closed session “to the extent possible.”

Supporters, including Diane, said a short closed session would give panelists time to review evidence, organize questions and present a unified message when the public hearing began. Diane said the closed session would help the committee “have our ducks in a row” and avoid early public commentary spreading incomplete information. Opponents said transparency of the decision-making process is paramount and that public observation of deliberations — even if messy — builds trust. One member argued the public needs to “see a messy conversation that is respectful” so the record explains how the board reached its decision.

Legal staff (Scott, city attorney) and staff (Madison) explained the limits set by the Texas Open Meetings Act and noted two constraints: 1) not everyone who falls under the ethics ordinance is a public officer or employee eligible for a closed-session employment discussion; and 2) complaints would still be subject to open-records requests even if discussed in closed session. Madison explained that a closed-session discussion could be held for some city officials (she listed the municipal judge, the city manager and the city attorney as examples of positions that are often treated as public officers), but the board would still have to take any formal action in open session.

After deliberation, the board voted. Diane and Kenneth Adams voted in favor; four members voted against. Chair (name not specified) announced, “It fails.” The motion therefore did not pass and no ordinance change was initiated based on that vote.

The board did, however, direct staff informally during the meeting to draft proposed language for other matters related to complaints (see separate article on ex parte communications). Any formal change to the code of ordinances would need review by the city attorney’s office and final approval by city council before taking effect.

Votes at a glance:
- Motion: direct staff to draft ordinance/procedure allowing preliminary-assessment panels to meet in closed session “to the extent possible.”
- Mover: Diane (first name only)
- Seconder: Kenneth Adams
- Tally: Yes 2 (Diane; Kenneth Adams) — No 4 (names not specified in the record)
- Outcome: failed

Context: A preliminary assessment panel is the board step that decides whether a submitted complaint should proceed to a full hearing. If a complaint is found actionable at a preliminary stage, the matter would proceed to a subsequent public hearing with full notice, opportunity for the complainant and respondent to present evidence, and a full-board decision.

Next steps: Staff will not implement the closed-session change without board direction and council action; the transcript shows staff would, if directed in the future, draft redlines and present them to the board for review and then send them to council for adoption.

","The Board of Ethics debated whether preliminary assessment panels should meet in closed session and directed staff to draft a proposal to change procedures; the formal motion to begin that process failed 2–4.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board of Ethics approves March minutes; schedules May agenda items including sanctions, council engagement

Board of Ethics directs staff to redraft ex parte-communications language for clarity

Denton Board of Ethics votes down proposal to allow closed preliminary-assessment panels