speaker: i'm not sure i heard it right about sixty-seven thirty-four -- oh it's back on. okay. there are two provisions of sixty-seven thirty-four one which defines official misconduct and one which discusses willing violations of the law. the official misconduct provision talks about a willful failure of any elected official and so forth to discharge a duty imposed by the ordinance of the act. there are actually sixteen places in the city charter where there can be a finding of official misconduct. there's this one plus fifteen others. at some point you are going to need regulations on how to handle

that. admittingly the charter provisions are a mess. once you move away from what the mayor can do and the mayor cannot do but you still need the regulations. the other problems i have obviously the artificial statute of limitations one year from the date the records were asked for. it makes no sense and i think it's probably too restrictive to stand up to the constitutional requirement of how you interpret laws affecting public access. there's also a provision that the notes of the investigative individuals on investigating individuals are to be kept confidential until the decision is made. there's no basis for keeping any of those records confidential. that's been

established. i think the quick case i filed a couple years ago probably established that principle. other than that, there is any number of glitches and such but i really think that taking another look at it is very helpful. thank you. speaker: okay we'll work on those. thank you for your comments. i think they were helpful and we'll keep trying. the next item of the agenda is a consideration on the

follow-up letter. does anybody need a break? we will -- let's take a break after we get through this agenda item and then we'll resume. do you want to introduce this matter mr. sacrum? speaker: a couple of the commissioners want a specialized interest in this act taken by the commission on a prior date for the purposes of determining whether you were interested in requesting an update on follow-up actions by the mayor so the thought expressed was that possibly a follow-up letter would be drafted and sent. the staff took the liberty in drafting a letter for the commissioners to consider and edit provided you

even decide to send one. speaker: any comments on the commissioners? mr.: i think we should send the letter and i think we have comments about the specifics of the not we at least have a voice set on typewriter. commissioner: i would add to the letter which the staff did a very fine job of but i think i would add in the last paragraph after what's written language to this effect. alternatively i request you advice the commission as to the reasons why you decline to take any action in respect to

miss g o /ph* go /phezs conduct. speaker: commissioner souther land: if we're he hadilitying i think the phrase was i would say with the authority or power rather than ability and um, i guess i wish that i had and i didn't go back to see our specific vote or the letter that we sent initially but is the wording of the last sentence of the paragraph

recommend that you remove her from appointed conduct from office, that's the language that we used before. speaker: yes it is. speaker: okay. speaker: any other comments? i have a suggestion and i don't feel particularly strong about it but i wonder whether we need the first sentence of the third paragraph -- i'm not sure that we requested that the mayor keep us informed, did we? speaker: yeah. speaker: so the mayor may or not have give us a response if we asked him to

speaker: he doesn't have a requirement. speaker: right so i would suggest we strike that first sentence and begin the third paragraph with i am writing and add commissioners sentence at the end of that. and then it's typical that the chair would sign an act of the commission speaker: either the chair would sign or you could delegate someone to sign. i'm fine with that for logistics purposes. that would certainly be easier. speaker: i think you should sign speaker: you think i should sign? speaker: i don't think we've ever had all five do that speaker: you should

sign speaker: i have two more suggestions for you to add. first i testified before this body before and mrs. go mess when i con grad lated her to be the first person to be referred for official misconduct i said sunshine task force in which you actually held a meeting and she didn't like my sarcasm which is too bad and that's too bad and her response bending over to pick up her book bag and jacket, she had come to strike me with her coat. what's the phrase? you don't have to have batteries to have assault. her behavior was reprehensible

and it has sat stingingly reprehensible for over a year while you've waited for the mayor to get back to you. one suggestion is to put in your letter to the mayor is to ask for an explanation from mrs. go mess why she thought that behavior in a public forum was -- what's the phrase? right conduct bee fitting an officer of the city blah, blah, blah, you know the phrase the mayor used? was that right action of a public official? the second question you should ask him on my behalf if you'd like in your letter is to ask him why he hasn't taken any

action on miss go mess who was found by two bodies both of them ethical over set boundaries which both concluded she had engaged in official misconduct and when that was brought to the mayors attention he chose to do nothing in stark contrast to what he did to official [indiscernible] and we're still wondering. you can't charge the sheriff with official misconduct over false charges and then let a library commission president off the hook for proven charges. speaker: thank you very much. i

do have graphic presentation but there are only two reel points i want to make. first of all, with respect to official misconduct in general, there have been questions about the appending charges against the elected sheriff about whether it was related to his office and whether he acted in his official capacity with respect to mrs. go mess there is no question this took place at an official public meeting and that she was conducting the office that she was appointed to while this was happening but more importantly the mayor removed while charges were

pending yet he did nothing, not even make a response after miss go mess was found guilty. you may remember that after this happened there was an altercation in which some comments of mrs. go mess was posted on the library website and my democracy on demonstration is a little bit slow here. this is more than the tip of the iceberg. this is a tip -- i've played this once before but there may be people who haven't heard it yet. video clip: [indiscernible]

speaker: you have to understand that not only is she discussing her possible revenge but she took that revenge by filing a /tprad lent police report against the speaker which wasn't me. the only accountability that she is susceptible to and there's no response at all that effectively rat and when the mayor does not respond in any way he's basically saying it doesn't rise to the level of his attention. he's basically ratifying it. well that's like

a referee taking a punch at somebody. everyone just go home. thank you very much. speaker: library association first of all certainly do send the letter. i appreciate that you do have it. i only wish it would have come sooner and i do hope you've repeated followups and as a previous speaker said, thank you for the petition that was suggested by commissioner /repby. the sunshine task force was essentially that her behavior in the room was so shocking and so intimidating that others not myself or the previous speaker said that they were actually

intimidated and did not make public comment on an item that they had actually come to make public comment on and it was the item generally speaking that was under discussion by the person who had been violently shouted down. in addition, as the previous speaker mentioned, there was a whole series of follow-up one hardly knows how to describe the behavior that followed but um, -- which is to say the police report, the apparent and it was witnessed by somebody else that we heard from at that time about the attempt to hit

mr. mow nay and my mind is going blank at the moment. not only was miss go mess reappointed to the library commission but earlier this year following your letter and the sunshine task force, mrs. go mess was nominated as the only nominee by the other library commissioners who are all appoint tees of the mayors office and was reelected unanimously as chair of the library commission. i would urge you not only to send this very promptly but to make it even stronger if you can find it to do so and i would say that the mayor has taken action in connection with this matter. he has reappointed miss go mess

and he has allowed presumably his offices appoint tees to rea /hrebgt a reelect her without any point. if you can make this even stronger and undertake to do this more than once a year i think that would be terrific. this is good and i appreciate you doing this letter. speaker: is there a motion to approve the letter as amended. all in favor? the motion passes. we'll take a short break. we'll take five minutes. speaker: we're

back in session. the next item on the agenda is consideration of ethics complain