001All right. Um, welcome to this evening's annual ethics training of the board of education. Under the board's ethics and conflict pol conflicts of interest policy, board members and senior district staff member shall complete a district sponsored training on ethics, including conflict of interest, public meeting laws, and public record laws. Each board member and senior district staff shall certify in writing intention of the training. Uh, tonight providing our training is Mike Porter from Miller Nash. Thank you. Welcome to work. >> Thank you. Go ahead. Take it away. >> Great. Thank you. Uh well, good evening. It's nice to see everybody. Hope you've had a good summer. I know things are starting to get roll rolling uh towards the towards the fall and everything will get more active in just about every area. Uh there are quite
002a few new faces to me in this group uh both on the board and then administrators that I haven't worked with. So, just quickly, I'll introduce myself. Uh I've uh I'm primarily a school and education lawyer. Uh I've worked with PPS in some fashion since I started at the firm in 2020. Uh or 2020. 2000. Yeah, I'm looking more like 2000 for sure. Uh so anyway, we've seen a lot of interesting issues and always just appreciate working uh with the district as you all uh pursue your missions and goals and try and uh help sort through uh the issues working with the general counsel's office that arise and uh this area public meetings, ethics, and public records certainly areas that come up. And tonight is really designed to be kind of an issue spotter, help
003hit some of the key components of the law so you know when to uh you know when to buzz the general counsel's office and get support uh just by thinking about some of the examples that we'll go through and and issues we address. So uh the the intro was perfect because it's also part of the first bullet uh which is why do we why do we do this? uh one we do it because you have a policy uh and that policy was just enacted I think finally enacted about a year ago. Does that seem right? A year and a half ago maybe. Um but but uh it was probably 8 or 10 years ago that uh there was a pretty solid consensus that hey these are issues that come up when uh when they go
004wrong uh public meetings violations or ethics violations they get thorny. They're difficult for the individual. They're also difficult it you know it's difficult for the entity if an individual is having to deal uh with something that's that's uh been problematic in this area. And I'm going to focus more on the uh some of the legal definitions, but the policy, we've got the number up there, 51066. Uh it has a lot of aspirational uh language as well. And and so, you know, I encourage you when thinking about these issues to look at it because it sets kind of a bottom line of the law sets a baseline for the way we undertake work, but nothing precludes us from exceeding what those baseline legal standards are and I think that was a thoughtful uh component of the
005policy. Also, uh there is a new uh relatively new law was passed about a year ago and this is specific to board members, a statute that requires a specific public meetings training that is facilitated through the Oregon uh government and ethics commission. Uh and so I think uh Roseanne and Sharon and I have kind of keep each other informed so that you have information about that. Uh for board members it has to be completed once during a term. It does strike me that during the earlier part of the term uh is a good time to do it as opposed to as you're winding out a term and maybe uh deciding whether you're going to come back. Uh so that'll focus on certain areas. uh working with Roseanne and Sharon, we decided to keep meetings as
006part of this just because uh you know there are things that are probably specific to the way Portland public schools typically operates. You're uh largest district in the state just there's more attention on Portland public schools in the uh you know in the media and the public and so uh nothing like a little reinforcement. Can I just Yes. Just for everybody's awareness, the OSBA conference seems to be offering like three or four of this required training at the conference this weekend. >> Oh, good. >> Yeah. >> Good. I knew OSBA was an authorized provider. There are three or four. So, that may be >> multiple options. >> A good opportunity. >> The um so we will hit uh public meetings uh some of the key issues around public meetings. We will have just we'll touch
007on public records today. Some of the issues that come up most frequently uh in the public uh records area and then we'll we'll address some of the key components of the Oregon ethics laws around uh gifts having uh your position be used for personal gain and uh some of the key definitions things to look for in there. So for uh returners uh we try and shift around what we focus on every year. Last year we went and used a lot of examples and kind of left some of the basic definitions since we do have more new people. We kind of we went back to uh hitting some of the key definitions but hopefully examples come through. I will say um we have uh if if questions pop up happy to try and answer them. This
008is not an attorney client privilege session. So, we're, you know, we take them in the very the very hypothetical and uh certainly we've had a time or two where there's a stumper and uh I say I'll follow up with Sharon uh because it's a good question that we need to think about, but if things come up uh we're happy to uh uh discuss it. for the returners. Uh this is a broken record, but uh I very much believe that we should start with the policy behind the law and it's in fact in the statute. Uh so the statute describes why do we even have these laws and we're going to start with public meetings. So we'll go meetings, records, ethics and that policy is the Oregon form of government requires an informed public aware of
009deliberations and decisions of governing bodies and the information upon which decisions were made. It's the intent of the public meetings law that decisions of governing bodies be arrived at openly. So most legal questions uh that get complex in in any meaningful way that means there's some gray area. So often times it is well it may depend the way you interpret the statute uh depends how you interpret cases that follow the statute. So when you're operating in the gray area, when you have questions about gosh, which which way are we allowed to do X and not call it a public meeting, think about the policy because uh the policy and public perception, all of those things are wrapped up together. And that doesn't mean you don't sometimes have something where you say, well, you know, we
010need to have something that's closed off. And there's good reasons to do that. But on the close calls, uh I mean oftentimes if I'm honestly if I'm talking with the legal team, we say, "Okay, this is a close call, but think about the policy behind all of this. Where would that lead? Where's that likely to lead the people who ultimately decided?" And uh so we come back to that pretty frequently. So as we Oh, sorry. It's like uh it's like taking a long shot from over here. That's not uh There we go. So, overview of what we'll cover. Uh before I get to the overview, you may be familiar with it, but there is uh as listed in the margin uh an attorney general public records and meetings manual. It's online. It is very informative.
011It was updated last year after I don't know probably 15 years or so since it had been updated and it's an excellent resource and so we refer to it a lot uh in the law office but it's something that's pretty user friendly and uh if you don't have something that will click through if the document doesn't let you if you googled that uh documents you you'd be able to get it. The three main topics under public meetings law that want to address today are what's what bodies are subject to the law and what does that mean? Who who's really subject to it? What is a meeting? That's probably one of the more common areas of discussion and often challenges and then a few uh moments on executive sessions. So what is a meeting? Uh a
012meeting or sorry what are the bodies that are subject to the law? Jumped ahead there. Uh first you have to have a public body. That's the easy one. That's what you that's what you think of it. Uh something that is uh created by the legislature, special district, a school district, a city, a county, the state is a public body. The trickier issue comes up with bodies that have the authority to make recommendations to a public body are called governing bodies of a public body subject to the public meetings law. And this is really uh tricky. This can be a tricky question when you have advisory committees, subcommittees, a variety of groups that can be on the edges of these. So for example, uh if the board were to set up a committee that reports to
013the superintendent and makes a recommendation to the superintendent, there is uh you know good argument that that is not a public body subject to the public meetings law. If though that body makes recommendations directly to the board of directors that are considered by the board, then it's going to be a governing body. So as you're structuring committees, those are important questions. Who is this reporting? What what is this body's purpose? How are they reporting? And uh what is it that they are actually doing? And this is one where also like the policy and the perception can come into play because if there is a perception that a a body was set up with the superintendent as an intermediary but that was not really like people could discern that that was simply to try and avoid
014having a public meeting for for for that body. you know, you may heir on the side of saying, okay, well, let's treat this committee as a public body uh even if we don't need to just to avoid the perception uh avoid argument about it. But again there there may be very good reasons that no that that me that public or that body that's not a public body needs to meet and they need to meet without uh being a public meeting and going through the uh requirements of notice etc. Yes. >> Um do you want us to ask questions along the way or do you >> Yeah, that probably because it'll be within the topic and I'll keep an eye on time. So if I start moving >> a quick question. So say for instance if
015we had a this SGC um a body that reports to the superintendent or chief of staff um but board members are allowed to attend those meetings does that now become a shady area? If they're allowed to, if they're attending the meeting and it's less than a quorum, you uh and they're just attending uh it's probably not going to be just turn it into a governing body necessarily. But, you know, again, that's kind of where the legal advice, like that's something where we'd want to sit down and make sure we understood who's there and who's who's involved and what what the recommendation authority coming from it really is. >> Can you give an example of what that would be? >> Um, yeah. So, I mean, process, which is a big committee that advised the um >>
016one of the chiefs and perks, right? was technically the one that was vice, but we regularly had board members like Michelle attend. Um, and often during meetings that we were discussing what our recommendation was going to be for >> to the chief of staff, >> the chief of >> uh finance financial >> or to the deputy superintendent. Yeah. Thank you. >> But less than a quorum of uh board members there. >> Yeah, I think three was the most uh public. I was thinking that in a cautionary sense, it seems like the district's practice has been to notice those in case there is any ambiguity. >> I would agree. >> And and I think if it's another good example, if you have multiple B board members attending and discussing something, uh even if you can make
017technical arguments that hey this wouldn't necessarily be hey we're going to treat it as a public meeting so that we don't have any uh you know suggestions otherwise. uh and if that might be something where it's there's an argument on the margins. Another example where you can draw a line is actually something where there's gathering information versus deliberating. So in theory a board can have a subcommittee that simply gathers information but does not make a recommendation. So there may be occasions where that would be uh a distinction that could be drawn. But the the question you raised points points out the um some of the play in the joints there and if people can question what's what is really that committee doing compared to the deputy superintendent and so airing on the side of noticing
018and treating something as a public meeting wise choice. So the bodies that those are good examples of the challenges uh and you just you want to be thoughtful when you're setting up committees to make sure as I said you know what is really its authority uh what is the purpose and how are we going to treat it shifting to meetings uh it's a mouthful to start with and then we have to break it down the Definition of a meeting is a convening of a governing body of a public body for which a quorum is required to make a decision or deliberate toward a decision on any matter. So you can take about every single one of those phrases and prepositional phrases and have an argument about what falls uh within it. And so some of
019the um some of the other definitions I think help a bit in narrowing it down. So there is also a definition of convening. Convening. We are convening tonight. Uh no question. Gathering in a physical uh location. Uh second one be using electronic video or telephone technology to be able to communicate contempor contemporaneously among participants. We're going to come back to that uh in a minute uh because I think it relates to C which is serial electronic written communication among participants or uh using an intermediary to communicate among participants. So the these are all uh have some traps in them. uh one or more definition before we get into what some of those traps are and that is uh deliberation means a discussion or communication that is part of a decision making process. So it does
020require convening to deliberate. So uh I had examples in my mind that I was going to give and then conveniently between the time that I sent this uh for the board packet and today there ethics commission put out an FAQ to uh help guide this part of the discussion and so uh but I think I found it Friday. So, couple more things that from that FAQ that I think you can find helpful. Deliberating. There's a good definition in the FAQ includes discussions or communications that are part of the decision-making process that may include identifying or selecting the nature of the decision to be made. Gathering information related to the decision to be made. identifying and assessing alternatives, weighing information, and making a decision. So, they pull that from a regulation. So, you know, you're always
021going to heir on the side of if we're considering information at all, we are likely deliberating. >> And so, are we doing that with, for example, prohibited serial communications? And here's the way it's described by the Oregon Ethics Commission. Prohibited serial communications occur when the governing body outside of a public meeting uses serial electronic written communication notes, emails, texts, in-person communications or an intermediary to communicate among a quorum of the members for the purpose of deliberating or deciding any matter within the governing body's jurisdiction. So, this this is a very tricky area to deal with. And in fact, the Oregon Ethics Commission just came out with an opinion. It doesn't address the question of whether a Google document edit would be a potential serial communication, but it assumes that it would because it treats as
022a public meeting a situation where multiple people are basically doing editing that that is deliberating on a document and you know when you see Google documents going and you've got questions coming back and forth, should we say it this way? Should we say it that way? Um, you can end up if you have uh if you end up with a quorum of a public body engaging in different it can be different times. So, it's serial. It's not all at the same time. Somebody's on at 10:00 p.m. The morning person's on at 4:30 a.m. But it just keeps going and it re and a quorum ends up basically having a discussion. You can have uh a potential public meetings violation. And you can see how it could uh play out because if that document has been
023edited since the last public meeting, somebody may, you know, an astute observer would notice, oh, there's been a lot of changes to that document. They might start asking how did they come about? And if they retraced it, they'd say it's a serial communication. More commonly, we hear about X texts. In fact, they have it here. They have an example. They use a phone call, but it's member A calls member B to discuss lowering downtown parking fines by 10%. On May 1st, on May 15th, member B emails member C to see if they member C would also be supportive of lowering the parking fees. The next day, member A sends a text message to member D to see if member D would support lowering the downtown parking fees. In this example, four members, a quorum, have
024deliberated about whether to lower the downtown parking fees. So, you can see the challenge of sort of one-off communications uh and they can occur through discussion, text message, Google doc, uh in any of these ways. Uh I worked on something for another district and I was curious what had happened to it. was work work on a policy and so I pulled up their board meeting because I was interested in their discussion and what they did and I haven't noticed PPS but you you may well have done it was in their board meeting they had a Google doc up and uh actually it was a subcommittee meeting but it was a public body meeting and they just they had the Google doc on the screen so the whole thing was the public meeting uh and you
025could see the Google doc and hear the discussion so uh this is the trickiest area I think uh of danger because we're human beings who like to communicate with each other and find uh utility in doing that, but you kind of have to say, "Okay, I I need to make sure I don't run myself into that." Yes. >> Questions. Go ahead. >> Yeah. So, you have an idea and you send it to a board >> one then if you send that to another board member. So you're not you shouldn't be chairing >> once you >> sharing ideas except >> so it it has to be a matter that is with one within the jurisdiction which presumably it is in other words it's something you can control something that you that will or could come before
026the board. So if you get more so you did just two >> and you trusted the two are not going to talk to anybody else about it. probably. >> So, so that is uh that's the danger. >> Who violates the serial meetings law? Is it Addie or is it the person who told the board person? >> So, that's a great question and we may not get to all 17 today. Uh but but uh the the the O OEGC will uh look at it, but I think they can I think I'd have to look, but I think they can find that anyone who was involved in it violated the public was involved in this serial committee law, right? It just passed serial meetings just passed pretty recently. So there was case law that was quite conf
027confusing and then the legislature uh two or three years ago uh created a definition to try and encompass the serial communications in statute. >> And so is generally speaking in your experience is everyone now incapable working together as a group? Um, >> great question mark. >> Or people finding a way because I mean to me it just sets us all up to look extremely messy because we can't communicate with each other. >> I guess I think what well I think you probably can communicate with each other. You just have to be very intentional and thoughtful about it and think about um the fact that most uh that the the meaningful discussion with a quorum has to take place in a public meeting. >> So if you're trying to change somebody's mind, you don't do a
028one-on-one, you wait for the whole meeting. >> That's the That's the idea actually. >> That's the idea. Yes. So let's say we want to put something like you know we have our board committees and we want to add something to the agenda. >> Okay. Are we saying um you know let's let's say it's Michelle and I and I'm like okay Michelle's chairing committee I would love to have this added to the agenda and this is why if I say and this is why am I >> in the the single communication to one person uh no >> even though in a committee two people is a quorum right >> oh so you're in a committee and you're on the committee and >> and two people are a quorum yes So discussions about what goes on an
029agenda to the uh those I mean I've certainly seen meetings where there is a process to determine what is going to go on the agenda so that that is considered in a public session. So would that make sense for us to send that request to say Roseanne who was our board manager and then she would discuss it with >> Michelle and their agenda setting meeting. Is that how >> so that's that can be considered an intermediary. >> Uh but what you can put on the agenda you I think you can put on the agenda we need to have an agenda item about whether to add something to the agenda. Okay. >> And that's occasionally >> like so are people working to change the law because it's clear that it's really dumb, right? >> So, I'm
030sure that there there are differences of opinion about it uh about I think it I I would expect that OSBA would like to tighten it up. I would expect that the city uh and county group would would like to make it more practical. And everyone remember the legislature wrote their own exception to it because they can get caucus and talk about all of this together. So everybody else is stuck but they have their >> Yeah. And certainly you have uh you know there's uh there's there's groups that are favor uh you know the there's public interest advocacy groups that help uh argue the other side. So, so I I am going to move on to so the uh OSBA I highly commend the OSBA uh sessions this weekend uh and any others uh on these
031issues because yes this is a really tough issue. Um I'm just quickly I'll go through you know there are things that are not subject to this so purely factual or educational or non-substantive and I consider an agenda item. I mean, that's a great question, but I I would consider that substantive whether or not we're going to consider this within the scope of the committee or important enough to be an agenda item, but I can't be at the meeting. >> You're okay. >> It does make you feel a lot better. I appreciate >> the standing item, >> right? Uh something that's not related to a matter for the board. Uh that's, you know, also something, but you really have to think about that because you could as a as PPS, all sorts of things that in
032theory might, you know, some other governmental entity is going to uh have a fee for service for something, but it impacts the community in a way. Uh, and even though it's not your public body's fee, if it's going to be something that you might make a resolution on and somebody thinks you should have seen that coming, that that can be a trap. So, so let uh I think we've sort of covered the you have to be replies to all those are that's kind of the classic serial communication group editing. Uh and then that last point of assess what what might come before the board. Uh if you think you're on the edges of the board jurisdiction, might it really come before the board? >> May I ask a question? Of course. >> So, I'm thinking
033about questions, right? And I know that that's factual um informative to the board. So if there are I'm thinking about last year where we had a few questions that go back and forth and then a uh with a multiple people added on and they uh the board member wanted to bring in additional context and then express their feelings or stance on something that was answered in a factual way. Does that begin to change it from being a question on factual? >> It might. Yes. >> Yes. So staff just answering factual questions >> say well that's we're not we're just providing factual information but once a discussion starts up about oh what about this what about that you're you're moving off of it. >> Yeah. Yep. >> Would this matter? >> You know so >> can
034I ask a related question? the the district makes a lot of like Q&A docs for us. >> Okay. >> Taking our questions, putting them together, answering them and >> and I think it's really helpful for us to all see it. >> Yes. >> So, would it just be instead of emailing it around where then suddenly it could feel right for some sort? >> Well, I think they can send you a here's FAQ uh and this is just information. This is information for you to consider. >> Don't reply at all. Don't start discussing it here. >> We're putting that in your board packet. >> Information. >> Yeah. >> So, if it were a Google sheet where questions are collected, >> read only. read only >> and um answers are put in and they can all see
035it >> and they're staff answers a question >> based often about an item that's on an agenda like a contract maybe with some questions. >> Let me add some context to that. So, so one of the things, so last year we had um quite a few emails and so staff was, you know, drop everything, let's answer this question. And so what we needed to do was design a process where we can collect all the questions and then respond in a timely manner. And then um what we talked about this year is then what if we just created a word document so all board members can see all questions that come in. We answer factually and um they're out there for replacing. >> I'd probably want to actually look and see how it is operating. And
036so, you know, I I I think there is a line that that could be drawn this FAQ, but it starts getting a little gr more gray there. And so, that may be something that's worth following up on. Um, >> yeah, >> I just want to add one thing to that because when I'm reading this, everyone's questions are causing me to deliberate on >> Yeah. topic. So, >> one question has now been sent to all of us >> and we're here in a public meeting >> right now. But if id looked at this at home, we wouldn't have >> But but is that going to be up on the screen for everyone to read? That's that's where I'm wondering where the line is. >> So, so >> I think you're not communicating back and forth at
037those other times. So, there's not a communication when you're off thinking about what's coming next. It's you have to have those questions that are percolating in your mind could go to an individual staff member. >> Uh or they could be raised at a discussion that relates to the topic at hand. >> Yes. Just trying to think of a simple way to put it. So if all board members ask their questions and the staff answer it in itself that would be seems like that would be okay. But the moment that board members see other people's questions and they respond to those questions, >> that's where I'm starting to get >> that's where >> that that's where >> so what we had talked about is having it be static and and there's a lot behind that. But
038what we had talked about is static so that it can't be an iterative document. It's a document where the questions are board members see it. It's factual. It goes >> static is a good word. So that's that's I mean I'm checking my thinking but yes >> that's in what I had envisioned with the concept Dr. Armstrong is talking about is static so that you can't >> inadvertently reply or go in the document which would be really great to go in the document and edit it and answer your ask your other questions that's going to be iterative and process >> right like >> director's reports questions has sparked new questions I have and I ask those questions that would be iterative >> I have a question about that so similarly in what you just said is
039so I do know sometimes if we're will ask a question like I'll send out something about you know something is ready for review and then they'll ask a question about something but copy all the board members which is similar to a question that's making you start deliberating your mind. >> Yeah, I worry about reply to all. I mean that's effectively reply to all and somebody can claim that's deliberative and so responding by taking out everybody and saying can you tell me a text? >> Yeah. So, if I email Roseanne a question and she responds to me, could she then email the rest of the board and say, "I had a question about XYZ and this is the answer." >> What I would like to do would be if there was like the static type of
040FAQ just like you're collecting it to everyone else. What what you can't do is basically use her for the purpose of doing that as opposed to just getting the factual information. factual though and not >> um I I just I liked the idea of where she's getting a few questions and then putting it together. It's you just have to know that somebody might question the intent if it's you know one off or it seems to have an agenda. That's that's where I get worried >> and I I take it then judgment but only my only worry is that um you know as we move through the work we have a lot of big things to share and I know there's going to be a lot of questions and so we haven't started this practice yet
041but what we were talking about is that there's really good questions that board members ask and how helpful it would be for others to see those questions so that then you know because often times we get the same question from multiple people and so instead of just like sending that same answer back, you know, uh the risk of sounding like it's a canned response. It's just that we've already answered it. We were just thinking like how can we solve this >> um in a way that it works and we were going to discuss it in our retreat in a couple weeks. So, we're a little early anyway, but >> yeah, I I'm I keep going back to Sharon's term. Uh the more static it is, the less it's deliberative. And so, I would kind of
042keep that in mind. And that's the type of thing where uh the question of is the legislature working on this? That would be the a nice type of thing to get clarity because what we're talking about here is all the stuff that's at the edges that somebody could make an argument about. We can probably say, "Well, that wasn't really deliberating. That was just answering a single factual question." But the way it plays out in reality, yes, >> may make that harder. We need to solve for when there's seven people on the board, when someone has a question and it would be helpful for everyone to see the response. Um, that's what we need to solve for. Right. >> Right. And >> within the confines of this >> and like when I go back to what
043the purpose of the law is that they'd say, well, that's deliberation that should be done in public. And so that's the ch that's the challenge. That's that's the thing. >> Even if it's just one way information, >> if it's just one way information then from staff for example, >> okay, >> for information then that then you're not deliberating >> right. >> So I uh I thought meetings was going to be the short component uh shorter than the ethics component. Uh and I see we could uh you know and I am very aware that you are uh have a meeting coming up soon. Uh, I'm gonna basically uh skip executive sessions because you have Roseanne and Sharon who can and the legal team who identify when those are. But in executive sessions, one of the things
044uh often you may hear is, "Hey, we're getting to the edge of what we're allowed to have an executive session about. Listen to that advice." uh the purposes are pretty specific and I think PPS is you know careful about using that statute properly. Public records law really was going to be uh the briefest and I thought um I I thought that the discussion on serial communications would actually be a good leadin to it. Um, and I just want to point out just like the public meetings law, this is a bright, this is open sunshine law. And so in the absence of a exemption, it is a public record. Anything done on the public's behalf. And so I'm just going to point out a couple of practical issues. uh you know I think you can probably
045identify these but if you have personal devices but you're doing district business on them uh those are public records and uh if uh somebody were to resist providing them in response to a public records request that will definitely be on the individual uh you know uh person who says well this is this is on my machine does anybody have a search warrant or something well uh you know it's a public record regardless of how it's stored. What can get tricky is like mixed business and personal. So you have a friend uh that you are have you know a a friend who's a parent of another student and so you have text discussions there but the parent is also uh who's a friend is also a constituent and so there's discussions about other things and once
046that starts blending into the same thread uh you can get in some very uh sticky situations and those are public records. And then finally, I just want to make a point about uh confidential uh information. There are exemptions for certain types of confidential information, but you can lose those if you if they are shared outside of the scope of the confidential information. And that is um so attorney client privilege comes to mind can only be with you know it it would typically be a public record but it's not because it's subject to a statutory privilege but that privilege is broken because it was confidential and it went beyond the intended audience. So anything you get student information uh employment information that's personal uh attorney client privilege you you want to treat as confidential. So because
047we are close on time, I'm going to get only the really big key uh ethics uh gift stuff. Uh so Oregon ethics law, you also have this in policy. Uh but these are the rules around uh conflicts of interest. They are the rules around not obtaining personal gain and gift acceptance. and a lot of them overlap and run together. Uh, and I'll just briefly cover I'll probably focus on use of office and and gifts conflicts of interest. Um, we'll touch on there are a couple of uh very good publications. there's a guide for public officials on the Oregon Ethics Commission site and so um you can uh utilize that uh for reference and then uh you know we get lots of questions about where these lines draw but basically you'll need to read this whole
048definition is did you get to did you end up making some money or losing some money or some other financial benefit or avoiding losing money because of the fact that you are either employed by the school district or because you're an elected official for the school district. And that applies to your relative uh as well, spouse, parent, there, you know, there's a whole list. And also, if you have a spouse, it applies to their list of people that you just because you're on the board, there are things that can come your way. Uh I'm going to skip that example because I want to just get to the the main issues. um official compensation if you're paid something. Uh and that applies more in the employment realm. Uh honorarium, so you go to OSBA and you
049speak and they give you uh certificate or a plaque or something like that. If it's $50 or less, you are allowed to take it. If it's totally unrelated, if you if it's related to your profession, completely unrelated to your work as a board member, a lot of times it's something some somebody's been doing for years, that's not because of your public official status. There's actually a rag that says that if it's gold or some other uh uh what what is it? >> Silver. >> Yeah, it it cracks me up. Um >> uh >> wrote this nobody's >> the gem that's that one's in the ranks like I wanted to read it but if it's oh material uh raw material but it would have value over the amount uh you don't have you can get a
050geologist to tell you that is okay to think um >> there are exceptions uh or some of the common issues that come are one credit uh frequent flyer credit card. Uh anything that you get because if you use go on a district trip and you use a credit card that gets you miles, you you're o the Oregon Ethics Commission would find that to be a violation. You have obtained the benefit of those miles. If you take a if you get bumped on a flight or you volunteer to get bumped and you know you're gonna get a $50 voucher because you took the later flight that you got that because of a public official if you're on a public official trip. So that's one uh that can be a real trap related to that is you
051can't accept gifts for over $50. There are um there are dozens of um dozens of uh exceptions to this and we'll hit the key ones. It is from someone who has a administrative or legislative interest. This is actually an easier one I think for employees than board members. board members are just, you know, the possibility you vote on a vendor contract involving uh, you know, somebody who's a vendor is it's just high. So, my whole career people have aired on the side of caution of this because and just tried to avoid uh, you know, those fancy perks. Uh, the big ones come >> for events. So, there are a few exceptions that relate to having uh meals, and I'll just kind of break the difference. You go to a event in the ballroom at the
052Portland Art Museum that has lots of public officials. You're going, they say, "Anyone who's an elected official, please stand up. We appreciate your service." And uh there's there's a meal there and you're there in a representative capacity. uh you're you're likely okay. >> Yes. The difference uh a different scenario would be uh uh you're at a conference and somebody who is selling something to some part of the district says we're inviting a couple key individuals from some of our favorite school districts to uh you know this seafood and steakhouse. Now, now we're starting to get into the territory of that's that's something where it's gonna very likely run a foul of the of the gift rule. So, you know, size of the event, the type of the event matters uh a lot. Uh entertainment, so
053invited to a Blazers suite should put red flags up all over the place. invited to an event where uh secondary to the event on the side there's entertainment of the timbers and the thorns are going to do a demonstration uh a couple famous players. Okay, that's incidental to the event. Anything where you participate is not an exception to the gift rule. So, uh, somebody says, "We're going to, this is a charitable group and we're going to do, uh, you can come and do axe throwing and then on the side you can also donate to the charitable group. The purpose is going to not look incidental because you got to go and basically participate in the event." Um, so I will uh um, so those are are some of the big issues. There are lots of
054exceptions to this. Um, conflicts of interest. Uh, this is where you or a uh member of your household or a business uh has something that the board is going to uh consider if it might uh be a financial benefit to you. There's a method to raise the fact that I may have a conflict of interest and I can stay and I can vote, but I've raised it. if it's clear that there's going to be a financial benefit uh potentially to you or a business. So the easiest examples are your profession is for a company and the company has a contract in front of the board. You have an actual conflict of interest. So I know you need to get to your other meeting. Uh >> I was ask allowed because I know in the legislature
055you have to vote even if you have a conflict of interest. Is that the case? There is there's an exception called the vote of necessity. So there is a minimum number of people that must vote to make something happen and it cannot happen without that person voting which is rare with because >> most likely you are in at the at our school board you just wouldn't vote and you just yourself I think in the moment you say I have an obvious >> and and you can't participate in the discussion either so my apologies for my use of time, but the questions were good on the meetings, and I can tell that's the uh a tricky area now, and I didn't want to uh, you know, leave them all away. So, I'll I'll close out and
056let you all go on to your other business. >> One last question. >> Sure. >> If we had a really long board meeting that was very stressful and we want to go out for desserts afterwards, >> uh, pay for your pay. >> No, I mean, the public meeting laws, as long as we can keep conversation about my cute puppy. >> Yeah. So, yes, you have to be you have to be careful. You you have to be careful because it's really hard to only have the conversation about your cute puppy. Uh you can do that. I I I I I worked at the University of South Carolina uh for a while and they had a public meetings law and they noticed every football game uh as a public meeting because you know they didn't trust that
057they could send the people to go to uh so you you do I mean I think the other question is you do have to watch the perception like that but obviously you have your board dinners that are sometimes before I mean you you can be social and not discuss those Thanks. >> Yeah. >> So, thanks. Sorry for the rapid fire speaking at the end there. >> Yeah. Thanks. >> Appreciate us. >> We were late.