§ 2-87. Disposition.

(a)

Written opinion. The Board shall issue a decision within ninety (90) calendar days after the filing of a complaint. This deadline shall be extended by any amount of time granted to a respondent pursuant to a respondent's request for additional time to respond or to attend proceedings. The Board shall state in a written opinion its findings of fact and conclusions of law. The written opinion shall either:

(1)

Dismiss the complaint; or

(2)

Upon finding that there has been a violation of the ethics laws or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code:

a.

Impose sanctions in accordance with these regulations; or

b.

Recommend criminal prosecution and/or civil remedies, in accordance with this rule; or

c.

State why no remedial action is imposed or recommended.

If the Board determines that a violation has occurred, the opinion shall identify in writing the particular rule or rules violated. If the complaint is dismissed, the grounds for the dismissal shall be set forth in the opinion. The failure of the Board to comply within the above time limits may result in the charge being dismissed for want of prosecution. Prior to such dismissal, the complainant will be given notice and an opportunity to request continuance of the action.

(b)

Notification. Copies of the opinion shall be forwarded to the complainant, the person charged in the complaint, the City Attorney's Office, Compliance Auditor, and any member of the Ethics Review Board who did not participate in the disposition of the case. A copy of the opinion shall also be forwarded to the City Clerk, who shall make it available as authorized by law.

(c)

Recommendations. A recommendation for criminal prosecution shall be forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency.

(d)

Similar charges barred. If the complaint is dismissed because the evidence failed to establish a violation of the ethics laws or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code, the Ethics Review Board shall not entertain any other similar complaint based on substantially the same evidence.

(e)

Factors relevant to sanctions.

(1)

General violations (non-reporting violations). In deciding whether to recommend or impose, in the case of a violation of the ethics laws, criminal prosecution and/or civil remedies, the Ethics Review Board shall take into account relevant considerations, including, but not limited to, the following:

a.

The culpability of the person charged in the complaint;

b.

The harm to public or private interests resulting from the violation;

c.

The necessity of preserving public confidence in the conduct of local government;

d.

Whether there is evidence of a pattern of disregard for ethical obligations; and

e.

Whether remedial action has been taken that will mitigate the adverse effect of the violation.

To impose or recommend sanctions for a first violation of the Ethics Code or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code, other than a letter of notification, a letter of admonition or a referral to training, the Board must find by a preponderance of the evidence that the person acted knowingly, unless otherwise provided by this code.

(2)

Reporting requirement violations. To impose sanctions, other than a letter of notification, a letter of admonition or a referral to training, for untimely or incomplete submission of reports required by the Ethics Code or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code, the Board must determine by a preponderance of the evidence that the person knowingly:

a.

Failed to file the report on time; or

b.

Failed to include in the report information that is required to be included; or

c.

Submitted inaccurate or false information.

Failure to submit a required report or an amended report after receipt of notice of non-compliance by the City Clerk, the Compliance Auditor, or the Ethics Review Board may be considered evidence of a knowing failure to comply with reporting requirements.

Upon finding a second or subsequent untimely, incomplete or inaccurate submission of reports within a two-year period of time, the Board may issue a letter of reprimand regardless of whether the second or subsequent violation was made knowingly by the filer.

(f)

Civil sanctions for Ethics Code violations. The following civil remedies may be recommended or imposed by the Ethics Review Board which finds that the ethics laws have been violated:

(1)

Disciplinary action. Civil service employees who violate this Code of Ethics may be disciplined in accordance with City personnel rules and procedures. Other City officials and employees who engage in conduct that violates this code may be notified, warned, reprimanded, suspended, or removed from office or employment by the appointing authority, or by a person or body authorized by law to impose such remedies. Disciplinary action under this section may be imposed in addition to any other penalty or remedy contained in this Code of Ethics or any other law. The Ethics Review Board may refer a violation to the City Manager or his or her designee for disciplinary action in accordance with any applicable municipal civil service rules;

(2)

Suit for damages or injunctive relief. This Code of Ethics has been enacted not only to further the policy stated in section 2-41 (Statement of purpose), but to protect the City and any other person from any losses or increased costs incurred by the City or other person as a result of the violation of these provisions. It is the intent of the City that this Ethics Code can and should be recognized by a court as a proper basis for a civil cause of action for damages or injunctive relief based upon a violation of its provisions, and that such forms of redress should be available in addition to any other penalty or remedy contained in this Ethics Code or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code or any other law. The Ethics Review Board may refer a violation of the Ethics Code or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code to the City Attorney's Office for consideration of a suit by the City for damages or injunctive relief.

(3)

Disqualification from contracting or lobbying.

a.

If the Ethics Review Board finds that any person (including business entities and non-profit entities) has intentionally or knowingly violated any provision of the Ethics Code, or has intentionally or knowingly assisted another person in violating any provision of the Ethics Code, or has violated a provision or assisted another in a violation that the person should have known was a violation of the Ethics Code, the Ethics Review Board may recommend to the City Council that the person be prohibited from entering into any contract with the City or prohibited from lobbying on behalf of clients before the City for a period not to exceed three (3) years.

An entity may also be disqualified from contracting based on the conduct of an employee or agent in violation of this code.

b.

It is a violation of this Code of Ethics:

1.

For a person debarred from entering into a contract with the City to enter, or attempt to enter, into a contract with the City during the period of disqualification from contracting; or

2.

For a City official or employee to knowingly assist a violation of subsection b.1. of this rule.

c.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit any person from receiving a service or benefit, or from using a facility, which is generally available to the public, according to the same terms.

(4)

Recommendation to void or ratify contract. If the Ethics Review Board finds that there has been an intentional or knowing violation of any provision of the Ethics Code, or that a person has committed a violation that he or she should have known was a violation of the code that is related to the awarding of a contract, the Ethics Review Board must vote on whether to recommend to the City Council that the contract be ratified or voided. Such action shall not affect the imposition of any penalty or remedy contained in this Code of Ethics or any other law.

(5)

Civil fine. The Ethics Review Board may impose upon any person, whether or not an official or employee of the City, who violates any provision of this Code of Ethics a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00). Each day after any filing deadline imposed by division 5 (Lobbyists) and division 7 (Financial disclosure) or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code for which any required statement has not been filed, or for which a statement on file is incorrect, misleading, or incomplete, constitutes a separate offense.

(6)

Letter of notification. The Ethics Review Board may issue a letter of notification to any person, whether or not an official or employee of the City, when the Board finds that a violation of the Code of Ethics was clearly unintentional or inadvertent. The letter must advise the person to whom it is directed of any steps to be taken to avoid future violations.

(7)

Letter of admonition. The Ethics Review Board may issue to any person, whether or not an official or employee of the City, a letter of admonition when the Board finds that the violation of the Code of Ethics was minor and/or may have been unintentional or inadvertent.

(8)

Letter of reprimand. The Ethics Review Board may issue to any person, whether or not an official or employee of the City, a letter of reprimand when the Board finds that the person has intentionally or knowingly violated the Code of Ethics.

(9)

Referral to ethics training. Upon finding of violation of the Ethics Code, the Ethics Review Board may require a City official or employee to attend Ethics Code training.

(g)

Criminal prosecution. The Ethics Review Board may recommend to the appropriate law enforcement agency criminal prosecution under this section or V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 171. Prosecution of any person by the City Attorney for a violation of this Ethics Code shall not be undertaken until a complaint is disposed of in accordance with section 2-87. However, the absence of a recommendation to prosecute from an Ethics Review Board to the City Attorney shall not preclude the City Attorney from exercising his or her prosecutorial discretion to prosecute a violation of this Ethics Code. Any person who files a false sworn statement under division 5 (Lobbyists), division 7 (Financial disclosure), or division 8 (Ethics Review Board) or the Municipal Campaign Finance Code is subject to criminal prosecution for perjury under the laws of the state.

(h)

Reconsideration. Within five (5) business days of receiving the final opinion of the Ethics Review Board, the complainant or respondent may request the Ethics Review Board to reconsider its decision. The request must be filed with the City Clerk. Within ten (10) business days after filing with the City Clerk, the originally assigned preliminary reviewing panel shall review the request for reconsideration. If the panel concludes reconsideration is warranted, it shall bring the request within another ten (10) business days to the full Board for decision on whether to grant reconsideration. If the full Board grants reconsideration, the Board may then order further proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this code. If no panel was assigned to conduct a preliminary review, the chair shall review the request and may in his or her discretion decline the reconsideration or refer the matter to the full Board for reconsideration within ten (10) business days of receiving the request.

(i)

Council action. City Council shall dispose of a recommendation from the Ethics Review Board within ninety (90) calendar days of receiving such recommendation. The recommendation(s) of the Ethics Review Board may be accepted, rejected, modified, or recommitted to that Board for further action or clarification. Failure to take action within specified time limits may result in the charge being dismissed for want of prosecution. Prior to such dismissal, the complainant will be given notice and an opportunity to request continuance of the action.

(j)

Appeals. A decision of the Ethics Review Board is final unless the person aggrieved by the decision appeals to the State District Court in Bexar County no later than twenty (20) business days after the date the Board renders the decision.

If the decision of the Ethics Review Board is not supported by substantial evidence, the District Court may reverse or affirm the Board's decision in whole or in part, or may modify the Board's decision if substantial rights of the aggrieved person have been prejudiced. Costs of an appeal may not be assessed against the Board, individual Board members, or the City.

(Ord. No. 2013-05-09-0317, § 2(Att. B), 5-9-13; Ord. No. 2018-06-21-0491 , § 1(Att. A), 6-21-18)