Maniaci Wants Steak Not Salad

She wants her free trips worth “thousands of dollars” and hundred dollar meals cuz the alternatives are a “nightmare”. Health care, I could at least understand, this, is just, wow. Oh, don’t worry, she’ll disclose what she got for free, isn’t that enough? I just have to comment on this one – its such bizarre behavior for an elected official.

TIPS
Tips for Bridget Manaici:
1. Know your audience. The ethics board members all work or worked for the state or UW and deal with this issue all the time, its not that hard.
2. Repeating yourself doesn’t change what you are saying and bores the listener.
3. Read the ethics ordinance.
4. You’re starting to look really, really greedy and unethical. It’s not all about you. If you don’t like the job, quit. If you’re going to do the job, follow the ethics laws.

THE ISSUE
The ordinance change in question relates to the Mayor’s bike ride and the lack of information about it. He did just file his information from April. Even tho the ordinance says it is supposed to be done in 10 days, they mayor waited 6 months. The committee felt the reimbursement by third parties needed to be tightened up and proposed the following:

DRAFTER’S ANALYSIS: The Ethics Code allows third parties to pay for expenses incurred by an incumbent, but sets out no procedure for such payment, and only requires that the expenses be primarily for the benefit of the City and not the individual benefit of the incumbent. This ordinance establishes such procedures and requires that the expenses be allowable under existing City policies. Such expenses shall be submitted to the Comptroller along with the contact person for the third party who agreed to pay the expenses. After the Comptroller determines which expenses are reimbursable, the Comptroller shall reimburse the incumbent and then obtain payment from the third party for reimbursement of the allowable costs.

ORDINANCE: The Common Council of the City of Madison do hereby ordain as follows:
Subdivision (i) of Subsection (6) entitled “Honoraria, Fees and Expenses” of Section 3.35 entitled “Code of Ethics” of the Madison General Ordinances is created to read as follows:
“(i) If a third party, other than the City, is authorized to pay for any expenses, including food, travel or lodging, incurred by any incumbent under this subsection, such reimbursement shall be made through the City Comptroller. The incumbent shall submit the expenses for which reimbursement is sought to the Comptroller, together with the contact person for the third party who agreed to pay those expenses. The Comptroller shall determine which expenses are reimbursable pursuant to City policy, and shall reimburse the incumbent for those expenses, and then obtain payment from the third party to the City for those expenses.”

FISCAL NOTE: Comptroller’s Office staff will perform the administrative procedures required by this Ordinance
as part of their regular duties. No appropriation is required.

Alder Bridget Manaici objected and would have referred it back a the last council meeting, but the walk out prevented it. You’ll have to read her own words, repeatedly, to find out why.

MANIACI TESTIMONY
Bridget Maniaci testifies on item three out of order so she can go to the briefing from the water utility.  Interesting priorities. She says she is “under the weather”. It was her birthday yesterday and she was bragging about how drunk she was going to get on the Isthmus/Forward Lookout live blog, so I’m guessing that is the problem.

Maniaci says that she “wanted to talk to guys” on her perspective on the ordinance as an alder and tell them about conversations she had, she shays she asked Mike [Verveer] to explain and he said talk to Mike May and Dean Brasser.  She talked out different scenarios with Michael May [city attorney[, he told her to talk to Dean [Brasser], Dean hadn’t heard about it, that was news to Mike [Verveer], he thought that Mike May talked with Brasser since Brasser is the comptroller and would administer it.  There were conversations that happened on council floor before the meeting between May, Brasser, Maniaci and Verveer – there was a difference of opinion between city attorney and comptroller, she is concerned that “you need to hear from Dean Brasser” about how it would be administered, he has “major reservations” about how it would function. Keep that characterization in mind. She says a couple things landed in her box and she wondered if she could do those things, one thing she is a member of “the young elected officials network or something like that” and they put together materials and seminars and usually she just gets emails, recently she got an email that they are having a conference on foreclosures and neighborhood stability for the members and [she fiddles around trying to find the email so she can read it to them, can’t find it, says she will send it on] . . . .she says one of the things is that young elected officials don’t have resources, this is cost free, they will pay for hotel and meals and they can apply for airfare reimbursement and when she took it to Mike May and asked how would it work, well, he said it would all go through the comptroller, they would write a check [comptrollers] and they [conference organizers] would write the city a check. What if she went a bus, what is my portion of the cost, it gets very murky very quickly and she will forward the email. This was an opportunity as an alder to go to a conference, they had the ability to cover the costs, she has no credit card, only a debit card, she can’t put “thousands of dollars of expenses” and then get reimbursed, that isn’t an option for her. Also “one of the ladies with Obihiro folks” wanted to put together delegation of half a dozen women in government and commerce to go to a winter festival in January and be part of a panel, she said she “can’t pony up” for airfare to Japan, she would be interested but can’t cover out of pocket, so how this is structured is a problem. I know Mike May has distinct ideas on what he wants to see but how it is administered, there are lots of problem, but Dean Brasser can’t be here. Part of this is politically motivated out of the mayor going to Europe, she has no problem with saying I’m going on a trip related to my duties as alder, that is no problem and it is relatively simple to put together itinerary and costs and document about “what the hell went on” in the trop. No problem with that but the whole comptroller being the middle is the problem. But where conferences and shared expenses, the discussions between Brasser and May there were real differences about how they view this. She is “not comfortable where this is at all”, it hit the council floor without Brasser being aware of it, she would like to see some work done, there is kind of not much at all in place right now, understands want for documentation when third parties involved in trip but it really hinders and exclude alders and mayors to take advantage of conferences or resources or opportunities directly related to city business, she is excited to see what you come up with on that. She sounds like Thuy now, none of her own ideas, just expecting others to come up with answers. She would like to see a filed report, detailing expenses. May “shot back” that they just have to submit for reimbursement, not putting things on a credit card on the first place. But how would that work she asked, he said go to;k to Brasser, Brasser said “wait a second, you want us to do what?” That is all I wanted to talk to you about, she will try to pull up email, specifically it was a conference for elected officials, very much to what I am doing here, so this whole comptroller as the middle man is really messy, she understands the goal. She thinks it needs some work so it functions well for alders, there is so little available to us and she wants to make the most of what we can do, she doesn’t want to “get hung up in red tape”. She asks Verveer if he has thoughts.

QUESTIONS OF MANIACI
Steve Brist, staff from city attorney’s office says that comptroller did a fiscal note on it, while he wasn’t personally aware his office did a fiscal note. He says if disclosure instead of money goes through city, how does city or citizens find out if a staff go to conference and reception sponsored by US Bank, how do we inform the public that that happened, or what if conference is underwritten by someone?

Maniaci says People for the American Way is paying, she thinks, it would all would have to be disclosed, there would be a requirement of them that they are in an official capacity , she doesn’t see problem with itinerary and what did and who underwrite the conference, that is easy to put together, you attach for the record the program of the conference and that kind of stuff, that is definitely easy if on an official business, that information should be made available, if she were a citizen who would like to know who is sponsoring, that is important to have, let make an example, if sponsored by Enron, that is kind of important information to know if it is an official responsibility, she has no problem with that, if official related to policy making why not want to disclose that or why you are there.

Brist asks about a conference that includes dinner and value of dinner is more than city would reimburse, if the city reimburses $30 and its $50, is that something that should be disclosed or changed?

Maniaci asks what you are supposed to do, go to a different dinner? No. If everyone is having steak, do you just eat a salad? That puts participant in an “enormous burden”, what are they supposed to do “walk out or pony up the difference on the spot for the dinner”? How would that work functionally if things needed ahead of time that due to extenuating circumstances, might not know cost of dinner ahead of time if have to run through comptroller two weeks ahead of time to get a check. She talks about the example of bus, if you have a bunch of participants and many participants, if differential in cost do I have to find different transportation but that is what is provided, how is that supposed to function? She has no problem with disclosure, it is the responsibility of the alder not to “jet set off to crazy things”, she knows they have to disclose it, but not what doing and who with, but she doesn’t understand if at restaurant it’s like oh, I guess the meal is $50 and the city piece of paper only be paid 30 bucks do I just get the salad, not sure how in some situations this is supposed to function that is why disclosure route isn’t more functional to have on file. The other thing too is that if trying to get information, what if alder just says I don’t want people to know who is covering it and they just pay then nothing through comptroller’s office then won’t get reimbursed and then “you guys: looking to see what they are doing can’t, you could go that route, not disclose, not go through comptroller office, so if going on some official travel we want to file and itinerary and thinks you want to know about where you are and what you are doing and if alders want to get reimbursed there is already a mechanism in place.

Carol Weidel says she is trying to understand about disclosure, are you saying advance or after the fact?

Maniaci says they could require both, if going on something they would need a pre-trip file saying here’s the basics and when get back, fill out itinerary and where went out to eat and who covered it, you could do both, if pre-trip disclosure then on the administrative side, let the comptroller’s office know, then they will know to a get report later.

Weidel says the heart of expenses issues is accepting something of value that is for benefit of the city, under your scenario if surrounded by young elected official peers and are going to a pricey meal above and beyond what we would reimburse any city employee, that’s ok cuz you disclose it?

Maniaci channeling Thuy says you should discuss that, if its part of program and they are all going out and one person is picking up the tab or if it is a formal sit down dinner as part of conference or day of panels and afterwards a bunch of people go out its different, “so here’s the thing” if I’m not under this scenario I struggle with reimbursement piece, I’m not whipping out my credit card and asking to be reimbursed.

Weidel asks if she is at a conference with meals and drinks with the conference, if value is more than normally be reimbursed, how would you control or limit that? Just through disclosure?

Maniaici says yes.

Weidel asks if its ok to accept a $100 meal?

Maniaici says because the “alternative is a nightmare”. I don’t understand if traveling and on the spot how to you work around that, it’s not like I can say I’m just not going to participate in this part of conference cuz city says too much money in my eyes.

Weidel says that is the heart of matter.

Maniaci says functionally, you have to think about “how the hell this would be administered” and how it would be handled fiscally, she understands why they are structuring this the way they are but functionally it’s a huge “nightmare”, that is why I wanted to be here. What is the goal here? It’s the disclosure, you want to know who is there, what the value of the things are getting and how it is proposed, people will not take advantage of conferences cuz of paper work or will just pay themselves and then not “mess with any of this junk”, the whole goal if this is totally circumvented if not reimbursed through comptroller then no paperwork – that is the flaw that she saw . . . .its more about disclosure than the dollar figure sum.

Weidel asks if she ever read the ethics code, its really simple, “No incumbent may use or attempt to use her or his position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of value or any advantage, privilege or treatment for the private benefit of herself or himself” unless the same is incurred for betterment of city and not private benefit

Maniaci says “Right, I totally get that”, if at a conference or official delegation going to Japan and government says they want to welcome you and honor you and they are having a meal on your behalf how say can only accept $20 and this meal is clearly more, it puts people in an awful position, could very easily say thanks glad to be here, I need to talk with organizer on what the cost of it is cuz I have to report that and bring that back for me. She understands this is kind of a difference, trying to wrap hands around how this would work, if standing there and bus for 30 people and they all get on one bus, they are not going to figure out another way to get there, that is why disclosure is here and you might get what you want to get at or see, and reimbursement thing is – if you never go though, if no personal reimbursement going through the comptroller’s office, just pay for it all myself and not tell anyone or say ok not going to go then and if conference on neighborhood stability I would like to go to that, that would be helpful but if have to get ahold of someone and submit to comptroller’s office and they might say they are not going to do that. I started having a really hard time following her as she repeated herself, started slumping in her seat more and didn’t talk in complete sentences.

Mike Verveer says he’s like to phrase it another way, when you were asked how to amend to maximize transparency, are you aware what we are trying to get at, Carol perhaps asked this another way, specifically the ethics code 3.35(6)(h) says “(h) Whenever an incumbent receives anything of value permitted by this Subsection (6) from or has any fee or expense waived or reduced by a person or entity other than the City in connection with her or his official duties, she or he shall, within 10 days of the occurrence file a report with the City Clerk on forms provided by the Clerk.” The clerk has the forms, they are not filed on a timely basis from my understanding more often than not. One example of forms are former alcohol coordinator, at least one or two or three trips were funded by the alcohol industry and it was legitimate in terms of code and benefit to the city but she did file reports but they are not detailed, this is so can determine how derived, that is what we want to change, expenses can’t be to the personal benefit to city official, and the code does not just cover elected officials, but all city staff – were you aware of the section, short of your concerns and exact language do you have real specific ideas to improve transparency?

Maniaci says you need to work on the forms. i.e. No.

Verveer says this is all disclosed after the fact.

Maniaci says that they could do an pre-trip official filing, administrative, tips off staff to look for detailed report, we can check if they did a good job of disclosing what said they were going to do, if they get there and conference not what they made it out to be, there is good information there, better job needs to be done.

Verveer asks if there are any shortcomings.

Maniaici says the form is not acceptable – she would expect detailed itinerary, the conference materials, my meal situation, my travel situation and spell it out, and if you just foot the bill cuz nothing will go through the comptroller’s office, this is a better way to do it, if you’re paying for some, say conference right and they pay for airfare but flights are not out of Madison but out of O’Hare but have to take VanGalder bus, that is an expense she wants to get reimbursed for, they should look comprehensively at trip as a whole, some expenses could be reimbursed, covered as part of event or trip- comprehensive, here is exactly where you were each hour of the day, in Katherine’s case if Anheiser Busch sponsored lunch that is important to know, need to know about conferences and who is behind them, not just conference on alcohol policy, any conference will have official schedule of events, its important to have on file and its not abuse to ask alders to file comprehensive statement, or any city staff, of itinerary, here is what we did and who it was sponsored by, that would be more comprehensive way to look at what is going on – not want to look at mayor’s example – we don’t know what he was doing, who paying and where he was, important to know and then if ancillary expense and alders asking – I just keep saying alder – alders asking to be reimbursed for, better sense comprehensively, that is her idea, require more comprehensive trip report, and that it is more than just the value of lunch or transportation expense, want to have a sense of purpose of the trip and what is going on in the trip and I think you want good things and city officials to take advantage of, you just want to know what they are doing, she doesn’t want to see worthwhile opportunity fall through the cracks cuz can’t navigate between conference organizers and comptroller and submit ahead of time and its going to be a mess and more important to look at the whole trip. Because then some just won’t ask for reimbursement so there’s no paperwork, not going to go on unnecessary trip if have to file a respond on everything done and where been.

Maniaci leaves and slams the door as Rosemary Lee starts talking and says that this is more a matter of Manaici’s inexperience.

PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Rosemary Lee testifies about how she did travel reimbursements when she worked at the UW.
Davin Pickell testifies about how he does travel reimbursements as treasurer of his union.
I shared the Mayor’s reports from his bike trip to Europe that were finally filed dated Friday. I suggested that they ask about what they did on behalf of the city and any promises made.

ETHICS BOARD DISCUSSION
Brist says he talked to the comptroller, his concern was what if someone goes to a conference and we never see anything, a person is a speaker or presenter at a national conference and our employee goes and the conference organizers made the hotel reservation and are sending a plane ticket, under our proposal that would not be appropriate, if I have to go on behalf of the city, he never sees it, from practical standpoint wondering how we deal with that? Can’t they take it unless reimburse or do something else?

Eric Hands asks more questions about mayor trip, was it approved?

Brist says the mayor is the top decision maker, but he thought he conferred with Michael May.

Michael Jacob, the chair, asks him to explain the comptrollers issue again.

Brist says the conference organizers could book the hotel and mail a ticket, and meals could be charged to the room and no one gets reimbursed. If above the reimbursable amount is it a thing of value or are they doing this cuz they are the speaker and is it benefiting the city? The state, in some circumstances, allows them to exceed the limit if they can justify it, it might be above the state rate but it would cost more to stay somewhere else in things like travel costs. But Dean Brasser’s concern is that a third party says they are paying your way, it just never shows up – on honorarium, is that for the benefit of the organization getting the info, not the city? He hates to speak for Brasser, but that is what he sees – that happens and doesn’t know how he would know about it if no public notice.

Michael Jacob asks how not a violation of 6(e) – “Employees shall not receive and retain honoraria, such as money or anything of value, other than commemorative or other items of nominal value for, or in recognition of activities related to, or arising from their City roles or positions”

Brist says that he needs to read the ordinance again but state interpretation is that they read the state uniform schedule with ethics code and take position based on the two. He knows an example of someone who teaches at national conference and gets a per diem rate that is higher than the state allows, the state interpretation is that they only get the per diem rate, if exception they have to do it through process, theory is that when read ethics code and travel schedule that is a thing of value.

Jacob asks if that was the only concern.

Brist says that was all he told him

Verveer says he should provide procedural information – the ethics board unanimously recommended this at the last meeting, at the last city council meeting it was on the agenda with two other ordinance that they recommended and all three were victims, if you will, of the walk out by council colleagues where they lost quorum. All three items were yet to be discussed when they lost quorum, but prior to that Alder Maniaci, about 24 hours in advance of the meeting called Verveer and stated her concern with specific proposals cuz she was invited to go on two trips, so she had concerns from her logistical point of view that it would not work for her and it could be a barrier to her participation in the conferences and meetings or events that she thought would be benefit to city, it did seem to be her personal circumstance of not having a credit card that would allow her to be reimbursed, that was the issue. I told her that an accommodation could be made to have a p-card issued to her that the council already uses for office supplies, that is not something we needed to make note of in an ordinance, there are internal procedural memorandums that cover that, any member of the council or other city official could figure out a way to make it work under existing language. But she has concerns about how implemented by comptroller so Alder Maniaci had gone to city attorney and comptroller with her concerns, comptroller did not know about this proposal, and he told her as Brist reported, there could be issues since deviation from current standard practice so he agreed to have it get referred back, or to not object to it. Maniaci was going to refer back to understand concerns of comptroller and what work he would have to do to implement the ordinance and they left it at that. He had two brief conversations with comptroller, one Monday evening, the council has not referred back, so they put it on the agenda, to get ahead of a likely referral from the council or so they could have language on council floor. The bottom line with Dean Brasser were not so much about how his office would implement this ordinance, the payroll office handles travel reimbursements, it is not rocket science, but to address Maniaci concerns and concerns of insulting your host if not accept glass of wine, which, by the way is prohibited from being reimbursed for alcohol, like state employees, he could see how it would be uncomfortable and prickly, but not some sort of real problem for office from their point of view. The salad example, how to deal with that concern I don’t know but I still think the proposal is a sound one, when Mike May brought his concern to our attention as a board that this section of the ode could be beefed up, it was a sound recommendation on behalf of city attorney’s office that we work in this area. He is committed to doing that- don’t know if we want to think of ideas for amendment or talk about at the next meeting.

Brist says there is a bit of a housekeeping issue, they do not have another meting til February, that is their next regular meeting, but now have a matter for a hearing, they could combine a business meeting with a hearing, there is no formal referral to us and no answer or middle ground or method or suggestion, maybe want to hear from Dean Brasser.

Verveer says he wanted May and Brasser to meet with him before the meeting, but they are too overwhelmed with the Overture Center, to make it a priority this week. He tried to get information and invite them, but its not the most time sensitive matter in the world and they could just wait for next meeting.

Hands says if not time sensitive, let it wait.

Verveer says if they wait until February some alders get to go on their trips and then the objection may go away. He then apologizes for being too catty.

Brist says there is a laudable purpose for some conferences, but that is in the eye of the beholder says Brist, that is what disclosure and ethics is about, I do know that I’ve been to conferences where there is a bus trip, but trip is part of fee for conference, sometimes conference fees are paying and that is legitimate under policies, what he doesn’t know about is when they mail you an airplane ticket, is that a thing of value, it can be a pain to travel there and back in a day, but under the code, they have an issue there, what I see is alder says is a laudable conference and it might be, I don’t know, but on the other hand we need one rule for everyone, is it a good guys conference or bad guys conference.

Verveer says current code is lacking in transparency, disclosure, and they report months later and forms are laughable and something better has to be done, they other issue is a lot of merit to holding city officials accountable to reimbursement policies of the city, Dean has said the same to me but no reason why accept first class or business class when coach can do or conference room – they shouldn’t have a suite when regular room will do, we still should address in code for reimbursable trips.

Laura Rose says it should be actual reasonable expenses that are allowed, does that mean above travel – plane ticket is allowable.

Brist says they just can’t use a private jet.

Jacob says that May said what was driving him, was not to have board decide what is reasonable when that wheel was already invented and they can route it through that system, rules are known, disclosure comes with it, idea that disclosure is the goal is not entirely accurate.

Rose says it is more than that, its compliance with ethics code.

Jacob says its about luxuries.

Rose says ti would be nice if this was more flexible to have payment made for trip, if come to speak and they front the costs, and in alder Maniaci’s cash issue, you can get a travel advance, there the problem is fixable, the state does it, and as long as comply its ok, we just don’t want reimbursed by lobbyists or being excessive in value.

David Albino says the last sentence throws that whole section off. Look at 6(e) in the code now. Thought the alderman brought up good point that distinction between cash outlay and reimbursement and prepayment and reimbursement from sponsor and sponsor paying up front where reimbursement not sought

Jacob says that is there is an event in the city and Alders are invited to a VIP area and offered food and drink, or a day long policy session during which lunch is provided it is his understanding that in both situations the incumbent needs to reimburse event organizer, it is uncomfortable, but you tell them I need to know value of the meal, in his mind doesn’t see conference than anything different, what has happened in past is incumbent has not followed rules and not been caught or complaints filed or they passed on events or areas or found a way to pay the value – in his mind this isnt’ any different.

And with that, they went on to other issues . . . .