Minutes October 29, 2024 MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION OF THE RHODE ISLAND ETHICS COMMISSION October 29, 2024 The Rhode Island Ethics Commission held its 13th meeting of 2024 at 9:00 a.m. at the Rhode Island Ethics Commission conference room, located at 40 Fountain Street, 8th Floor, Providence, Rhode Island, on Tuesday, October 29, 2024, pursuant to the notice published at the Commission offices, the State House Library, and electronically with the Rhode Island Secretary of State. The following Commissioners were present: Lauren E. Jones, Chair Jill Harrison Holly J. Susi, Vice Chair Emma L. Peterson Matthew D. Strauss, Secretary Scott P. Rabideau Dr. Michael Browner, Jr. Hugo L. Ricci, Jr. Frank J. Cenerini Also present were Herbert F. DeSimone, Jr., Commission Legal Counsel; Jason Gramitt, Commission Executive Director; Katherine D’Arezzo, Senior Staff Attorney; Lynne M. Radiches, Staff Attorney/Education Coordinator; Staff Attorneys Teresa Giusti and Teodora Popova Papa; and Commission Investigators Peter J. Mancini, Gary V. Petrarca, and Kevin Santurri. At 9:03 a.m., the Chair opened the meeting. The first order of business was: Administration of Oath of Office to Dr. Michael Browner, Jr. Chair Jones administered the Oath of Office to Commissioner Michael Browner, Jr. The next order of business was: Approval of minutes of the Open Session held on September 24, 2024. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Rabideau, it was VOTED: To approve the minutes of the Open Session held on September 24, 2024. AYES: Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Jill Harrison; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.; Matthew D. Strauss; and Holly J. Susi. ABSTENTIONS: Dr. Michael Browner, Jr. The next order of business was: Director’s Report: Status report and updates. Executive Director Gramitt informed that the meeting materials and agenda are available on the Commission’s website. He stated that the Open Session portion of today’s meeting is being livestreamed, after which the livestream will be closed while the Commission convenes in Executive Session. At the conclusion of Executive Session, the Commission will resume livestreaming in Open Session and report out all actions taken in Executive Session. The report out also will be available on the Commission’s website after the meeting. a.) Complaints and investigations pending There are eight complaints pending. Executive Director Gramitt advised that the staff initiated four complaints relative to non-filing of the 2023 Financial Statement, one of which was administratively dismissed and two of which were informally resolved consistent with the current fine schedule. The remaining complaint, in which the respondent has since filed the required statement, has been noticed for a probable cause hearing today in executive session. b.) Advisory opinions pending There are five advisory opinions pending, three of which have been noticed for today’s meeting. c.) Access to Public Records Act requests since last meeting There were six APRA requests received since the last meeting, five of which were granted within one business day. A request involving approximately 650 historical financial disclosure records remains pending, with the statute tolled, while the staff works with the requester to narrow its scope and confirm costs of retrieval. d.) Financial disclosure In preparation for the 2024 Financial Disclosure season, the staff has been reaching out to public bodies to request updated lists of all required filers. e.) General office administration There is one Commission meeting scheduled in November and one in December. Executive Director Gramitt informed that a tentative 2025 Commission meeting schedule has been prepared and included in today’s meeting packets. He asked that the Commissioners review the schedule and inform of any foreseeable conflicts. Chair Jones noted that the Commission is now at its full composition with nine members, which should allow for meetings to be held notwithstanding a Commissioner absence. The next order of business was: Advisory Opinions. The advisory opinions were based on draft advisory opinions prepared by Commission Staff for review by the Commission and were scheduled as items on the Open Session Agenda for this date. The first advisory opinion was that of: Andrew D. Kettle, NRP, I/C, requests an advisory opinion regarding whether the Code of Ethics precludes him from accepting the position of Emergency Management director for the Town of Charlestown, given that the Petitioner is privately employed, and intends to remain privately employed, as chief of Charlestown Ambulance-Rescue Service, a nonprofit corporation that currently contracts with the town to provide emergency medical services. Staff Attorney Radiches presented the Commission Staff recommendation. The Petitioner was present. The Petitioner addressed the Commission and informed that there are 22 other communities in Rhode Island that have chiefs who also serve as emergency management directors. In response to Commissioner Cenerini, Staff Attorney Radiches stated that the Petitioner has represented that he is the town’s preferred choice. In response to Commissioner Rabideau, the Petitioner stated that a question on the current ballot relates to whether the town shall provide for emergency management services through a town department or through a licensed private party. The Petitioner explained that if any changes are approved by the voters, those changes will not take effect until after the expiration of the contract between the town and CARS in 2027. In response to Commissioner Cenerini, the Petitioner informed that he receives an income for his position as chief of CARS and would receive a stipend for the public position. In further response to Commissioner Cenerini, the Petitioner explained that, as chief of CARS, he mostly serves in the town. In response to Commissioner Ricci, the Petitioner stated that the town did not post for the position but approached the Petitioner directly. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Peterson, it was unanimously VOTED: To issue an advisory opinion to Andrew D. Kettle, NRP, I/C. The next advisory opinion was that of: Gregory Mark Dantas, a member of the East Greenwich Historic District Commission, requests an advisory opinion regarding whether he qualifies for a hardship exception to the Code of Ethics’ prohibition on representing himself before his own board, in order to allow him to seek a certificate of appropriateness for the construction of a structure consisting of a three-car garage and a living space above it on his residential property located in the East Greenwich historic district. Staff Attorney Popova Papa explained that the instant and following advisory opinions relate to the same Petitioner. She presented the Commission Staff recommendation. The Petitioner was not present but had consented to the Commission proceeding in his absence as to both advisory opinion requests. Upon motion made by Commissioner Ricci and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously VOTED: To issue an advisory opinion to Gregory Mark Dantas, a member of the East Greenwich Historic District Commission. The final advisory opinion was that of: Gregory Mark Dantas, a member of the East Greenwich Historic District Commission, who in his private capacity owns and operates a real estate brokerage firm, requests an advisory opinion regarding whether he qualifies for a hardship exception to the Code of Ethics’ prohibition on representing himself, either personally or through a representative, before his own board, in order to allow him to seek a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of solar panels on a building that houses the headquarters of his firm and is located in the East Greenwich historic district. Staff Attorney Popova Papa presented the Commission Staff recommendation. The Petitioner was not present. In response to Chair Jones, Executive Director Gramitt explained that there is no specific narrative required on the conflict of interest statement/recusal form relating to a person appearing before his own board in a matter involving his own property, such as disclosing the receipt of an advisory opinion granting a hardship exception. Executive Director Gramitt stated that the Commission could add language requiring such disclosure to advisory opinions going forward. Upon motion made by Commissioner Rabideau and duly seconded by Commissioner Browner, it was unanimously VOTED: To issue an advisory opinion to Gregory Mark Dantas, a member of the East Greenwich Historic District Commission. The next order of business was: Discussion and Vote regarding adoption of Fine Schedules for Financial Disclosure Complaints. Executive Director Gramitt presented to the Commission a memorandum along with two proposed fine schedules, one for the informal disposition of complaints alleging a delinquent financial disclosure statement and the other for the informal disposition of complaints alleging a deficient financial disclosure statement. He stated that these proposals were prepared pursuant to the Commission’s discussion at a recent meeting regarding Commission Regulation 3.30 and its contemplation of a fine schedule applicable to complaints relating to delinquent and deficient financial disclosure statements, whether filed by the Commission staff or third parties. He stated that the proposals provide that the Executive Director may exercise discretion to reduce or waive a civil penalty for good cause upon a determination of unique circumstances. In response to Commissioner Susi, Executive Director Gramitt explained how discretion would be exercised when deciding whether a deficient complaint should be brought before the Commission. He discussed the necessity of a respondent coming in, meeting with staff, explaining any deficiencies, and accepting responsibility. Commissioner Cenerini noted that Regulation 3.30 states that the fine schedule is used “unless otherwise determined by the Commission.” He expressed concern over always requiring specific penalty amounts and stated that the Commission should have flexibility to assess higher penalties where the circumstances support doing so. Chair Jones noted that matters warranting higher penalties would be brought before the Commission and not handled administratively. Commissioner Cenerini suggested that there be a formal procedure for the Executive Director to report to the Commission those instances in which he utilized discretion to waive or reduce penalties. Chair Jones noted that such reporting would allow the Commission to give the Director input into future uses of discretion. Commissioner Peterson stated that there should be a provision in both schedules that allows the Executive Director to bring a matter before the Commission rather than informally resolving it. She indicated that habitually delinquent filers should be brought before the Commission. Commissioner Peterson agreed with having a formal reporting requirement to inform the Commission as to how cases were administratively resolved. Commissioner Ricci expressed that neither the Commission nor the Executive Director should be bound by fine ceiling and that discretion should remain with the Executive Director to require a higher civil penalty when appropriate. Commissioner Peterson added that the Executive Director should come before the Commission in those cases in which he believes the penalties should be higher than the amounts in the fine schedules. Commissioner Rabideau expressed concern with granting anyone unlimited discretion to impose a civil penalty and proposed that discretion to increase a civil penalty be capped at a reasonable amount such as, for instance, $500. Further discussion ensued as to the degree of discretion that should be afforded to the Executive Director in any given case. In response to Commissioner Ricci, Executive Director Gramitt stated that he appreciates the discretion that the Commission grants to him, but he also agrees that there should be limits. He explained, for example, where he believes that a matter should be informally resolved but for an amount higher than the amount set forth in the fine schedule, he would bring that informal resolution and settlement to the Commission and it may either approve the amount, suggest a different amount, or direct him to proceed instead with an investigation. Executive Director Gramitt proposed removal of language from the schedule that suggests that a respondent is entitled to informally resolve a complaint and, instead, proposed the addition of language that provides discretion to the Executive Director to either informally resolve a complaint or bring the matter to the Ethics Commission, and further provides that the Commission is not bound by the amounts set forth in the schedule. In response to Commissioner Peterson’s concern over the various different time periods in the proposed deficient statement schedule, Executive Director Gramitt stated that he intends to remove the different time frames from the next draft. Commissioner Jones directed Executive Director Gramitt to revise the draft schedules based on the Commission’s comments today and, if possible, to present amended proposals at the next meeting for discussion and potential vote. At 10:40 a.m., upon motion made by Commissioner Ricci and duly seconded by Commissioner Susi, it was unanimously VOTED: To go into Executive Session, to wit: a.) Motion to approve minutes of Executive Session held on September 24, 2024, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4). b.) In re: Michael J. Dowhan Jr., Complaint No. NF2024-4, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4). c.) In re: Scott Millar, Complaint No. 2024-8, pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(2) & (4). d.) Motion to return to Open Session. Executive Director Gramitt reminded all in attendance that the Open Session portion of the livestream meeting will close for Executive Session and will be reactivated for Open Session after Executive Session concludes. At 11:14 a.m., the Commission reconvened in Open Session. The livestream of the meeting resumed. The next order of business was: Motion to seal minutes of Executive Session held on October 29, 2024. Upon motion made by Commissioner Cenerini and duly seconded by Commissioner Rabideau, it was unanimously VOTED: To seal the minutes of the Executive Session held on October 29, 2024. The next order of business was: Report on actions taken in Executive Session. Chair Jones reported that the Commission took the following actions in Executive Session: Voted (8-0) to approve the minutes of the Executive Session held on September 24, 2024. [Reporter’s Note: The vote was as follows: AYES: Lauren E. Jones; Frank J. Cenerini; Jill Harrison; Emma L. Peterson; Scott P. Rabideau; Hugo L. Ricci, Jr.; Matthew D. Strauss; and Holly J. Susi. ABSTENTIONS: Dr. Michael Browner, Jr.] Unanimously voted (9-0) in the matter of In re: Michael J. Dowhan Jr., Complaint No. NF2024-4, to find that probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent, Michael J. Dowhan Jr., a member of the Rhode Island State Board of Examiners of Landscape Architects, violated R.I. General Laws § 36-14-16 by failing to timely file a 2023 Financial Disclosure Statement with the Rhode Island Ethics Commission. Unanimously voted (9-0) in the matter of In re: Scott Millar, Complaint. No. 2024-8, to find that there does not exist probable cause to believe that the Respondent, Scott Millar, a former member of the Town of Exeter Planning Board, violated R.I. General Laws § 36-14-16 and R.I. General Laws § 36-14-17 by not disclosing his spouse’s interest in Plat 53, Lot Nos. 1103 and 1105 in the Town of Cumberland on his 2018-2023 Financial Statements. The Complaint was dismissed with prejudice. Copies of the Investigative Report will be available at the conclusion of the meeting. The Commission will prepare and issue a written Decision & Order explaining the bases of its vote. Unanimously voted (9-0) to return to Open Session. The next order of business was: New Business proposed for future Commission agendas and general comments from the Commission. There were none. At 11:17 a.m., upon motion made by Commissioner Susi and duly seconded by Commissioner Browner, it was unanimously VOTED: To adjourn the meeting. Respectfully submitted, _____________________________ Matthew D. Strauss Secretary