North Texas Daily

Ethics complaints for Armintor, Meltzer headed to public hearing

Ethics complaints for Armintor, Meltzer headed to public hearing

Ethics complaints for Armintor, Meltzer headed to public hearing
March 27
23:02 2019

At an ethics board meeting Wednesday night, an ethics panel ruled that ethics complaints against Denton City Council members Deb Armintor of Place 5 and Paul Meltzer of Place 6 are “actual,” which means they will be forwarded to a public hearing, according to the Denton Record-Chronicle.

Ethics board member Ron Johnson filed the ethics complaints, telling the Record-Chronicle it was “because the pair’s disregard for the board’s advice created the public perception there were no consequences for ignoring the city’s ethics code.”

Before voting on the issue of UNT having a polling place, both Armintor and Meltzer sought an advisory opinion from the ethics board regarding their participation in this issue. The ethics panel ruled that it would be a conflict of interest for them to participate in discussions relating to the university, as Armintor is a UNT professor and Meltzer is the spouse of a UNT employee.

However, the pair ultimately went against the advice of the ethics board, participating in discussions and voting on the UNT Election Day polling location, which will be the Greek Life Center.

Both Armintor and Meltzer had ethics complaints filed against them in regard to their participation in the issue of a polling place on UNT’s campus for the municipal elections in May. 

“Two words: voter suppression,” Armintor told the Daily following the ethics board decision on Wednesday.

Both Armintor and Meltzer were elected to city council last year and are not up for reelection in May, with their current terms ending next year.

This story is developing.

Featured Image: Deb Armintor, candidate for Place 5 on the Denton City Council, speaks during a forum on March 26, 2018 at the Denia Recreation Center. File.

About Author

Lizzy Spangler

Lizzy Spangler

Related Articles


  1. Jane Piper-Lunt
    Jane Piper-Lunt March 29, 03:24

    1) it was an opinion they sought b/c council person Duff suggested they should recuse themselves. Duff in a letter questioned whether we wanted students to influence city policy.
    2) the contract is between the city and the county not the city and UNT. Neither UNT nor Meltzer or Armintor stand to gain financially.
    3) Jesse Davis, chairman of the ethics committee and candidate for council D3, the district UNT is in, authored the opinion. It is obvious to most, he stands to gain by not having students easily vote and should have recused himself but instead put himself on the panel to decide the opinion.
    This whole debacle is a misuse of the ethics ordinance by conservative leaders to harass liberal councilpersons and to suppress the student vote for liberal candidates. Btw, I am a conservative who is disguised by this ridiculous, hateful episode of partican politics.

    Reply to this comment
  2. Ken G
    Ken G March 29, 15:05

    I think the issue to watch is the how the board sees this council vote, the pending matter question. Was it actually an arrangement with UNT? Or was it like previous polling location arrangements – actually a deal with the county election folks who always run the thing.

    Reply to this comment

Write a Comment

The Roundup

<script id="mcjs">!function(c,h,i,m,p){m=c.createElement(h),p=c.getElementsByTagName(h)[0],m.async=1,m.src=i,p.parentNode.insertBefore(m,p)}(document,"script","");</script>

Search Bar

Sidebar Thumbnails Ad

Sidebar Bottom Block Ad

Flytedesk Ad