RSS
Open meeting law and executive sessions
Since this is Sunshine Week, I thought I should do a post on open government issues.
Every so often, I'll get a call, email, or blog post that worries that Mayor Scott Johnson is violating state Open Meeting Laws when he and other members of the City Council vote in executive session to hire attorneys to manage litigation on behalf of the city. As anyone who frequents City Council meetings knows, this council makes a habit of deciding to hire attorneys behind closed doors.
Earlier today, I put a call in to Bob Freeman, chairman of the state Committee on Open Government, to asked him about the practice.
The answer is: The council is allowed to make certain decisions in executive session, especially those pertaining to litigation. The council is not allowed to vote to appropriate funds in session, but they may expend funds already appropriated.
As the Mayor's Department's budget includes a line for outside council, the funds are already appropriated, and therefore, the council is acting legally when it votes to expend those funds in Executive Session.
For anyone curious about the letter of law, you can find it here. Scroll down to see the section that deals specifically with executive sessions.
Every so often, I'll get a call, email, or blog post that worries that Mayor Scott Johnson is violating state Open Meeting Laws when he and other members of the City Council vote in executive session to hire attorneys to manage litigation on behalf of the city. As anyone who frequents City Council meetings knows, this council makes a habit of deciding to hire attorneys behind closed doors.
Earlier today, I put a call in to Bob Freeman, chairman of the state Committee on Open Government, to asked him about the practice.
The answer is: The council is allowed to make certain decisions in executive session, especially those pertaining to litigation. The council is not allowed to vote to appropriate funds in session, but they may expend funds already appropriated.
As the Mayor's Department's budget includes a line for outside council, the funds are already appropriated, and therefore, the council is acting legally when it votes to expend those funds in Executive Session.
For anyone curious about the letter of law, you can find it here. Scroll down to see the section that deals specifically with executive sessions.
posted by The Saratogian City Desk at
7:54 PM
2 Comments:
Then if outside counsel is "already appropriated", why the secrecy? And how do you justify the expenditure of $270K to deal with the DEC as "already appropriated"?
anon 6:08 a.m.: The council is allowed to use executive session to discuss private business relating to a specific individual, so as to protect their privacy.
As to your second question, while the decision to settle the DEC matter was made in executive session, you'll recall that a separate motion was made at a later council meeting to appropriate and expend the $270,000. That motion occurred during Commissioner Ivins' regular agenda.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home