"America's Radio News Network"
KROS is an equal
opportunity employer
KROS NEWS
Council violates Open Meetings Law
(Clinton) -- Judge issues ruling in one of the two meetings cited in court action by the former Human Resource Director
A District Court Judge has ruled the city of Clinton did violate the open meetings law in discussing budget and personnel reductions in a closed door meeting.
The ruling came in a case filed by former Human Resource Director Dave Geisler, who lost his job in the reductions. The summary judgment covered one meeting and a hearing is still set for a second violation that the lawsuit cited. A summary judgment was granted because there were not factual disputes about the meeting in question-but a second meeting is still in dispute.
The suit was filed against the office holders at the time-Mayor Rodger Holm, Council members Mark Vulich, Jennifer Graf, Paul Gassman, Charlie Mulholland, Bev Herman, Mike Kearney and Maggie Klaes and the city of Clinton.
Judge Mark Smith granted the judgment concerning a meeting held September 13, 2011. He said the records showed the meeting was called to discuss personnel matters, but no individual requested the closed meeting. The transcripts of the meeting showed the issues discussed were the elimination of departments, severance pay and other budget reduction proposals. The city was looking to make up an $800,000 shortage in the budget.
Judge Smith wrote that while the notification for the September 13th meeting was proper, the meeting did not comply in regard to an employee or individual to be discussed.
The ruling states that the meeting did involve policy making decisions and did not constitute a mere irregularity or technical violation of the open meetings law. It did affect the public’s ability to give the council input or be aware of the reasoning of the council concerning the elimination of the positions and severance package.
Judge Smith wrote that there would not have been needless and irreparable injury to any employee’s reputation. The court, he wrote, is aware there was no formal vote taken during the closed session, but it appeared the council members clearly indicated their positions and with a wink and a nod indicated to the administrator that it was his decision to make.
The ruling states this did not constitute substantial compliance with the Open Meetings Law and is the reason the law was created to allow the public and city employees to be aware of what the council is doing and their reasoning when the eliminated positions.
Judge Smith wrote there is some factual dispute about a September 2, 2011 meeting and that portion can proceed to a hearing.
The damage or penalty phase for the violation in the summary judgment should be heard at the same time as the trial on the September 2, 2011 meeting.
There has been no comment from Clinton City Officials yet.
Written 8/8/2012 by Dave Vickers - KROS News
