[Items 1 - 4]
[00:00:04]
2020 SPECIAL SESSION IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER.
CHAPLAIN OF THE DAY IS COUNCILMAN BURKHARDT.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCIL LADY STREAKMAN.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN I WILL ASK YOU TO STAND IF YOU ARE ABLE AND COUNCILMEN BURKHARDT PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR MEETING.
>> THANK YOU. WOULD YOU BOW WITH ME.
MY FATHER HEAVEN WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THIS DAY AND ALL BESTOWED UPON US. BE WITH US AS WE HAVE THIS MEETING. MAY THE THINGS WE WE TALK TO HEART MAY WE ALWAYS HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF CLARKSVILLE AT HEART. FATHER BE WITH US.
BE WITH THESE THAT LOST LOVED ONE THIS WEEK OF OUR CITY FAMILY. FATHER ALSO BE WITH OUR MEN AND WOMEN AS THAT PROTECT US. FAR AND NEAR.
FATHER BE WITH THEM. FATHER FORGIVE US FOR OUR SINS.
CHRIST NAME WE PRAY, AMEN. MADAM CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. BR NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF ELECTRONIC MEETING IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE TECHNICAL ASPECT OF THE GOVERNOR EXECUTIVE ORDER IN REGARDING HOLDING IN OPEN MEETING IN A FORUM OTHER THAN IN THE OPEN AND IN PUBLIC. THIS GOVERNING BODY DETERMINES THAT MEETING ELECTRONICALLY IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF ITS CITIZEN DUE TO THE COVID-19
OUTBREAK. >> I NEED A MAKE A MOTION AND SECOND. I MAKE A MOTION.
IT'S BEEN PROPERLY SECONDED. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> MOTION IS ADOPTED. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THE ONLY
[5) PRESENTATION REGARDING TENNESSEE OPEN MEETINGS ACT]
ITEM WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA TO THIS EVENING IS A PRESENTATION FROM ELISHA HOSTAGE WHO IS AN ATTORNEY WITH THE MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE. I REACHED OUT TO HER AND ASKED HER IF SHE WOULD HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT MORE ABOUT THE OPEN MEETING ACT. COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS. FIRST OF ALL IF I COULD ASK THOSE WHO ARE PARTICIPATING ELECTRONICALLY TO MUTE THEIR MICROPHONES AND THEN SECONDLY WE HAVE A HARD STOP WITH MITTS HOSTAGE'S PRESENTATION AND Q&A AT 6:15. SHE HAS ANOTHER ENGAGEMENT THAT SHE NEEDS TO GET TO. WHEN WE REACH THE 6:15 TIME, WE WILL STOP AND ALLOW HER TO LEE AND WE WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO HER FOR HER WILLINGNESS TO SHARE HER EXPERTISE.I WILL SAY THAT SHE HAS A PRESENTATION AND WE WILL ASK YOU TO HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS UNTIL THE END.
AND THEN WE WILL GET TO YOU IN AN ORDERLY FASHION.
SHE IS PREPARED TO HELP US ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
WITHOUT FURTHER ADO. MISS HODGE, YOU ARE ON THE LINE.
WE CAN SEE YOU. WE THANK YOU FOR HELPING US WITH
THE TENNESSEE OPEN MEETING ACT. >> YOU'RE WELCOME MAYOR.
THANKS FOR HAVING ME HERE THIS AFTERNOON.
I HAVE NOT USED THIS PLATFORM BEFORE.
I THINK I FIGURE THIS OUT. I WILL TRY TO SHARE MY SCREEN
WITH YOU ALL NOW. >> AND THERE IT IS.
[00:05:12]
THANK YOU MISS HODGE. CAN EVERYONE PARTICIPATINGVIRTUALLY SEE THE SCREEN? >> YES.
>> I CAN'T SEE IT THAT TIME. >> I CAN SEE IT.
>> I SEE IT NOW. >> WE'RE READY TO GO, MISS
HODGE, PLEASE PROCEED. >> OKAY.
THE TENNESSEE OPEN MEETING ACT THAT'S WHAT WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THIS AFTERNOON. THIS EVENING.
AND AS THE MAYOR SAID ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE I'M OPEN TO ANSWER THEM. ONCE THE PRESENTATION HAS CONCLUDED. THE TENNESSEE OPEN MEETING ACT WAS CODIFIED IN 1974. IT'S FOUND 844101 FOLLOWING IN OUR TENNESSEE CODE AND KNOW TATED.
WE HAVE ONE OF THE FEW STATES THAT HAVE BEEN BEGIN THE DESIGNATION OF HAVING ONE OF THE STRICTEST OPEN MEETING ACT IN PUBLIC RECORD ACT ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
ONE OF THE THINGS YOU WILL SEE ABOUT OUR PUBLIC RECORDS ACT OR OPEN MEETING ACT AS OPPOSED TO THOSE ACTS IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONETARY PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH VIOLATION OF OUR ACT. THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE OPEN MEETING ACT EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE MONETARY PENALTIES. THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER PENALTIES THAT COULD COME IN PLACE THAT COULD BE AS DETRIMENTAL AS ANY MONETARY PENALTIES.
>> DID MY SLIDE ADVANCE. >> THE SLIDE DID NOT ADVANCE.
>> I'M TRYING TO MAKE PUT IT IN PRESENTER MODE.
I'M NOT SURE WHY I CANNOT DO THAT.
BUT I CAN JUST ADVANCE THE SLIDES LIKE THIS.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS JUST THE FIRST PART OF WHAT I TALKED ABOUT. WHERE IS OUR OPEN MEETINGS ACT OR THE SUNSHINE HA. BECAUSE THAT MIGHT BE HOW YOU REFERRED TO MORE OFTEN THAN NOT. WHERE IS IT ACTUALLY CODIFIED.
IT'S CODIFIED 844101. THE OVERARCHING PROVISION SAYS THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DECLARES IT TO BE THE POLICY OF THIS STATE FORMATION OF PUBLIC POLICY AND DECISION IS PUBLIC BUSINESS AND SHALL NOT BE CONDUCTED IN SECRET.
SO THAT THE IS OVERARCHING PROVISION OF OUR OPEN MEETINGS ACT IN TENNESSEE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE NOTE OF BECAUSE WE OFTEN GET QUESTIONS ABOUT CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. WE HAVE A ESPECIALLY GOT A NUMBER OF THOSE QUESTIONS SINCE THE GOVERNOR ORDER EXECUTIVE ORDER HAVE COME OUT ON EELECTRONIC MEETINGS.
AND SO I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT WE HAVE CASE LAW IN THIS STATE THE ACT DOESN'T GUARANTEE CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING. AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PARTICIPATE. THAT IS MAKE PUBLIC STATEMENTS, UNLESS, OF COURSE, YOU ALL RULES THAT YOU HAVE THAT GOVERN YOUR MEETING ALLOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE THE CITIZEN DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMMENT.
OF COURSE THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMMENT WHEN WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS. BUT OUTSIDE OF THOSE TWO CONDITIONS THERE IS NO GUARANTEE FOR CITIZENS TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO ACTUALLY COMMENT AND PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING.
BUT THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO ATTEND AND OBSERVE THE
MEETINGS. >> THE NEXT PROVISION THAT I WANT TO TALK 844102. AND IT SAYS THAT ALL MEETING OF GOVERNING BODY DECLARED TO BE PUBLIC MEETINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND ALL TIMES. ACCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF TENNESSEE. AND THE ONLY EXCEPTION WE HAVE IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE WITH REGARD TO THIS ISSUE IS THAT RELATED TO ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT IN JUST A FEW MINUTES.
ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE OR EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THE ONLY EXCEPTION THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE A FEW OTHER EXEMPTION PLACED IN THE STATUTE BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL YEARS AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THOSE AS WELL.
44 # 02-B DEFINES WHAT A GOVERNING BODY AND WHAT MEETING IS. FOR OUR PURPOSES GOVERNING BODY IS GOING TO CONSIST OF TWO OR MORE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BODY THAT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR OR RECOMMENDATIONS TO A PUBLIC BODY ON POLICY ADMINISTRATION.
ANYTIME THAT YOU ALL GET TWO OR MORE MEMBERS OF YOU ALL GATHER,
[00:10:05]
AND YOU ARE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND THE ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ON PUBLIC BUSINESS, IF YOU ARE DELIBERATING OR MAKING DECISION THAT'S GOING TO TRIGGER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S ALSO A DEFINITION OF MEETING CONTAINED IN THIS PROVISION.AND THAT IS WHERE I GOT THE LANGUAGE ABOUT DELIBERATION.
MEETING IS DEFINED AS GOVERNING BED OF PUBLIC BODY FOR WHICH A FORUM IS REQUIRED AND IN ORDER TO MAKE A DECISION OR DELIBERATE TOWARD A DECISION ON ANY MATTER. MEETING DOESN'T INCLUDE ON SITE INSPECTION OF ANY PROJECT OR PROGRAM.
SO COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT THIS DEFINITION OF MEETING THAT I WANT TO GO BACK TO. TWO THINGS, TWO ACTIONS CAN TRIGGER A MEETING BEING HELD BY A GOVERNING BODY.
IF YOU HAVE TWO OR MORE MEMBERS AND THEY ARE ONE MAKING A DECISION OR TWO DELIBERATING TOWARD A DECISION ON A MATTER, THEN THAT TRIGGERS THE OPEN MEETING ACT.
I WANT TO POINT OUT SO YOU THINK I'M NOT SKIPPING THIS.
THAT YES THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THIS DEFINITION OF MEETING THAT SAID FOR WHICH A QUORUM IS REQUIRED.
WE CASE LAW THAT SAID YOU CAN'T CIRCUMVENT THE OPEN MEETING ACT BY SAYING QUORUM WAS NOT REQUIRED.
THE COURTS HAVE BYPASSED THAT LANGUAGE.
THEY ACKNOWLEDGE IT BUT BYPASS IT AND SAY ANYTIME YOU HAVE TWO OR MORE MAKING DECISION OR DELIBERATING ON PUBLIC BUSINESSES THEN THAT WILL TRIGGER THE OPEN MEETING ACT.
HERE IS SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME PUBLIC BODIES CITY COUNCIL OF COURSE YOUR BUDGET COMMITTEE. WE OFTEN, OFTEN DURING BUDGET SEASON GET QUESTIONS ABOUT BUDGET COMMITTEES AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL BE SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
IF THEY ARE MAKING DECISIONS ON PUBLIC BUSINESS, OR EVEN DELIBERATING EVEN IF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE ITSELF DOESN'T HAVE THE ULTIMATE DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY, THEN, YES, THEY ARE GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE ACT. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARDS PARKS AND REC BOARD. UTILITY BOARD AND I HAVE IN ANY OTHER COUNTY BOARD OR COMMISSION.
AGAIN, THE THRESHOLD THAT WE LOOK AT IS WHEN I GET THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT AN ENTITY IS SUBJECT.
THE FIRST THING I ASK WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? WHAT IS THERE AUTHORIZATION? WHAT ARE THEY ALLOWED TO DO.
IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS TO PUBLIC BODY. THEN IT'S LIKELY THAT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
CHANCE MEETING. THERE'S LANGUAGE STATUTE DEALING CHANCE MEET 844102-C. YOU WILL SEE HERE THAT IT SAYS THAT NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO REQUIRE CHANCE MEETING OF TWO OR MORE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BODY TO BE CONSIDERED A PUBLIC MEETING. HOWEVER, IT GOES ON TO SAY NO SUCH CHANCE MEETING INFORMAL ASSEMBLY OR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS SHALL BE USED TO DECIDE OR DELIBERATE PUBLIC BUSINESS IN CIRCUMVENTION. I HAVE EXAMPLE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE WHERE A CHANCE MEETING COULD OCCUR IT'S EXACTLY WHERE YOU WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE. DINNER PARTIES.
GROCERY STORE, GYM, IN CITY HAL. A NUMBER OF PLACES.
THAT YOU ALL COULD RUN INTO ONE ANOTHER.
THAT'S FINE. I KNOW THAT OFTENTIMES, WHEN THE FIRST SECTION WHEN YOU HAVE TWO OR MORE MEMBERS GATHERED TOGETHER YOU MUST BE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC BUSINESS.
THAT'S THE PERCEPTION OFTENTIMES.
BUT THAT'S NOT THE REALITY. SO YOU ALL JUST NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF AND I THINK THAT YOU PROBABLY ARE WELL AWARE WHAT THE PERCEPTION CAN BE. TO JUST ENSURE THAT EVEN IF YOU RUN INTO ONE ANOTHER, AT ONE OF THE PLACE THAT YOU MIGHT FREQUENT, THAT YOU DON'T USE THAT TIME TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, HAS BEEN ON THE AGENDA OR COULD BE ON THE AGENDA. YOU NEED TO STEER CLEAR OF THOSE ISSUES. WHAT CONSTITUTES DELIBERATIONS? WE TALKED ABOUT TWO O MORE MEMBERS WITH THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO OR DECISION FOR A PUBLIC BODY.
IF THEY ARE EITHER DECIDING ON AN ISSUE OR DELIBERATING TOWARD AN ISSUE. WHAT CONSTITUTES DELIBERATION? THIS IS WHAT THE CASE LAW IN TENNESSEE SAID ABOUT DELIBERATION. IT SAY DELIBERATION GOING TO BE WAYING ARGUMENT FOR AND AGAIN PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION.
THE TYPE OF DEBATE AND RECIPROCAL ATTEMPT AND PERSUASION THAT WE OLD EXPECT TO SEE TO TAKE PLACE COUNCIL MEET IN PRESENCE OF PUBLIC OR THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT OUR COURTS IN TENNESSEE.
THAT'S THE STANDARD THEY LOOK AT WHEN THEY DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT A CONVERSATION MEETS THE LEVEL OF DELIBERATION.
JUST KNOW THAT. IT'S THE WEIGHING OF ARGUMENT
[00:15:03]
FOR AND AGAIN. TRYING TO PERSUADE SOMEONE TO YOUR POINT OF YOU. THAT'S CONSIDERED DELIBERATION FOR THE OPEN MEETING ACT ACCORDING TO CASE LAW.WE HAVE THIS WE'LL CONCEPT OVERARCHING CONCEPT OF ALL MEETING ARE OPEN TO PUBLIC. WE ALSO HAVE THE ISSUE OF NOTICE. AND SO NOTICE OFTENTIMES IS WHAT GET GOVERNING BODIES TRIPPED UP. ESPECIALLY IN THE CASES THAT WE HAVE IN TENNESSEE. WITH REGARD TO ADEQUATE PUBLIC NOTICE WE HAVE LANGUAGE IN STATUTE 844103 THAT SETS OUT TWO TYPE OF NOTICE. AND THEN TALKS ABOUT ANOTHER TYPE OF NOTICE THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE IN THE STAT OUT.
FOR PURPOSES OF OPEN MEETING ACT, THE LANGUAGE IN STATUTE TALKS ABOUT REGULAR MEETINGS. REGULAR METING ARE THOSE THAT ARE SCHEDULED BY STATUTE ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION OR SCHEDULED BY BI-LAWS. IF A MEETING OF A GOVERNING BODY IS NOT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED BY STATUTE ORDINANCE RESOLUTION OR BI-LAWS IT WILL BE A SPECIAL MEETING.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SPECIAL MEETING THERE'S SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE CASE LAW ABOUT HOW THE NOTICE FOR THOSE MEETING HAVE TO BE PROVIDED. AND WHAT MUST BE PROVIDED IN THE NOTICES. ALSO I JUST ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GOVERNING BODY MEETINGS.
NOT PUBLIC HEARING BUT JUST GENERAL GOVERNING BODY MEETINGS, GENERALLY THOSE TYPE OF MEETING WILL BE COVERED BY 844103 IN THE LANGUAGE YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. HOWEVER THERE COULD BE OTHER MEETING WHERE YOU DISCUSS SPECIAL TOPICS THAT MIGHT ALSO HAVE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE OTHERWISE IN THE STATUTE.
I ALWAYS LIKE TO TELL PEOPLE YES LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE IN 844103.
THERE COULD BE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT RELATED TO NOTICE DEPENDING ON THE TOPIC DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING.
AND THEN I WANT TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE THIRD BULLET POINT. THIS THE WHAT THE CASE LAW SAYS.
AS FAR AS WHAT THE TEST IS FOR ADEQUATE NOTICE.
YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT THE FACT AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE NOTICE TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY INTERESTED CITIZEN IS GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING. THAT'S THE VERY FIRST THINGS THE COURT LOOK AT WHEN THEY LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT ADEQUATE PUBLIC NOTICE THE PROVIDED. AGAIN JUDGED ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THERE'S NO SINGLE FORMULA WHEN IT COMES TO RARELY SCHEDULED PUBLIC MEETINGS, NO SINGLE FORMULA TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE NOTICE WAS ADEQUATE.
HOWEVER, AGAIN, YOU WILL SEE THE LANGUAGE FROM THE CASE IN THE CENTER OF THE SCREEN, AND THIS LANGUAGE SAYS THAT THE COURT IS GOING TO LOOK AT THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE NOTICE WOULD FAIRLY INFORM THE PUBLIC THAT THE MEETING WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE AND THEY HAD THE RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING. ONE OF THE ISSUE THAT HAVE COME UP RECENTLY, AGAIN, IN THE WAKE OF THE ELECTRONIC MEETINGS AUTHORIZATION IS WOO DO THOSE NOTICES SAY.
DO THEY SAY THE GOVERNING BODY WILL HOLD A MEETING ELECTRONICALLY, IS THAT CLEAR IN THE NOTICE? IS THE LINK TO PLATFORM THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO BE USING TO HOLD THE MEETING IS IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC? IF HALF OF THE GOVERNING BODY WILL MEET IN PERSON, AND HALF IS GOING TO MEET OR FEW OF THEM WILL MEET ELECTRONICALLY, IS THE MEETING SPACE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC TO ATTEND IN PERSON AS WELL? A LOT OF THINGS ISSUE, ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW COMING UP AROUND NOTICE FOR REGULARLY SCHEDULED AND SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS. AND THEN WE GET TO THE TEST FOR ADEQUATE PUBLIC NOTICE OF SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.
WE DO HAVE SOME CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL CALLED MEETING AND NOTICE. AND THIS CRITERIA COMES OUT OF PUBLISHED OPINION BUT ONE IN WHEN I SAY UNPUBLISHED, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE FOLLOWED BY OTHER COURTS BUT IT IS AUTHORITATIVE TO OTHER COURTS.
AND THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY ALL OF THE COURTS IN TENNESSEE TO MY KNOWLEDGE WHEN THEY LOOK AT THE CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS. WHAT THIS CRAY CRITERIA SAID THREE THINGS NOTICE SHOULD PROVIDE OR LOOK LIKE OR INCLUDE WITH REGARD TO SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS.
THE FIRST IS THE NOTICE MUST BE PUBLIC POSTED IN THE LOCATION WHERE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WOULD BECOME AWARE OF SUCH NOTICE. IT CAN'T BE OBSCURE POSTING THAT NO ONE WILL SEE. THE SECOND CRITERIA IT MUST
[00:20:02]
DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING OR THE ACTION PROPOSED TO BE TAKEN. IT CANNOT BE SITUATION IN THE COURT ACTUALLY USES THE LANGUAGE CRYPTIC.THE NOTICE IN THE CONTENT OF THE NOTICE CAN'T BE CRYPTIC WHERE CITIZENS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THE TOPIC OF THE MEETING WOULD BE. AND THEN LET ME ALSO ADD HERE.
SO OFTENTIMES WHAT I HAVE SAID IS A NOTICE FOR A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING THAT WILL HAVE OTHER BUSINESS ON IT THAT'S NOT ADEQUATE EITHER. BECAUSE NO ONE KNOWS WHAT WILL COME UP UNDER OTHER BUSINESS. THAT WOULD NOT BE ADEQUATE FOR PURPOSES OF SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS UNTHIS CRITERIA.
THE THIRD THING THAT THE COURT POINTED OUT THE NOTICE MUST BE POSTED AT A TIME SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCE OF THE MEETING SO PEOPLE COULD ACTUALLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AWARE OF IT AND ATTEND IF THEY WANTED TO. I KNOW THAT NUMBER OF CITIES HAVE TIME FRAMES IN THEIR CHARTERS.
AND SOME IN THEIR CODES RELATED TO WHEN NOTICE FOR A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING HAS TO BE POSTED. THEN THERE'S SOME CITY THAT DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION. THE LANGUAGE THAT THOSE CITIES HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT DON'T HAVE A TIME FRAME POSTED OR TIME FRAME INCLUDED IN THE CHARTER OR CODE IS HAS TO BE ENOUGH TIME TO GIVE CITIZENS THE OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME AWARE OF THE MEETING AND ATTEND THE MEETING IF THEY WANT TO.
WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE TEST FOR SPECIAL CALLED MEETING AND THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO TEST FOR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
CASE BY CASE SITUATION. TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES
WHAT THE COURTS LOOK AT. >> THE NEXT THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. AND I CANNOT SEE -- DO YOU ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO PLACE COMMENTS AND CHAT?
>> REPEAT THE QUESTION. DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO PLACE
INFORMATION IN A CHAT? >> YES.
>> OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU ALL WHO HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO IS TO TELL ME IN THE CHAT BOX OR I CAN'T SEE THE CHALT.
IF YOU WILL UNMEET SO WE CAN MAKE THIS INTERACTIVE.
WHAT ARE THE REASONS THAT YOU CAN GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION?
>> OKAY. COUNCILOR SMITH YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED. >> TO DISCUSS PROBLEMS THAT WE WILL VOTE IN REGULAR TO DISCUSS WHAT THE PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR SESSION TO BE VOTED ON.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT COUNCIL LADY. LET ME SAY THIS.
I THINK THAT YOU ALL MIGHT CALL YOUR WORK SESSION EXECUTIVE
>> LET ME CHANGE THE LANGUAGE THAT I AM USING.
WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR WHICH YOU ALL CAN GO INTO AN ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXECUTIVE SESSION?
>> >> WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN DISCUSS ATTORNEY CLIENT INFORMATION WITH THE PUBLIC.
THE ONLY TIME THAT IS WE COME TOGETHER ON THAT WHEN WE NEED HAVE A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENED BASED ON ATTORNEY ISSUES. IF WE HAVE A LAWSUIT OR SOMETHING AGAINST THE CITY. WE DON'T COUNT IT.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE ANOTHER COUNCILMAN, ALLEN WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
MISS HODGE. >> I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVE IT'S WHEN THE WHAT'S SAID BY ATTORNEY MAY EFFECT ONGOING COURT CASE OR LAWSUIT OR SOMETHING. BASICALLY HE'S GOING TO BRIEF AND EVERYBODY DON'T NEED TO KNOW THE STRATEGY.
>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU FOR THOSE RESPONSES. THE KEY WORD WHAT YOU SAID THE LAWSUITS. AND SO BEFORE I MOVE TO NEXT SLIDE. I WANT TO POINT OUT WHEN THE COURTS TALK ABOUT EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THEY TALK ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
WHAT OUR COURTS HAVE SAID THEY WILL NOT MAKE EXCEPTIONS TO THE OPEN MEETING ACT PROVISIONS. SO THAT IS NOT THE COURT'S RESPONSIBILITY ACCORDING TO THE COURT.
THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THE LEGISLATURE IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE EXCEPTION.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE ONLY EXCEPTION THAT'S IN THE CONSTITUTION FOR RELATIVE TO OPEN MEETING ACT IS THE ATTORNEY
[00:25:03]
CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXECUTIVE SESSION.AND SO WHAT YOU WILL SEE HERE IS SOME LANGUAGE.
FROM A COURT CASE CALLED WARRIOR VERSES DARK.
THIS CASE IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT THE REASON FOR WHICH A GOVERNING BODY CAN GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THIS IS A COMMON LAW PRIVILEGE. THIS IS SOME IMPORTANT LANGUAGE THAT I WANT YOU TO BE AWARE OF. THIS COUNTY VERSES ANDERSON.
THIS LANGUAGE HAS BEEN REPEATED IN A NUMBER OF OEM MEETING CASES RELATED TO GOVERNING BODY GOING INTO ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE COURTS HAVE SAID THIS ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. AGAIN I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ALL USE THE TERM EXECUTIVE SESSION A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT I'M USE IT. I WILL TRY TO ALWAYS REMEMBER TO SAY ATTORNEY GENERAL EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THIS IS WHAT COURT SAID. IT'S LIMITED TO MEET WHICH DISCUSSION OF PRESENT IMPENDING LITIGATION.
THAT'S YOUR LAWSUITS, ARE TAKING PLACE.
THE CLIENTS CAN PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH FACTS AND INFORMATION RELATED TO THE LAWSUIT. AND THEN COUNCIL CAN ADVICE ON THE LEGAL RAMIFICATION OF THE FACTS AND INFORMATION.
HOWEVER, IF COURT HAVE SAID ONCE ANY DISCUSSION WHATSOEVER BEGINS, BASED ON THE ADVICE PROVIDED BY COUNCIL WHETHER SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS OR OTHERWISE.
THOSE DISCUSSIONS MUST TAKE PLACE IN AN ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING O OR THAT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF OPEN MEETING ACT. WITH THAT IN MIND.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXECUTIVE SESSION. THERE'S A COUPLE RULES WE NEED TO BE AWARE. YOUR ATTORNEYS THAT TO BE PRESENT. IT'S THE ATTORNEY WHO PROVIDING THE LEGAL ADVICE. IF THE ATTORNEY IS NOT THERE.
YOU DON'T HAVE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
TWO, IT HAS TO BE RELATED TO PENDING OR THREAT IN LITIGATION.
THREE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUPLE OF CAVEATS WITH WILL TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE. THREE, YOU CANNOT USE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DELIBERATE OR MAKE DECISIONS.
THE COURTS HAVE SAID ONCE YOU GET TO THAT POINT YOU MUST GO BACK OUT INTO AN ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING TO DELIBERATE. THAT'S EVEN INCLUDES WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATION.
THAT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR MUNICIPALITY.
FROM A STRATEGIC STANDPOINT IT PUTS US -- PUTS CITIES IN A BAD POSITION. YOUR ADVERSARY IS GOING TO KNOW WHERE YOU FALL AS FAR AS SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS ARE CONCERNED. HOWEVER THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP ON A NUMBER OF OCCASION OVER THE YEAR SINCE I WORKED IN THIS AREA. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS WORK AT THIS ISSUE AND CONSIDERED IT AND HAVE NOT MADE ANY CHANGES TO THE OPEN MEETING ACT. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE NOW.
AND SO NUMBER FOUR COVERS THAT. THIS DEALS WITH AND COVERS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS AS WELL. THE NEXT AREA THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS MEETING MINUTE AND RECORDS.
844104-A SAID MEET RING SUPPOSED TO BE PROMPTABLY AND FULLY RECORDED. AND OPEN TO PUBLIC INSPECTION.
I WILL ALSO PUTTEN ASTERISK BY THE OPEN TO PUBLIC INSPECTION PART OF THIS TO LET YOU KNOW THAT EVEN IF YOUR MINUTES ARE IN DRAFT FORMAT; AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
THEY ARE OPEN TO PUBLIC FPGS. IF MADE REQUEST FOR THE MEETING MINUTES OF THIS MINUTE OR OF MEET THANK YOU HELD LAST MONTH, AND THEY'VE NOT BEEN FINALIZED YET.
I CAN STILL GET THOSE DRAFT MEETING UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT. THE LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE GOES ON TO INCLUDE THAT THE MINUTE SHALL INCLUDE THE RECORD OF PERSON'S PRESENCE SO THAT WOULD BE THE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY. AND THEN ALSO HAS TO INCLUDE ALL MOTIONS PROPOSAL AND RESOLUTIONS OFFERED AND THE RESULTS OF ANY VOTES THAT ARE TAKEN. YOU CAN SEE THAT I HAVE A COURT CASE CITED AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SLIDE.
I HAVE DONE THAT BECAUSE THE COURT IN TENNESSEE HAVE SAID THAT YOU CAN IN FACT VIOLATE THE OPEN MEETING ACT BY NOT HAVING YOUR MINUTES ADEQUATELY RECORDED.
TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING THAT OCCURRED DURING THE COURSE OF THE MINUTE AS FAR AS MOTIONS, PROPOSALS AND RESOLUTION.
WHEN YOU ALL -- I ASSUME YOU ARE SENT MINUTE IN ADVANCE.
BEFORE YOU ARE ASKED TO APPROVE THEM.
PLEASE MAKE SURE THEY ARE ACCURATE AND THAT INCLUDE ANY MOTION PROPOSALS OR RESOLUTION THAT WERE OFFERED.
BECAUSE FAILURE TO INCLUDE THAT INFORMATION COULD RESULT IN AN
OPENING MEETING FACTS VIOLATION. >> I TALKED ABOUT A MINUTE AGO THERE WAS A CAVEAT TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION LANGUAGE.
[00:30:06]
THIS CAVEAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. A FEW YEARS AGO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY PASSED LEGISLATION THAT ALLOWED AUDIT COMMITTEES SO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUDIT COMMITTEES TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. THAT LANGUAGE IS FOUND 9-3-405.YOU CAN SEE HERE ALL OF THE REASONS THAT A LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUDIT COMMITTEE CAN GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND INCLUDES TALKING ABOUT THOSE THINGS THAT ARE CONFIDENTIAL UNDER STATE LAW. TALKING ABOUT CURRENTOR PENDING L LITIGATION.
TALKING ABOUT AUDIT INVESTIGATION.
ANY INFORMATION RELATED PROTECTED UNDER FEDERAL LAW AND ANY MATTERS INVOLVING INFORMATION UNDER 93406 WHERE THE INFORMANT HAS REQUESTED UNANIMITY.
THE NEXT SLIDE TALKS ABOUT PUBLIC VERSES SECRET VOTING.
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK WHAT NEEDS TO BE CONVEYED.
THERE SHOULD NEVER BE SECRET VOTING.
THAT IN AND OF ITSELF VIOLATES NOT ONLY THE SPIRIT OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT BUT ALSO THE ACTUAL LAW RELATED TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. 84410 #-B PROVIDE ALL VOTE MUST BE PUBLIC WHETHER THEY ARE VALID OR NOT.
THEY CAN'T BE SECRET. AND THEN IT SAYS THAT PUBLIC VOTES MEANS VOCAL EXPRESSION OF EITHER AYE OR NAY IN THAT ORDER.
THE WAY THAT I HAVE SEEN THIS ISSUE COME UP WITH BALLOT VOTES.
I HAD A SITUATION FEW YEARS AGO AND THIS BACK WHEN OPEN RECORDS COUNCIL. WHERE I HAD LOCAL GOVERNMENT TRYING TO FEEL A VACANT SEAT ON THEIR BOARD AND THEY WERE GOING TO DO IT BY BALLOT. AND SO INSTEAD OF EACH ROUND OF THE BALLOTS WENT AROUND. READING THE BALLOT THE NAME OF THE PERSON WHO VOTED A CERTAIN WAY ON THE BALLOT THEY TALLIED THE BALLOT AND THEN ELIMINATED A PERSON.
THEY CAN'T TELL WHAT THE COUNTS. THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETING ACT. IF AT ANY TIME YOU VOTE BY BALLOT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROCESS MUST BE THAT EVERYBODY MUST KNOW WHAT YOUR BALLOT SAID AND HOW YOU VOTED.
THE LANGUAGE IN THIS PART SAID IF ROLL CALL VOTES ARE TAKEN.
THE VOTE MUST BE RECORDED INDICATING INDIVIDUAL VOTES.
>> THIS SLIDE TALKS ABOUT ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION AND SO THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE THIS CLEAR. ALL OF THIS LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN IN THE STATUTE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.
WE ALL KNOW THAT WHEN COVID HIT THAT THE GOVERNOR PUT IN PLACE EXECUTIVE ORDER 16 THAT AUTHORIZED ELECTRONIC MEETINGS.
HE HAS EXTENDED THAT ORDER THREE TIMES NOW TO INCLUDE EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER 60 THAT CAME OUT LAST WEEK AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT IN THE FEW MINUTES.
BUT PRIOR TO THOSE EXECUTIVE ORDERS BEING IN PLACE.
CITIES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CITY THAT MET THE EXEMPTION THAT IS IN THIS SLIDE AND THAT WOULD BE A CITY THAT HAD A GOVERNING BODY ORGANIZED UNDER TITLE SIX. CHAPTER 18.
HAVING CITY COMMISSION AND THREE MEMBERS THAT FELL INTO THE POPULATION BRACKET. THAT WAS THE ONLY CITY THAT WAS AUTHORIZED TO WHOLE ELECTRONIC MEETINGS PRIOR TO THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT HAVE RECENTLY COME OUT.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE -- THAT'S AN ISSUE LOOKED AT RIGHT NOW. BECAUSE WITH COVID THERE WAS NEED TO HOLD ELECTRONIC MEETING. CONVERSATION AFTER HOPEFULLY SOONER THAN LATER AFTER RESOLUTION TO COVED AND THE VACCINE COMES OUT AND WE CAN MEET BACK TOGETHER, WITHOUT FEAR OF SOMEONE ACQUIRING COVID IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS AUTHORIZATION IN 844108 SHOULD BE EXTENDED TO CITIES ALL OVER AND NOT JUST CITIES THAT MEET THESE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT IN 108 RIGHT NOW. AGAIN IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT CITIES OUTSIDE OF THE ONE THAT MEETS THIS REQUIREMENT AND THE STATUTE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MEET ELECTRONICALLY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION ABOUT ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION OUTSIDE OF LANGUAGE THAT WE TALKED NABLT THE STATUTE IS THAT E-MAILS ALSO
[00:35:03]
CONSTITUTE ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION IN A MEETING.THAT JOHNSTON OPINION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT DEFINED WHAT DELIBERATION WAS, THERE WAS ALSO A LOT OF CONVERSATION IN THAT OPINION FROM THE COURT RELATED TO E-MAIL COMMUNICATION. PLEASE KNOW THAT ANY FORM OF COMMUNICATION WHETHER IT IS MEETING OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING. WHETHER IT IS THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA BECAUSE SOCIAL MEDIA IS ONE OF THOSE PLACES THAT OFTENTIMES ARE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS FIND THEMSELVES IN TROUBLE WITH REGARD TO OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
BECAUSE THEY WILL BE HAVING CONVERSATIONS WHETHER THEY WITH PUBLIC OR PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS ON THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS THAT VIOLATE THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
SOCIAL MINDA. TELEPHONE CALLS, TEXT MESSAGES, AND E-MAIL YOU CAN ALL -- IN ALL OF THOSE FORMS YOU COULD FIND YOURSELF HAVING AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION.
WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THE JOHNSTON OPINION THE INDIVIDUAL THAT SUED METRO ACTUALLY SUED BECAUSE OF AN OPEN MEETING -- WELL IT STARTED OFF PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
AND THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST ALL OF THESE E-MAILS WERE PROVIDED AND IT WAS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF THOSE E-MAILS THAT HE FOUND OUT THERE HAD BEEN AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION. JUST BEING MINDFUL REGARDLESS OF THE FORMAT THAT YOU ARE USING TO COMMUNICATE THOSE COMMUNICATIONS DO NOT NEED TO GO INTO DELIBERATION OR DECISION MAKING
ON PUBLIC BUSINESS. >> THERE'S ALSO LANGUAGE ADDED BACK IN 2009 THAT ALLOW GOVERNING BODY TO SET UP INTERNET FORUMS. ESSENTIALLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THEY ARE LIKE CHATROOMS ACCEPT THEY ARE PUBLIC CHATROOM.
ONE REQUIREMENT IN THE STATUTE. THEY HAVE TO MAKE AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED IN THE INTERNET FORUM. AND THIS PROCESS A PROCESS THAT GOES THROUGH THE OFFICE OF OPEN RECORDS COUNCIL.
THEY HAVE TO GET A LETTER OF COMPLIANCE TO ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENT WHO SUBMITS A PLAN. FOR ONE OF THESE INTERNET FORUM OR CHATROOM TYPE COMMUNICATION STYLES.
BUT THE BENEFIT OF THESE INTERNET FORUMS IS THAT GOVERN BODY CAN DO EVERYTHING UP TO VOTINGEN AN ISSUE IN THE FORUM.
AS LONG AS IT IS MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE TO THE CITIZENRY AS
WELL. >> NOW THESE NEXT FEW SLIDE GETS INTO WHO HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION.
JUST TO RECAP, WE KNOW THAT ALL OF OUR MEETINGS, WHEN YOU HAVE TWO OR MORE MEMBERS OF GOVERNING BODY WHO ARE DELIBERATING TOWARD OR MAKING DECISIONS ON PUBLIC BUSINESS THEN THAT WILL TRIGGER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. THAT MEANS THAT CONVERSATION DISCUSSIONS, DELIBERATIONS, MUST BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
THEY ALSO MUST BE ADEQUATELY PUBLICLY NOTICED AND THERE MUST BE MINUTES OF THOSE DELIBERATIONS OR DECISIONS BEING MADE. THOSE ARE THE THREE REQUIREMENTS UNDER OUR OPEN MEETINGS ACT. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S A VIOLATION. ANY CITIZEN WHO IS EFFECTED BY A DECISION THAT HAS BEEN MADE OUTSIDE OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO FILE A LAWSUIT AND WHAT THE COURTS HAVE SAID BASED ON THE LANGUAGE 844105.
ANY ACTION TAKEN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ANYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH PUBLIC MONIES. THEN THOSE ACTION CAN BE VOIDED AND THE COURT CAN SAY THEY WERE OF NO EFFECT.
THAT WHAT LANGUAGE IN 844105 SAY IF THE COURT ULTIMATELY DETERMINES THROUGH A LAWSUIT THAT AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATIONS HAS OCCURRED. AGAIN I JUST WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION WHAT I HAVE IN THE THIRD BULLET POINT THERE WHICH IS THESE VIOLATIONS CAN BE TECHNICAL, OR THEY COULD BE SUBSTANTIVE. SUBSTANTIVE IN THE MANNER THAT MULTIPLE MEMBERS ACTUALLY MET OUTSIDE OF AN ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING TECHNICAL FROM THE MINUTES WERE NOT ROARED AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECORDED. BASED ON THE LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE. A CITIZEN CAN BRING A CHALLENGE OR ANY OTHER COURT OF EQUITY. THE COURT HAS TO PREPARE FINDING
[00:40:02]
FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A VIOLATION. WHAT CAN ACTUALLY HAPPEN IS THE COURT CAN PERMANENTLY JOIN PERSON VIOLATED THE ACT FROM VIOLATING AGAIN. WHAT I HAVE SEEN HAPPEN.THE WAY I'VE SEEN THIS PLAY OUT. I'VE SEEN A COUPLE OF GOVERNING BODY WHOSE HAVE HAD OPEN MEETING VIOLATIONS FOUND AGAINST THEM BY A COURT AND THE COURT HAS TAKEN THOSE GOVERNING BODY UNDER JURISDICTION FOR YEAR TIME PERIOD.
BASICALLY SAID YOU GOVERNING BODY MUST REPORT BACK OR SENT THE COURT BACK REPORT ON REGULAR BASIS TO SHOW HOW YOU ARE NOT VIOLATING THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. BECAUSE AGAIN WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONETARY PENALTIES UNDER OUR OPEN MEETINGS ACT FOR VIOLATIONS. HOWEVER YOU ALSO SEE THAT I HAVE A LINK TO A COURT CASE FROM CHATTANOOGA THAT INVOLVED OPEN MEETING VIOLATION AND THEN IS THE ONLY CASE WHERE I HAVE SEEN THIEVES ASSESSED IN THE OPEN MEETING CASE, BUT THE FEES WERE ASSESSED ON SOME RESPONSES THAT WERE PROVIDED TO INTERROGATORIES IN THE CASE. WHERE THERE WERE ASSERTIONS MADE THAT KNOW THE OPEN MEETING ACT HAD NOT BEEN VIOLATED WHEN THE COURT CAME BACK AND FOUND IT HAD.
SO THE COURT DID ASSESS FEES IN THAT CASE.
AND THEY WERE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL.
FEES THAT WERE ASSESSED. AS I SAID BEFORE WE DON'T HAVE MONETARY PENALTIES. BUT THERE ARE PENALTIES THAT FEEL SOME GOVERNING BODIES HAVE PLACED UPON THEMSELVES BECAUSE OF THEIR VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETING ACT.
IF THE PURPOSE OF THE GOVERNING BODY TO SERVE THE PUBLIC THEN WHAT COULD MAKE THE PUBLIC LESS TRUSTING OF THE GOVERNING BODY THAN FINDING OUT THAT DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC VIEW? I THINK THAT'S THE MOST DAMAGING THING THAT CAN HAPPEN WITH REGARD TO AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION. EVEN IF IT'S ONE THAT NEVER GOES TO COURT. JUST THE THOUGHT IN AND THE CONVERSATION AND THE SCUTTLEBUTT AROUND OUR GOVERNING BODY WHICH IS HERE TO REPRESENT US IS MAKING DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC VIEW. TO ME THAT'S MORE DAMAGING IN THE LONG RUN THAN ANY MONETARY PROVISION OR MONETARY PENALTY COULD BE IN THE SHORT RUN. I WANT TO SAY THAT.
I ALSO WANTED THOUGH SAY THE COURTS IN TENNESSEE HAVE SAID YES THERE ARE GOING TO BE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S MISTAKES THAT ARE MADE. RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. SOMETIMES THERE ARE DELIBERATE SITUATIONS WHERE THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT IS VIOLATED.
BUT WHAT THE COURSE HAS SAID THAT, THAT DOESN'T VIOLATION DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THE BE ALL END-ALL.
THERE'S A WAY TO CURE THE VIOLATION.
THE COURTS HAVE SAID THAT, THAT THE WAY TO CURE AN OPENING MEETING VIOLATION TO HAVE NEW AND SUBSTANTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE THAT WERE INVOLVED. IN BY THE PUBLIC IS AFFORDED AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THE FACTS AND TO BE HEARD WITH REFERENCE TO MATTERS AT ISSUE. THAT IS HOW OUR COURT HAVE SAID WE CAN CURE OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES CAN CURE AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION BY HAVING THE NEW AND SUBSTANTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE YOICH ALL DISCUSSED OUTSIDE OF THE ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO ADD TO THIS ISSUE I GUESS IT GO TO THE THIS SLIDE.
THERE WAS A SITUATION AND YOU CAN ALL LOOK THIS UP.
IT WAS CALLED BLACK WEDNESDAY. AND IT WAS A SITUATION THAT OCCURRED IN KNOX COUNTY WHERE THERE WAS A SERIES OF OPENING MEETING VIE LIST. THERE WERE SOME APPOINTMENT THAT WERE MADE AS A PART OF THE OPEN MEETING VIOLATIONS.
ONE OF THE JOURNALIST FOR THE KNOX SENTINEL AND PRETTY PROMINENT ATTORNEY BROUGHT AN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION CASE AGAIN THE KNOX COUNTY COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY PEOPLE LOST -- PEOPLE WERE OUSTED. AND THEY LOST THEIR POSITIONED ON THE COMMISSION BECAUSE THE APPOINTMENT WERE MADE ILLEGALLY.
[00:45:02]
JUST KNOW THAT I TALKED ABOUT REPUTATION.AND LOSING PUBLIC TRUST. THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE MONETARY PENALTIES; BUT I DO FEEL LIKE BASED ON WHAT HAPPENED IF A COURT WERE TO SEE A SERIES OF VIOLATION.
THAT COULD D.A. COULD BRING PROCEEDINGSES AGAINST THE GOVERNING BODY. AND THIS IS LAST SUBSTANTIVE SLIDE I HAVE. IT JUST SAID HAPPENING AROUND THE STATE. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SUGGEST THAT YOU ALL DO IS IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN ON THE TENNESSEE COALITION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENTS, WEB SITE.
I SUGGEST THAT YOU QUESTION THERE.
BECAUSE YOU CAN FIND STORIES ABOUT ALMOST ANY AND ALL THINGS RELATED TO OPEN MEETINGS AND PUBLIC RECORDS FROM A JOURNALIST GRASS ROOTS CITIZENS PERSPECTIVE.
ANYTIME THAT COMPLAINTS ARE MADE AGAINST GOVERNING BODIES, OFTEN TIME THEY WILL PICK THAT UP AND WRITE A STORY ABOUT IT.
ANYTHING RELATED TO LEGISLATION THAT IMPACT THE OPEN MEETING ACT THEY WILL HAVE THAT ON THE WOEB SITE.
THEY HAVE ALSO THERE'S A STORY NOW ON THERE ABOUT IF REGISTRY OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND THE ISSUE RELATED TO THE OPEN MEETING ACT THAT THEY HAVE HAS BEEN BROUGHT OUT RECENTLY IN THE PRESS. THIS IS RELATED TO ELECTRONIC MEETING AND ISSUES THEY SOLICITED COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS AND FROM MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA ABILITY ISSUES THEY HAD PERSONALLY. JUST SOME INTERESTING INFORMATION THAT YOU MIGHT FIND ON THIS WEB SITE.
IF FOR SOME REASON THIS COUNCIL WERE TO MIND ITSELF IN OPEN MEETING ISSUE YOU COULD GO TO THIS WEB SITE AND READ ABOUT IT.
THEY PICK UP STORIES FROM ACROSS THE STATE THAT EVEN I BEING ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS THERE DON'T ALWAYS KNOW ABOUT.
EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION TO HOLD ELECTRONIC MEETING.
THAT AUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN EXTENDED UNTIL OCTOBER 28TH.
BUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I JUST WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION ABOUT THE NEW ORDER. THE FIRST PART OF THE ORDER IS GOOD UNTIL THE END OF SEPTEMBER. IT MIRROR EXECUTIVE ORDER 16 AND ALL THOSE PUT IN PLACE TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 16.
HOUR WITH THE LANGUAGE EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 1 AND THAT GOES UNTIL AND EFFECTIVE UNTIL OCTOBER 28TH, THERE'S SOME NEW REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THAT PART OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER.
THEY SENT OUT IF YOU DIDN'T GET AND YOU ARE INTERESTED.
I WILL BE WILLING FORWARD TO YOU.
ONE THING THAT IS DIFFERENT NOW IS THAT WILL BE DIFFERENT STARTING OCTOBER 1ST. IS THAT CURRENTLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE REAL-TIME ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC OF ITS MEETING IF IT'S MEETING ELECTRONICALLY BASE ON THE DECLARATION THAT YOU MADE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING HOW IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC AND BECAUSE YOU ARE CARRYING OUT ESSENTIAL BUSINESS.
STARTING OCTOBER 1ST. NOT ONLY WILL REAL-TIME ACCESS -- STARTING OCTOBER 1ST REAL-TIME ACCESS HAVE TO BE PROVIDED TO THE MEETING AND RECORDING WILL HAVE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC WITHIN TWO DAYS.
RIGHT NOW IT'S AN EITHER-OR BASICALLY.
YOU PROVIDE THE REAL-TIME ACCESS OR IF YOU CANNOT PROVIDE IT, THEN YOU PROVIDE THE RECORDING WITHIN TWO DAYS.
BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST. IT'S AN AND NOT AN OR.
THERE'S ALSO SOME LANGUAGE THAT SAID THAT BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST.
THAT YOU MUST INCLUDE IN YOUR NOTICE HOW ACCESS TO THE MEETING CAN -- IS TO BE PROVIDED. AND RIGHT NOW THAT'S JUST URGED.
THERE'S ALSO LANGUAGE BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST IN THAT ORDER THAT REQUIRES ANYBODY WHO IS SPEAKING.
SAY IF THE MEETING HELD BY AUDIO ONLY, ANY AND EVERYBODY WHO IS SPEAKING MUST IDENTIFY THEMSELVES SO THAT THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHO IT IS THAT THEY CAN ATTRIBUTE COMMENTS TO.
[00:50:04]
A COUPLE OF THINGS, AGAIN THAT WILL BE DIFFERENT BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST RELATED TO 60 THAT'S NOT IN PLACE RIGHT NOW UNTIL THE END OF SEPTEMBER. THAT'S EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE.I HAVE SOME RESOURCE INFORMATION HERE.
YOU ALL IF YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF OFFICE OF OPEN RECORDS COUNCIL MAKE YOURSELF AWARE. IF ADDITION TO CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE WHICH SHOULD ALWAYS BE YOUR FIRST LINE OF COMMUNICATION WHEN YOU HAVE QUESTIONS RELATED TO OPEN MEETINGS.
YOU ALSO HAVE ANOTHER RESOURCE. THAT WAS WAS SET UP TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT AND THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
LEE POPE STAFF THE OFFICE AND THEY ARE MORE THAN HELPFUL.
YOU CAN CONTACT YOUR M-TASK OFFICE.
THEY WILL HELP YOU. AND I WILL ASSIST GARY IN ANYTHING THAT HE MIGHT NEED ASSISTANCE WITH.
AGAIN, FIRST LINE OF ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE SHOULD ALWAYS BE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THEN JUST KNOW THAT YOU HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AS WELL. AT THIS POINT, SO I CAN SEE WHO THE TALKING SO YOU CAN ASK ANY QUESTION I'M GOING TO STOP SHARING MY SCREEN IF THAT'S OKAY.
AND BACK OUT. BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE YOU WHEN I
HAVE MY SCREEN UP. >> MISS HODGE.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
IT'S CLEAR OUR STATE CITY AND TOWN ARE WELL SERVED BY THE WORK YOU DO. MAY I ASK WILL YOUR SLIDES BE
>> CAN YOU SHARE YOUR LIEDS WITH US.
>> I WILL. IN CASE WE MISSED SOMETHING WE CAN GO BACK AND REFRESH OUR MEMORY.
WE'RE READY FOR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.
ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT?
>> I HAVE SOMETHING MAYOR. >> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED COUNCIL
LADY SMITH. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.
THE PERSON THE PERSON WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT WHAT THE AS WELL AS THE OUT ONE THAT INVOLVED.
IS THAT CORRECT? >> WHAT ACTUALLY SAID.
WHAT THE CASE LAW IN TENNESSEE SAID THERE HAS TO BE FULL AND
FAIR RECONSIDERATION. >> IF THAT WAS THREE PEOPLE INVOLVED. IF SOMEONE VIOLATED THE SUNSHINE LAW, WHEN THE ATTORNEY CALLED THE NAME OF THE PERSON IN A LETTER THAT PERSON CAME TO THE MEETING AND MADE HIS STATEMENT ABOUT WHY HE CALLED THAT PERSON. SHOULD THE OTHER TWO ALSO BE REQUIRED TO PRESENT WHAT WAS SAID ON THE PHONE?
>> THE ONE WHO DID THE CALL? >> COUNCIL LADY.
I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION YOU ASK.
PLEASE KNOW I'VE DONE MY HOMEWORK ON THIS ISSUE.
I HAVE LOOKED AT YOU ALL PREVIOUS MEETING.
I KNOW -- I KNEW THIS QUESTION WOULD COME UP.
BUT WHAT I WILL SAY ABOUT IT IS I WILL REPEAT WHAT THE CASE LAW SAYS. THE CASE LAW SAYS THAT THERE MUST BE FULL AND FAIR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE THAT WAS PRESENTED. WHATEVER -- WHATEVER ADVICE THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM YOUR ATTORNEY THAT'S THE ADVICE THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM YOUR ATTORNEY. I'M NOT GOING TO CONTRADICT THAT. WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT THE CASE LAW ONLY REQUIRES FULL AND FAIR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE THAT WAS DISCUSSED OUTSIDE OF THE ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING. THAT INCLUDES ALL PEOPLE.
>> WHATEVER THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS WHERE.
THERE'S SHOULD BE A SEMBLANCE OF PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS THAT IS BROUGHT FORWARD WHEN THE ISSUE IS PRESENTED AGAIN.
OKAY. IF YOU SAY FULL AND FAIR IN MY UNDERSTANDING. HELP ME IF I AM WRONG.
>> AGAIN THERE SHOULD BE SOME SEMBLANCE OF THE CONVERSATION
[00:55:06]
THAT OCCURRED SO THE CURE CAN ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE.THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CASE LAW SAID.
IT JUST SAY THERE MUST BE FULL AND FAIR RECONSIDERATION AND IN PREPARATION FOR THESE QUESTION, I DID GO BACK AND READ FIND.
AND THERE'S NO LANGUAGE IN THE CASES THAT DICTATES THAT EVERYONE WHO SPOKE OUTSIDE OF ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC PETING MUST SPEAK AGAIN. BUT I ALSO DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED OF THE COURTS.
I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND FULL AND FAIR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUES. WHATEVER THAT LOOKS LIKE.
OKAY. >> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
WHENEVER SOMEONE HAS VIOLATED THE LAW.
>> WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.
CAN YOU LEAN INTO YOUR COMPUTER OR MICROPHONE?
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? >> BETTER YES, GO AHEAD.
CAN YOU HEAR ME BETTER NOW. PERFECT.
THAT'S GREAT, THANK YOU. >> WHAT ABOUT THAT?
>> THAT'S GOOD. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> YOU SAID A LOT. YOU SAID A LOT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GATHER MY THOUGHTS HERE.
>> YES, MA'AM. >> YOU GAVE SOME GOOD INFORMATION. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT FIRST OF ALL. YOU SAID A LAWSUIT COULD BE BROUGHT FORTH. THE PERSON THAT VIOLATED THE SUNSHINE LAW. WHAT WOULD CAUSE THAT TO HAPPEN.
>> JIGS BECAUSE CITIZEN FILE A LAWSUIT OR COULD BE ANOTHER
COUNCIL PERSON. >> IT COULD BE ANYBODY.
ABSOLUTELY. THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON WHO CAN BRING THE LAWSUIT. ANYBODY WHO FEELS LIKE THEY HAVE STANDING WHICH MEAN THEY WERE IMPACTED IN SOME WAY.
BY THE POTENTIAL -- BY THE POTENTIAL VIOLATION.
YES, MA'AM. I COULD BE ANYBODY.
>> WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED? >> WELL, TWO THINGS YOU JUST ASKED ME. STAND SING GOING TO BE CAN I SHOW IMPACTED IN SOME WAY. THAT I WAS HARMED IN SOME WAY BY THIS. EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE.
IT'S INTERESTING IN A LOT OF THE CASES, IT'S STATEMENT THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY THEMSELVES.
THAT WERE MADE TO GROUP OF INDIVIDUAL OR MAYBE IN SUBSEQUENT PUBLIC MEETING. I'VE SEEN IT COME UP WITH CONVERSATION HAVE OCCURRED. IT'S BEEN SAID THAT'S NOT WHAT WE AGREE TO. WELL, NONE OF THE MINUTE SHOW YOU AGREE TO ANYTHING. THAT LET'S THE PUBLIC TO AGREE YOUED A KWUTLY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING.
LAWSUITS CAN COME ABOUT IN A VARIETY OF WAYS IN THE CASES LIKE IN THAT JOHNSTON CASE, AS I MENTIONED IT WAS TRYING SOME PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST. THAT THE EVIDENCE FOR OPEN MEETING VIOLATION CAME IN PLAY. BECAUSE THEY HAD DISCUSSED ISSUE IN THEIR E-MAIL COMMUNICATION. OKAY.
THANK YOU. I KNOW YOU SAID THERE'S NOTHING -- THERE'S NOTHING IN PLACE IF SOMEONE HAD VIOLATED
THE SUNSHINE LAW MONETARY. >> WHAT CAN BE DONE BASICALLY IF
SOMEONE HAS VIOLATED THE LAW. >> THE LAWSUIT IS REALLY THE RECOURSE THAT PEOPLE HAVE IN TENNESSEE.
>> ALSO I JUST THINKING. IF ONE OF THE COUNCIL PERSON.
I'M JUST SAYING FOR EXAMPLE. IF THEY WERE FOUND IN VIOLATION.
AND LAWSUIT BROUGHT AGAINST THEM.
COULD THE CITY PAY FOR THAT? >> I WILL TELL YOU THAT WHEN OPEN MEETING VIOLATION ARE BROUGHT.
THEY ARE NOT BOUGHT BROUGHT IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY QUIT.
THEY ARE BROUGHT IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNING BODY.
[01:00:02]
OH, OKAY. BECAUSE IT TAKES MULTIPLE MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY TO TRIGGER THE OPEN MEETING ACT.OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THAT'S GOOD INFORMATION. >> THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY SMITH.
COUNCILMEN GARRETT. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
I WILL BE BRIEF. JUST A MATTER OF CLARIFICATION.
TO CURE IT YOU GOT TO SUMMARIZE WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.
DOESN'T REQUIRE ALL PARTIES TO SUMMARIZE.
AS I DISCUSS HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT.
I CAN MAYBE BRIEFLY GIVEN A OVERVIEW OF WHAT WAS SAID THAT CURES IT. IF THAT'S THE CASE SOUNDS LIKE THERE MAY NOT NECESSARILY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BE REASON FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO MAYBE RUN TO THE CITY ATTORNEY OR SOMEONE ELSE TO NOTIFY SOMEONE THAT SOMEONE TALKED TO THEM. IT'S MATTER OF DISCUSSING IT AGAIN WHEN WE MEET AGAIN TO VOTE ON IT.
IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECT. >> COUPLE OF THINGS.
I DON'T KNOW IT'S JUST I WOULD NOT SAY TO CASE LAW SAID YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE SUMMARY. IT SAID FULL AND FAIR RECONSIDERATION. I DON'T IN MY MIND THAENT EQUATE TO SUMMARY. I ALWAYS THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO PUT YOUR CITY ATTORNEY ON NOTICE OF ISSUES THAT COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A LAWSUIT FOR THE CITY.
AS AN ATTORNEY I WOULD NEVER WANT TO BE BLINDSIDED ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT OTHER PEOPLE KNEW ABOUT.
THEY JUST CHOSE NOT TO TELL ME ABOUT IT.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO PUT THE CITY ON NOTICE ON ANY ISSUE THERE'S VIOLATION OF THE LAW. BECAUSE FOR THE SO THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN MAKE EVERYONE AWARE OF WHAT THE LAW IS.
AND OFTEN THE TIMES THAT IS THE SIMPLE CURE FOR A LOT OF THINGS THAT MAY COME UP. JUST, HEY, JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW.
EDUCATION THIS THE WHAT THE LAW SAYS.
THIS IS REQUIRED UNDER THE LAW. YOU WANT YOUR ATTORNEY TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY PROVIDE THE EDUCATION BUT ALSO FIGURE OUT FROM A RISK ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE WHAT MILING THIS COST THE CITY IF LAWSUIT BROUGHT. THIS REQUIRES CONVERSATION WITH THE CITY INSURER. EN IF YOURSELF INSURED.
YOU NEED RISK ANALYSIS DONE. I THINK THERE'S A VARIETY OF REASONS WHY YOU WOULD STILL WANT TO PUT YOUR CITY ATTORNEY ON NOTICE. OF ANY POTENTIAL VIOLATION OF NOT ONLY THIS LAW BUT ANY LAW. AND INCLUDING YOUR ETHICS
I'M JUST THINKING PRACTICINGCALITY ISSUE OF IT.
WE MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE LIMITED TO ADOPTED LAND USE PLAN BUT TO TAKING THE VOICE OF THE CITIZENS AND THIS COUNCILMEMBER ARRIVED LOOKING AT IT. WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN HEARING.
I'VE GOTTEN A FEW E-MAILS. THEY SHARE WHAT THEY'VE BEEN HEARING. YOU MAY CALL SOMEONE ELSE FOR THEIR PROFESSIONAL OPINION NOT ASKING THEM TO TELL YOU HOW TO VOTE. AS THEY GIVE YOU THEIR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTISE BECAUSE THEY ARE DEVELOPER ON IT PEOPLE COME TO MEETING NEXT WEEK AND SAID YOU KNOW AFTER TALKING WITH COUNCILMAN SO AND SO AND THEIR RESIDENTS DON'T SEEM TO HAVE A PROBLEM. AFTER TALKING TO OTHER COUNCILMAN THAT DEVELOPS IN THE AREA.
DOESN'T APPEAR STRUCTURAL ISSUES WITH THE SITE THAT WOULD IT YESESES MY CONCERN. TOPPOGRAPHY AND THE SITE LINE PREP AND THE DEVELOPMENT COST AND ALL OF THAT.
THAT'S WHERE I GET AT IN TERMS OF THE FULL DISCLOSURE VERSES SUMMARY. YOU GET INTO THE DETAIL.
SUCH AND SUCH TOLD ME THAT SPECIFIC ADDRESS OPPOSES IT.
THAT SPECIFIC ADDRESS OPPOSES. THAT ADDRESS DOESN'T CARE.
HER DAUGHTER PLAYS AROUND THERE. IN TERMS OF DIFFERENTIATING THE SUMMARY VERSES A I FORGET THE VERBAGE YOU USED.
[01:05:04]
>> FULL AND FAIR DISCLOSURE. >> RECONSIDERATIONS.
EXCUSE ME. >> RECONSIDERATIONS, YEAH.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS. WHO I WOULD RECOMMEND TO ALL YOU THAT JOHNSTON OPINION CITED MATERIAL.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU READ THAT.
BECAUSE THERE'S A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION IN THAT CASE.
THERE'S A DIFFERENT IN FACTUAL INFORMATION AND DELIBERATION.
BECAUSE WHAT THE OPEN PETING ACT PROHIBITS IS DELIBERATION OUTSIDE OF AN ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING.
THE CASE LAW IN TENNESSEE, THOUGH, SAY PROVIDING FACTUAL INFORMATION IS NOT DELIBERATION. HOWEVER, LET ME SAY THIS.
IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE BETWEEN FACTUAL INFORMATION.
I DON'T SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE TOO MANY OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS AT ALL. BECAUSE OF THAT SLIPPERY SLOPE.
BUT I DO RECOMMEND THAT YOU READ THAT CASE SO YOU CAN AT LEAST SEE WHAT THE COURTS HAVE SAID ABOUT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROVIDING FACTUAL INFORMATION AND DELIBERATING.
>> IF WE DO HAPPEN TO RECEIVE FACTUAL INFORMATION FROM SOMEONE. PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA TO MAYBE JUST MENTION WHAT FACTUAL INFORMATIONS DISCUSSED.
PRETTY MUCH NO ISSUE. >> WHAT FACTUAL INFORMATION WAS RELAYED. WHEN YOU TUESDAY WORD DISCUSS.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE DELIBERATION. >> OKAY.
I RECEIVED FACTUAL INFORMATION FROM SO AND SO.
THIS IS THE CASE AND THEN WE'RE GOOD; RIGHT?
>> AGAIN, READ THE CASE TO SEE WHAT THE COURTS CONSIDER FACTUAL INFORMATION. I THINK I HEARD LANCE SAID HE WOULD SEND THE CASE. COUNCILMAN ALLEN YOU ARE
WHEN I WAS LISTENING TO YOU TALK ABOUT THE CURE IN THE CASE.
I WAS READING OVER THERE. I KIND OF GOT BASICALLY, IF YOU HAVE LET'S SAY WE HAVE OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SOMEONE TALKED ABOUT SOMETHING BEFORE THE VOTE AND THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE OR WHATEVER. CAN YOU NOT HEAR US?
>> I CAN'T HEAR HIM. >> COULD YOU ASK HIM TO SPEAK UP
MUTE YOUR MIC. GO AHEAD COUNCIL MAN ALLEN.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? >> GO AHEAD.
>> IF THAT HAPPENED THEN AS LONG AS THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ACTUAL DAY THAT YOU WOULD DISCUSS, YOU WENT THROUGH MOTION ALL OVER AGAIN. THE PUBLIC HAD A CHANCE TO GET IMPACT THAT CARRIES IT. THAT CARRIES WHATEVER VIOLATION
THAT POSSIBLY COULD HAVE BEEN. >> TELL ME THE FIRST PART OF YOUR SCENARIO AGAIN. I DON'T THINK I GOT THE FULL
FIRST PART. >> IF THERE WAS A PERCEIVED VIOLATION OR VIOLATION THAT THE AS LONG AS THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC SESSION.
WHERE THE PUBLIC COULD GIVE INPUT ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE OR WHATEVER IT WAS. THEN IT CAME BEFORE THE BODY AND YOU DISCUSSED IT. THAT CURES THE VIOLATION OR THE QUOTE, UNQUOTE PERCEPTION OF VIOLATION.
WHAT OVER YOU DISCUSSED WAS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THEN YOU DISCUSSED WHATEVER IT WAS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
YOU DISCUSSED AND VOTED ON IT. THAT CARRIES IT.
>> YOU DISCUSSED IT AND VOTE IN MATTER SIMILAR HOW YOU DISCUSSED OUTSIDE ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC MEET SOMETHING.
>> RIGHT. >> YOU BASICALLY SAY THE SAME
THING. >> THAT AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC GOT A CHANCE TO HEAR IT. AS LONG PUBLIC GOT A CHANCE ON THE SUBJECT YOU DISCONGRESS BEFORE HAND, AND THAN YOU HAVE MEETING AND THE WE'LL COUNCIL WAS HERE.
WE DISCUSSED AND YOU GAY YOUR INPUT OUT OF PUBLIC AGAIN.
THEN THAT WOULD BASICALLY CURE ANY VIOLATION OR POTENTIAL
>> WHAT YOU DESCRIBED, YES. THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE
COURTS HAVE LAID OUT. >> I JUST HAD A QUESTION TOO ON THE SHARING OF INFORMATION AND DELIBERATING OR WHATEVER.
I KNOW THERE'S SOME IF WE LET'S JUST SAY A PERSON HAS TALKING
[01:10:08]
ABOUT SOMETHING. COUNCIL PERSON COMMISSIONER OR WHATEVER. YOU TALK ABOUT AN ISSUE.YOU'RE NOT DELIBERATING WITH ANOTHER PERSON.
IT'S JUST IN PUBLIC FORUM. AND I WASN'T CHIME IN ON IT BECAUSE IT COULD BE CONSIDERED DELIBERATION.
BUT YOU KNOW, I'M STATING FACTS AND DELIBERATING KIND OF LIKE
YOU SAID SLIPPERY SLOPE. >> IF YOU FOLLOW WHAT I'M SAYING. IT'S VERY SLIPPERY.
I WOULD STAY AWAY FROM THAT TO THE EXTEND YOU CAN.
I THINK SCENARIO THAT YOU'VE JUST PUT FORTH WHERE SOMEONE IS OUT IN PUBLIC FORUM AND TALKING ABOUT AN ISSUE.
THAT MIGHT BE ON THE AGENDA MIGHT BE COMING ON THE AGENDA.
IT MIGHT BEEN A ISSUE BEEN THERE BUT COULD COME BACK UP ON THE AGENDA. WHEN THAT SECOND PERSON ON THE COUNCIL STARTS TALKING ABOUT THAT ISSUE; AGAIN, IT'S DELIBERATION IT'S NOT FACTS. IT'S DELIBERATION.
WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE IN A COUNCILMEMBER TRYING TO PERSUADE SOMEONE. THIS WHAT I THINK SHOULD HAPPEN.
THIS WHAT YOU THINK SHOULD HAPPEN.
THIS COULD GET YOU INTO OPEN MEETING VIOLATION.
TO EXTENT ONE PERSON STAYS SILENT.
ONE PERSON NEED TO STAY SILENT. >> IFFISM THE ISSUE PERTAINS TO HAS TO BE SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA OR ON THE AGENDA.
COULD BE ON IT. >> HAS BEEN ON IT.
>> HERE'S AN EXAMPLE. LET'S USE THIS.
WE HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS IN CLARKVILLE.
WE NEED TO WORK ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE'RE GOING OUT AND TALKING ABOUT.
EVENTUALLY THAT WILL BE ON SOMEONE'S AGENDA.
YOU KNOW WHAT I SAY. WE TALK ABOUT COULD POSSIBLY ON THE AGENDA AT SOME TIME. I ASSUME IT MEANT SOMETHING THAT WAS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S COMING UP ON THE IMMEDIATE
AGENDA. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CASE LAW SAYS. THAT'S THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE STATUTE. ANY PUBLIC BUSINESS I CAN'T RECOMMEND TO YOU THAT SOMETHING THAT MIGHT COME UP THAT MIGHT NOT BE ON THERE NOW THAT YOU ALL CAN TALK ABOUT THOSE THINGS.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS.
THE STATUTE SAYS PUBLIC BUSINESS.
IT DOESN'T SAY PUBLIC BUSINESS ON THE UPCOMING AGENDA.
>> ANY PUBLIC BUSINESS. >> PUBLIC BUSINESS IS WHAT THE LANGUAGE SAYS. THE WAY WE DO OUR MEETING ANY WAY WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND SO EVEN IF THERE WAS AS LONG AS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON THE AGENDA, THEN OKAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME.
THANK YOU COUNCILMAN ALLEN. COUNCILMEN SMITH AND THEN GARRETT. SMITH, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> I WILL ASK THIS. SHE ANSWERED IT.
WHEN CAN WE TALK ABOUT A PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA? BEFORE THE MEETING OVER MEETING. SHE SID SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.
CAN WE TALK ABOUT WITH ONE ANOTHER BEFORE OR AFTER OR AFTER IT'S VOTED. I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA.
THAN YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT DURING WHAT YOU ALL CALL EXECUTIVE SESSION. YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT AT YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
OUTSIDE OF THOSE AREAS AND MEETING YOU SHOULD NOT BE
THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY SMITH.
COUNCILMAN GARRETT. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
JUST A BRIEF COMMENT OR QUESTION IN TERMS OF WHO CAN WE NEED TO REACH OUT TO IF WE WANTED TO SEE ABOUT GETTING SOME OF -- THIS COULD BE STATE REPS TO GET THE LAWS UPDATES AND CHANGE.
WHAT I'M THINKING IS WE ALL HAVE WISH LIST THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND HEAR IT WOULD BE AFTER THE MEETING.
I SAY MAN I GOT TO CHANGE TO NASHUA TO GO TO TRADER JOES THEN SOMEONE SAY, MAN TRADER JOES REALLY WOULD BE NICE.
I LOVE TO SEE THEM COME. NOW IT'S NOWHERE NEAR THE HORIZON OF AGENDA. BUT AS YOU STATED, THAT'S PUBLIC BUSINESS TRADER JOES COMING HERE.
IT'S SUCH A LOOSE TERMS THAT I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE FOR NOT
[01:15:04]
JUST US BUT FOR THE STATE. IT'S A LOOSE GRAY AREA ALMOST ANYTHING THAT FLIES OUT OF MOUSE CAN BE INTERPRETED AS PUBLIC BUSINESS. WE SHOULD.MAYBE I WILL REACH OUT TO STREET.
WE JUST DISCUSSED PUBLIC BUSINESS AND AGREED.
I THINK THE LETTER OF THE LAW CAN GET MISCONSTRUED AND TAKEN WAY FURTHER THAN ITS INTENT. AND YOU KNOW, I COULD BE WRONG BUT I THINK IT MIGHT CARRY WEIGHT FOR RESPECTED YOU KNOW END ENDS TO LEAD THE CHARGE AND CLEANUP THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN BECAUSE YOU SEE FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT ANGLE.
WE CAN'T BE THE ONLY COMMUNITY THAT IS VOICED SOME CONCERN JUST LOOSENESS OF INTERPRETATION THAT CAN GET APPLIED TO CERTAIN
SITUATIONS. >> I DON'T THINK IT'S LOOSELESS OF INTERPRETATION. THE LANGUAGE SUPPOSED TO BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED. THE LEADING LANGUAGE THAT WE LOOKED AT TO THE OPEN MEETING ACT THE GENERAL ASEMIABLY CLEAR ABOUT THE FORMATION OF PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC DECISIONS SHALL NOT BE MADE IN SECRET. I DON'T THINK THAT AND WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTRUING THE LANGUAGE THAT'S THE COURT'S JOB.
THE COURT TO INTERPRET THE LANGUAGE THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS PUT IN PLACE. WE HAVE A PLETHORA OF OPEN MEETING CASES IN TENNESSEE AND THE COURTS HAVE CONSTRUED THE LANGUAGE STRICTLY BASED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ON THE PAGE.
AND SO I MEAN I WILL BE HAPPY TO SEND YOU A LIST OF THOSE CASES.
IT'S A STRICT INTERPRETATION. BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS ESSENTIALLY GUIDED THE COURTS TO DO WITH REGARD TO THIS LANGUAGE. RAS FAR AS CLEANING UP LANGUAGE.
TML OR YOUR LOCAL LOBBYIST WHOEVER YOU USE TO LOBBY IF YOU DON'T USE TML THAT'S THE ENTITY YOU NEED TO CONTACT.
IF YOU WANTED LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO BE CONSIDERED AND THEY HAVE A POLICY COMMITTEE. THAT THEY RUN ALL LEGISLATION THROUGH AND THEN THERE'S A VOTE THAT'S TAKEN ON WHETHER OR NOT TO PROCEED WITH DRAFTING SOME PROPOSED LEGISLATION AROUND THE ISSUE. TML THE ISSUE THAT WOULD DO THAT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF TML.
>> WE ARE MISS HODGE. TML JUST SENT OUT THERE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA SURVEY. THAT IF YOU WANTED TO SUBMIT AN IDEA TO TML FOR THEM TO CONSIDER IN THIS PROCESS, YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO THAT. I CAN TELL YOU GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
ANY BILL THAT RELATED TO OPEN MEETING BE IT ELECTRONIC, ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PHONE IN THE THEY COULDN'T BE PRESENT.
THEY WERE TREATED AS RADIO ACTIVE.
NO ONE WANTED TO THUCH THEM. BECAUSE THE PUBLIC VIEW AS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING IN SECRET NOT TO SAY WE -- THEY WOULDN'T IT'S JUST I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION.
COUNCILMEN GARRETT. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
>> COUNCILMEN ALLE BACK TO YOU. >> I FIND IT AMAZE IMAGE IT
DIDN'T APPLY TO THEM. >> IT ONLY APPLIED TO BELOW.
THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY. IT ONLY APPLIES TO BELOW THEM.
>> IT TRICKLES DOWN. >> I'M JUST SAYING.
MY QUESTION IS INFORMATION SHARING INFORMATION THERE'S A DIFFERENT BETWEEN DELIBERATING AND SHARING INFORMATION.
IF YOU SHARE INFORMATION LET'S JUST SAY YOU GO OUT AND WE DISCUSSED SOMETHING IN THE MEETING.
LET'S DO RESEARCH ON IT. AND I KNOW ALL ABOUT E-MAILS ARE IF YOU USE YOUR SEEDY E-MAIL. IT'S SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETINGS
ACT. >> WHETHER YOU USE CITY E-MAIL OR NOT. IF YOU ANY E-MAIL AND THEY RELATED TO CITY THEY ARE SUBJECT TO THE ACT.
>> SHARE SHARING INFORMATION. I WILL SEND THIS OUT TO YOU.
I GOT SOME INFORMATION ON THIS. I SEND IT OUT TO YOU.
THERE'S NO RESPONSE BEHIND IT. OTHER THAN THANK YOU.
>> BUT IS THAT DELIBERATING. >> ACCORDING TO COURT IT'S NOT DELIBERATION. HERE'S FACTUAL INFORMATION; BUT THIS IS WHERE THE ISSUE COMES IN WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT HAPPEN.
ESPECIALLY IN SOME OF MY -- WITH SOME OF MY GOVERNING BODIES THAT
[01:20:01]
MAY NOT BE AS RESTRAINED AS I'M SURE YOU ARE.IF SOMEONE SENDS OUT FACTUAL INFORMATION THERE'S A REPLY WHERE SOMEONE SAID THIS THE WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO.
THIS HOW I THINK WE SHOULD PROCEED.
THAT'S WHY I SAID SLIPPERY SLOPE.
IT MAY BE THE DISSIMILARNATION OF INFORMATION.
BUT IT COULD TURN INTO DELIBERATION REALLY QUICKLY.
>> OKAY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
>> THAT'S FINE. JUST SENDING OUT INFORMATION
DOES NOT ACTUAL DELIBERATION. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT?
>> COUNCILMAN RICHMOND. >> COUNCILMAN RICHMOND YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU MAYOR.
I THINK WE'RE PRETTY MUCH THERE. I THINK AS A NEWER MEMBER OF TOWN I THINK YOU SPOKE TO IT. WHAT WOULD BE YOUR RECOMMENDATION LET'S SAY ONE OF US SPONSORED OR COUNCILMEMBER SPONSORS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS JUST INFORMATIONAL OR RESEARCH IS THAT CONSTITUTED.
THAT'S PART A AND SECOND PART IS I JUST DON'T WANT TO WALK AROUND FEELING LIKE I'M WALKING ON EGGSHELLS AND JUST COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT. HOW CAN WE PREVENT WALKING AROUND. I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE IT'S A HAMLET PLAY. BRUTIS WILL STAB THEM IN THE BACK. HOW ARE YOU SEEN PEOPLE HANDLE THAT IN REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
I'M SURE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF SAYING, HEY, YOU KNOW, SO AND SO THIS SOUNDS LIKE DELIBERATION. I WOULD PREFER IF WE DISCUSS THIS IN PUBLIC SETTING. SO WE'RE NOT IN VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE LAW. AT THAT POINT WOULD YOU ADVISE US TO TALK TO CITY ATTORNEY LIKE HOW COULD YOU SPEAK TO THOSE TWO
>> ON THE FIRST ISSUE RELATED TO FACTUAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH. AGAIN, I WILL JUST SAY THIS AGAIN. I'M GOING TO REPEAT THIS.
>> SLIPPERY SLOPE. >> ONE COUNCILMEMBER --
>> WE ARE HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.
ARE YOU THERE. WE CAN SEE YOU.
>> I CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME.
>> I CAN HEAR YOU NOW. GO AHEAD, SIR.
>> I HAVE MY EAR PODS ON. SORRY.
IT COULD ALSO COME DOWN TO I SEE IT AS FACT CHECK IN.
MISS HODGE YOU MAY SEE AS WE'RE DELIBERATING.
MAYBE THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.
>> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WHICH IS WHY I HAVE SAID A TO EXTENT YOU STAY AWAY DO. AND READ THE CASE.
IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION.
I'M HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU. BUT READ THE CASE SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE COURT. BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT INTERPRETATION ENTITY THAT HAS INTERPRETATION POWER PERIOD. WHAT THE COURTS SAY ABOUT PROVIDING FACTS AND DELIBERATING.
>> LET'S SAY THERE'S SOME FACT CHECK-IN AND YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE IN UP AND UP. WOULD IT BE THREE-WAY CONVERSATION. WE MR. BAKER ON THE PHONE.
WE CALL YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HOW ABOUT YOU HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH LANCE BEFORE HAND.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND DO YOU THINK THIS IS
>> MAYBE SECOND PART I DON'T WANT TO WALK AROUND FEELING ICKY WHEN ALL I'M DOING NOT BREAKING THE LAW FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
MEAN THAT FIXES. I DON'T WANT TO BE A NERVOUS LEADER. I'M SURE NO ONE ELSE DOES.
WE THANK YOU FOR THIS. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL RICHMOND. ANY OTHER MEMBER HAVE A QUESTION
OR COMMENT? >> I GOT SOMETHING.
>> COUNCIL LADY SMITH. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
[01:25:01]
>> THANK YOU, AGAIN. FOR ALLOWING ME TO ASK THE QUESTION. THANK YOU.
>> THIS IS SIMPLE. SUPPOSE I WANT TO ASK THE MAYOR A QUESTION. CAN I ASK THE MAYOR IF I WANT TO SAYING THIS TO HIM. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS?
HOW SHOULD WE DO THIS. >> CAN I CALL HIM OR SET UP
MEETING TO TALK TO HIM? >> MAYOR MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY. IF THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE TO BE HAD THEY NEED TO BE HAD IN ADEQUATELY NOTICED PUBLIC
MEETING. >> WE KNEW ABOUT THIS.
WHAT CAN YOU THINK ABOUT THIS? HOW SHOULD WE PROCEED WITH THIS.
>> WHAT ABOUT YOU ARE SAYING I HAVE QUESTION.
I WANT MONUMENT PUT UP. JUST AN EXAMPLE.
I WANT A MONUMENT PUT HERE. I THINK HISTORICAL AREA.
AND WE WANT THIS MONUMENT HERE. IF I TEXT HM OR CALL HIM CAN WE DO THIS? OR YOU KNOW.
WHAT DO YOU SAY ABOUT THAT? >> ARE YOU ASKING HIM TO PROVIDE LANGUAGE THAT SAID YOU CAN DO IT OR LANGUAGE IN CHARTER THAT SAID YOU CAN DO OR ASKING HIM HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN? EXPLAIN HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
>> THE BEST WAY EXPLAIN TO ME HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
>> THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY.
>> IF THERE ARE SECTIONS IN THE CODE THAT HE CAN PROVIDE TO YOU.
THEN THAT'S ONE THING. BUT SAYING I WANT A MONUMENT PUT HERE, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? DO YOU THINK WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN? ARE THERE WAYS WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN? OUTSIDE OF PROVIDING FACTUAL INFORMATION YOU CANNOT CLIBRATE AND AGAIN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DELIBERATIONS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE. DURING COUNCIL MEETING.
LET ME SAY THIS. I WILL BE FIRST PERSON TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THESE THINGS HAPPEN.
I KNOW THAT. I KNOW THAT THEY HAPPEN.
BUT IF WE'RE OPERATING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WE ARE GOING TO FOLLOW THE LAW, THENEN THOUGH WE KNOW IT HAPPENS WE WILL BE ASPIRATIONAL AND SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO ENGAGE IN DELIBERATION.
>> BECAUSE THE VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
>> IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH ME SETTING UP A MEETING TO MEET WITH THE MAYOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR CAN I SAY I'M GOING IN AS CITIZEN IF I'M NOT ON THE CLOCK.
YOU'RE ALWAYS ON THE CLOCK AS A COUNCIL LADY.
>> ALL TOGETHER NOW. >> I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION.
WE WANT TO SET UP MEETING TO CHECK WITH MAYOR.
ARE YOU JUST GOING TO PROVIDE HIM FACTUAL INFORMATION AND YOU DON'T WANT HIM TO DELIBERATE WITH YOU?
>> YOU JUST WANT TO PROVIDE HIM FACTUAL INFORMATION?
>> MAYBE JUST PROVIDE FACTUAL INFORMATION NOT TO DELIBERATE.
>> I WOULD SUGGEST YOU TALK TO CITY ATTORNEY FIRST AND SAY THIS IS THE CONVERSATION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE MAYOR.
IS THIS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
>> I GOT A QUESTION. THANK YOU.
SUPPOSE THE STATE ATTORNEY VIOLATION.
CAN WE GO TO HIM. GO TO ANOTHER ATTORNEY.
SHOULD WE GET INFORMATION FROM HIM?
>> YOUR CITY ATTORNEY IS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY.
HE'S THE INDIVIDUAL UNDER YOUR CHARTER THAT IS NOT ONLY AUTHORIZED BUT HIS HE IS THE PERSON WHO HAS THE HE'S THE PERSON UNDER THE CHARTER WHO GIVES YOU LEGAL ADVICE.
IT ALLOWS YOU TO HIGHER OUTSIDE COUNCIL.
I KNOW SOME CITY DOES. YOUR CITY ATTORNEY IS THE PERSON THAT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE YOU LEGAL ADVICE.
I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE I'M WALKING ON EGG SHELLS EITHER.
JUST TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT. OKAY.
WELL, THANK YOU, MA'AM. YOU'VE BEEN GREAT.
>> YOU ARE WELCOME. THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY SMITH.
ANY OTHER MEMBER OF COUNCIL HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? I'M GOING TO SAVE THE LAST QUESTION OR COMMENT MR. BAKER HAD A QUESTION OR COMMENT. IF YOU WILL TURN YOUR MIC ON,
[01:30:01]
THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS PRESENTATION.I REALLY APPRECIATE. IT'S VERY INFORMATIVE.
I WANTED TO ASK YOU AND I KNOW THIS IS KIND -- I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE. WITH REGARD TO THIS DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROVIDING FACTUAL INFORMATION, PROVIDING FACTS VERSES DELIBERATIONS CAN YOU THINK THAT THE COURTS, YOU KNOW, MY UND PEOPLE CAN ONE HAND CAN SAY THAT'S JUST PROVIDING FACTS. WHEREAS SOMEONE ELSE MAY SAY YOU'RE PROVIDING FACTS IN ORDER TO PERSUADE AND INFLUENCE SOMEONE. AND ULTIMATELY I GUESS IT'S -- IF THERE'S AN ISSUE IF THE LAWSUIT GET FILED IT'S REALLY UP TO THE COURT TO DETERMINE AND THE COURT COULD DETERMINE THAT EVEN THE PROVISION OF FACTS COULD IF YOU PROVIDE FACTS IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO PERSUADE ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER TO VOTE A CERTAIN WAY, COULD THAT BE VIOLATION
AND AS I SAID BEFORE, ONE I DON'T SUGGEST THAT OCCURRED.
>> RIGHT. >> BECAUSE FOR THAT VERY ISSUE.
THE COURT -- THE COURT COULD LOOK AT SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN I MIGHT LOOK AS AN ATTORNEY OR YOU MAY LOOK AT IT. THEY COULD SAY YOU PROVIDED THIS SET OF FACTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO PERSUADE SOMEONE.
>> THANK YOU MISS HODGE. WE HAVE NO ONE ON THE LIST WISHING TO SPEAK. SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF CLARKSVILLE FOR TAKING YOUR EVENING TO BE WITH US.
I APPRECIATE YOUR EXPERTISE. COUNCIL RAED STREAKMAN.
GO AHEAD. IF SOMEONE WERE TO CONTACT US, IF FELLOW COUNCILMEMBER WERE TO CONTACT US AND ASK US QUESTIONS, DO YOU THINK A GOOD RESPONSE BACK TO THAT WOULD BE RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE THOSE QUESTIONS ASKED IN PUBLIC? VERSES ANSWERING THEM AT THAT TIME WHETHER IT BE THROUGH ANY
OTHER MEANS OF COMMUNICATION? >> ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY APPROPRIATE RESPONSE.
NOW BACK TO WHERE WE WERE. THANK YOU MISS HODGE.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO BE WITH US.
THIS EVENING AND AGAIN WE'RE WELL SERVED BY YOU AND YOUR ROLE. THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THIS SPECIAL SESSION OF CLARKSVILLE CITY COUNCIL HAVING BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.