As of
1:41 PM, June 22, 2010, there is no notice of the special meeting to
be held by Christiansburg, VA at 7:30 PM on that same date on the
Calendar provided by the Town of Christiansburg.
The calendar
entry still maintains that this is a work session only for the
discussion of the budget. On 6/17/10 at 2:10 PM, PR Specialist,
Becky Hawke sent out an announcement to some group of people via
email. That announcement states the following:
Christiansburg Town Council will hold a work session
on Tuesday, June 22, 2010, beginning at 7:30p.m. to discuss the
F.Y.2010-11 Budget. The meeting will be held in Council
Chambers, 100 E. Main St.
While no formal action will be
taken, citizens are welcome to attend the work session.
On
6/21/10 at 6:05PM, this notice was sent out from the Clerk of
Council:
The
Christiansburg Town Council agenda for June
22, 2010 is now available.
The
link provided takes you to a pdf where this is found:
A
G E N D A
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHRISTIANSBURG TOWN
COUNCIL
CHRISTIANSBURG TOWN HALL
100 EAST MAIN STREET
JUNE
22, 2010 – 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
SPECIAL MEETING
I.
CALL TO ORDER
II. DISCUSSIONS BY MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
1.
Budget for Fiscal Year 2010 – 2011.
REMARKS:
2. CLOSED
MEETING:
a. Request for a Closed Meeting under Section 2.2-3711
A(1), Code of Virginia, for the discussion of personnel
matters;
and Section 2.2-3711 A(7), Code of Virginia, for the discussion and
consideration of probable
litigation requiring the provision of
legal advice by legal counsel.
REMARKS:
b. Out of Closed
Meeting.
c. Council Action on the Matter.
REMARKS:
III.
ADJOURN
From
the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council you find the
following:
§
2.2-3711(A)(1): Personnel.
Provides an exemption for:
Discussion,
consideration or interviews of prospective candidates for employment;
assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries,
disciplining or resignation of specific public officers, appointees
or employees of any public body; and evaluation of performance of
departments or schools of public institutions of higher education
where such evaluation will necessarily involve discussion of the
performance of specific individuals. Any teacher shall be permitted
to be present during a closed meeting in which there is a discussion
or consideration of a disciplinary matter that involves the teacher
and some student and the student involved in the matter is present,
provided the teacher makes a written request to be present to the
presiding officer of the appropriate board.
§
2.2-3711(A)(7): Legal advice.
Provides an exemption for:
Consultation
with legal counsel and briefings by staff members or consultants
pertaining to actual or probable litigation, where such consultation
or briefing in open meeting would adversely affect the negotiating or
litigating posture of the public body; and consultation with legal
counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding specific
legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such
counsel. For the purposes of this subdivision, "probable
litigation" means litigation that has been specifically
threatened or on which the public body or its legal counsel has a
reasonable basis to believe will be commenced by or against a known
party. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to permit the
closure of a meeting merely because an attorney representing the
public body is in attendance or is consulted on a matter.
Now
for some Freedom of Information Advisory Council interpretations on
similar matters:
In particular, one relevant section of the Code is noted:
Subsection D of § 2.1-343 requires that notice for special meetings only be reasonable under the circumstances, and be given contemporaneously with the notice provided to the members of the public body. The question of whether or not it was reasonable to call this special meeting with only one working day's notice is a question for the courts, and not for this office. Assuming that the notice was reasonable under the circumstances, the facts indicate that the public was notified contemporaneously by posting a notice at the town hall, also assuming that this is the location where notices for town council meetings are normally posted.
Now, it is just my opinion, but I feel that it is unacceptable to 'change horses in mid-stream'. What has happened here is that people have been invited to a Square Dance. Suddenly, someone decides to have a Ballroom Dance instead but hardly anyone is notified of the change. You do not just randomly change things on such short notice without good cause. Unless there is an emergency involving the items on the 'closed meeting' agenda, Council and the citizens would be better served by saving that meeting for the next Town Council meeting and putting in the proper agenda. Section D of State Code 2.1-343 used the term ' reasonable under the circumstances'. However, it also means that the public would have to have been notified 'contemporaneously by posting a notice at the town hall ...'. By use of the word 'contemporaneously', citizens have the right to assume that citizen notice would have coincided with council members notice of the meeting. It would also stand to reason that ALL council members were notified at the same time. While the 'reasonable under the circumstances' issue would likely be one for the Courts to determine, Council members, the Mayor, and the Town Manager all know who knew about this meeting and when. They know the right thing, the honest thing. Now, what will they do about it?
Is this a good faith effort on the part of Town Council to comply
with FOIA and to keep citizens informed?