Last week, citing “personnel matters” the Worcester County Commissioners conducted a hastily called closed session meeting about the budget for FY 2010. It resulted in 12 County employees being fired, but the meeting also covered other matters, including the consolidation of several county departments. That action, at least in the common perception, is not a “personnel matter” because it involves the organization and operation of the County government as its primary aspect.
This is already a major story in regard to the layoffs, but it may have an even bigger impact under the State’s Open Meetings law if someone challenges the proceeding. Stay tuned!
By the way, the vote that occurred on these matters was 4 to 3.
7 comments:
It was a bad enough to lay them off, but to have the sheriff's office usher them out like common criminals was insulting
This was a violation of the open meetings act unless they talked about a specific person related to employment.
The closed session provides a vehicle wherein participants can freely discuss sensitive matters dealing with personnel, land acquistion and legal counsel.
In the very broad context, matters effecting departments could be construed as having an impact on personnel. However, in no case can a vote or decision be made in the closed session. Once all participants have been briefed and are ready to take action (whatever that is) a motion to return to open session is made where upon a detailed formal motion is made and seconded; which must also provide for requested discussion, at the end of which, the question is called and made a part of the public record.
Any deviance from this process could be a violation of the Sunshine Law or Open Meetings requirement.
As a follow-up on my previous comments regarding Closed Sessions:
the law DOES NOT REQUIRE the body to go in closed session for any reason!
It must be voted on with specific reason given, with a majority vote. No other topic or discussion can occur. To do so the body must come out of closed session and once again vote on a specific action falling within the approved topics for closed session discussion.
Isn't an ordinance or charter change needed before they can change the government structure by consolidating departments?
I smell a scam in progress.
One commissioner had promised to eliminate one employee before he was even elected.
That is scary . . . .
10:09... you OBVIOUSLY mean Church or Cowger. What employee are you referring to?
Post a Comment