Agenda - Council - 03/26/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Bill March 20, 1991 Page No. 4 the meeting be included and to inform the members that the tape may be reviewed by a court if challenged. In applying the above analysis to our set of circumstances, there is more than one viable alternative for proceeding in the interviewing/hiring process. Based on the Moberg decision, it would be possible to circumvent the "meeting" requirements of the Open Meeting Law by having less than a quorum of a committee, subcommittee or board conduct the initial interviews of the applicants, assuming time constraints and coordination of efforts can be worked out efficiently. The second alternative would be to have a quorum of the committee, subcommittee or board conduct a closed meeting for the purposes of interviewing the initial applicants. The Annandale Advocate case illustrates the availability of this alternative where private data on individuals is to be discussed. Depending upon the consensus of the council, assuming there is one, this approach would provide for the input from more council members on each individual applicant in the initial hiring process. Regardless of which approach, or variation thereof, is adopted by the City Council for the initial interviewing process, once the field of applicants has been narrowed to the finalists for the position of City Administrator, the interviews by the City Council must at that point comply with the Open Meeting Law. It would be at this point the finalists' names would become public information. There would remain, however, the concern for complying with the Data Practices Act, a violation of which presents potentially significant liability.