Thanks
Ray

From: Jon Miller
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 1:37 PM
To: Bart Bouse ; rayvincent@coxinet.net
Cc: Mark Ramsey ; OAMA Luistserv
Subject: [Oama] Re: executive session

Ray,

I remember the IRS position well.  Our Oklahoma legislature pushed back by enacting a specific law providing that contract city attorneys were not “employees” of their contracted cities.

With regard to whether or not your employment could be discussed in executive session, I disagree with Mr. Bouse.  Section 307(B)(1) allows discussion in executive session of “the employment, hiring, appointment, promotion, demotion, discipling or resignation of any individual salaried public officer or employee.”  While I agree that in response to an Open Records Act request an employee’s gross salary is not considered confidential, I disagree with the suggestion that what salary or benefits will be paid cannot be discussed in executive session.

Jonathan E. Miller

City Attorney

City of Mustang

1501 N. Mustang Road

Mustang, Oklahoma 73064

Telephone: (405) 376-7746

Facsimile: (405) 376-7721

This email is sent by the City Attorney and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the email and any attachments.  If you are a and officer, employee or agent of the City of Mustang, you should not share this email with others.  Sharing this email may result in a loss of the attorney-client privilege.

From: Bart Bouse bartbouse@bouselaw.com
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 1:22 PM
To: rayvincent@coxinet.net
Cc: Mark Ramsey MRamsey@soonerlaw.com; OAMA Luistserv oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: executive session

No. Only if it meets the specific limited purpose of Section 307.  Section 307 does not allow discussion of pay.  Salary and compensation are not confidential and, in fact, have to be disclosed.  I’m constantly amazed at people attempting to circumvent the Open Meeting Act.  The Open Meeting Act is for “open government”. Every issue must be viewed first in the light of it being open and it can only be in executive session if it meets the very limited specific purposes of Section 307.  Trying to find loopholes is not a city attorney’s job.  That lands people in jail.

This e mail transmission and/or attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It contains information from the law firm of Bartlett A. Bouse, P.L.L.C., which is either confidential or legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the e mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or other unauthorized use of, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited. If you received this e mail in error, please notify this office at bartbouse@bouselaw.com or 580-256-1285 and then delete it.

On Sep 16, 2021, at 1:16 PM, rayvincent@coxinet.net rayvincent@coxinet.net wrote:

Several years ago the hot topic was the IRS wanted city attorneys treated like employees.  I get paid in Choctaw for prosecution in court as an employee.  So I guess the council could discuss me in executive session as an employee.  Thoughts?

Ray

From: Bart Bouse

Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 8:33 AM

To: Mark Ramsey

Cc: OAMA Luistserv

Subject: [Oama] Re: executive session

No.  Section 307 is very specific.  Additionally, it doesn’t pass the smell test.

<image002.jpeg>

This e mail transmission and/or attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It contains information from the law firm of Bartlett A. Bouse, P.L.L.C., which is either confidential or legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the e mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or other unauthorized use of, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited. If you received this e mail in error, please notify this office at bartbouse@bouselaw.com or 580-256-1285 and then delete it.

On Sep 16, 2021, at 7:56 AM, Mark Ramsey <MRamsey@soonerlaw.com> wrote: 

  

One of my Towns has a provision in the Town Code making the Town Attorney an “officer” of the Town.  Section 307(B)(1) is broad enough to allow discussion of terms and conditions of employment of an officer, but since you have been in the position for quite a few years it seems like a stretch.  Good luck! 

  

From: Kay Robbins Wall <lkrw@sbcglobal.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 12:57 PM
To: OAMA Luistserv <oama@lists.imla.org>
Subject: [Oama] executive session 

  

Notice: This email is from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected e-mail. 

My fee as local counsel on a bond issue is going to be determined at a future meeting for one of the Towns I serve.  I would like for this to be discussed in Executive Session.  Thoughts? 

I have been the City Attorney for this city for quite a few years.  We are having some controversies lately, and this issue has been privately discussed with me and Public Finance.  At this point, we agree to place it on a Council Agenda. 

  

My only question is whether or not it is an issue that can legally be discussed in Executive Session. 

  

Thanking you in advance. 

  

Kay Wall 

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org 

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org

There will be a contract setting out your duties and a fee, correct?  If so, you’re an independent contractor, not an employee.  Just discuss it with them in small groups.

From: Bart Bouse bartbouse@bouselaw.com
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 1:22 PM
To: rayvincent@coxinet.net
Cc: Mark Ramsey MRamsey@soonerlaw.com; OAMA Luistserv oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: executive session

No. Only if it meets the specific limited purpose of Section 307.  Section 307 does not allow discussion of pay.  Salary and compensation are not confidential and, in fact, have to be disclosed.  I’m constantly amazed at people attempting to circumvent the Open Meeting Act.  The Open Meeting Act is for “open government”. Every issue must be viewed first in the light of it being open and it can only be in executive session if it meets the very limited specific purposes of Section 307.  Trying to find loopholes is not a city attorney’s job.  That lands people in jail.
[cid:image001.jpg@01D7AB08.7C657170]

This e mail transmission and/or attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It contains information from the law firm of Bartlett A. Bouse, P.L.L.C., which is either confidential or legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the e mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or other unauthorized use of, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited. If you received this e mail in error, please notify this office at bartbouse@bouselaw.commailto:bartbouse@bouselaw.com or 580-256-1285 and then delete it.

On Sep 16, 2021, at 1:16 PM, <rayvincent@coxinet.netmailto:rayvincent@coxinet.net> <rayvincent@coxinet.netmailto:rayvincent@coxinet.net> wrote:

Several years ago the hot topic was the IRS wanted city attorneys treated like employees.  I get paid in Choctaw for prosecution in court as an employee.  So I guess the council could discuss me in executive session as an employee.  Thoughts?
Ray

From: Bart Bouse
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 8:33 AM
To: Mark Ramsey
Cc: OAMA Luistserv
Subject: [Oama] Re: executive session

No.  Section 307 is very specific.  Additionally, it doesn’t pass the smell test.
<image002.jpeg>

This e mail transmission and/or attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It contains information from the law firm of Bartlett A. Bouse, P.L.L.C., which is either confidential or legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the e mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or other unauthorized use of, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited. If you received this e mail in error, please notify this office at bartbouse@bouselaw.commailto:bartbouse@bouselaw.com or 580-256-1285 and then delete it.

On Sep 16, 2021, at 7:56 AM, Mark Ramsey <MRamsey@soonerlaw.commailto:MRamsey@soonerlaw.com> wrote:

One of my Towns has a provision in the Town Code making the Town Attorney an “officer” of the Town.  Section 307(B)(1) is broad enough to allow discussion of terms and conditions of employment of an officer, but since you have been in the position for quite a few years it seems like a stretch.  Good luck!

From: Kay Robbins Wall <lkrw@sbcglobal.netmailto:lkrw@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 12:57 PM
To: OAMA Luistserv <oama@lists.imla.orgmailto:oama@lists.imla.org>
Subject: [Oama] executive session

Notice: This email is from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected e-mail.

My fee as local counsel on a bond issue is going to be determined at a future meeting for one of the Towns I serve.  I would like for this to be discussed in Executive Session.  Thoughts?
I have been the City Attorney for this city for quite a few years.  We are having some controversies lately, and this issue has been privately discussed with me and Public Finance.  At this point, we agree to place it on a Council Agenda.

My only question is whether or not it is an issue that can legally be discussed in Executive Session.

Thanking you in advance.

Kay Wall

Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.orgmailto:oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.orgmailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.orgmailto:oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.orgmailto:oama-leave@lists.imla.org

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain privileged and confidential information protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or e-mail, destroy this message and delete any copies held in your electronic files. Unauthorized use and/or re-disclosure may subject you to penalties under applicable state and federal laws.