Executive Session: investigation, claim or action
Hello! My question is about Open Meetings Act in particular, Executive Session. My issue is about 25 O.S. § 307(B)(4) which states in pertinent part:
B. Executive sessions of public bodies will be permitted only for the purpose of:
- Confidential communications between a public body and its attorney concerning a pending investigation, claim, or action if the public body, with the advice of its attorney, determines that disclosure will seriously impair the ability of the public body to process the claim or conduct a pending investigation, litigation, or proceeding in the public interest;
If there is a known claim against the City (for instance a party has filed a lawsuit against the City) the case is named in the City Agenda. However, in some cases the City Council may want to discuss a matter it may believe is a potential claim against it OR a potential claim it has against a party. In its executive session discussions, the City Council may decide pursuit of the claim is not appropriate to proceed with OR may decide to move forward in one of many ways.
My question to you is: when a "pending investigation, claim, or action" could be harmed by revealing the potential party, how much should be placed on the agenda? Is the statute itself sufficient to be placed on the agenda under certain circumstances as it may cost the City more public funds to reveal the subject of the "pending investigation, claim, or action".
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
6700 NW 36th
Bethany, OK 73008
You do not have to disclose the name of the party that is a potential claim. That fact needs to remain confidential.
Robert C. Thompson
Cheek & Falcone, PLLC
6301 Waterford Blvd., Suite 320
Oklahoma City, Okla. 73118
direct telephone:405-286-9560
direct fax: 405-286-9680
Firm telephone: 405-286-9191
rthompson@cheekfalcone.commailto:rthompson@cheekfalcone.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information that is protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
Visit us at our website http://www.cheekfalcone.com/
From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org On Behalf Of Claudia Conner
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 12:18 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Executive Session: investigation, claim or action
Hello! My question is about Open Meetings Act in particular, Executive Session. My issue is about 25 O.S. § 307(B)(4) which states in pertinent part:
B. Executive sessions of public bodies will be permitted only for the purpose of:
- Confidential communications between a public body and its attorney concerning a pending investigation, claim, or action if the public body, with the advice of its attorney, determines that disclosure will seriously impair the ability of the public body to process the claim or conduct a pending investigation, litigation, or proceeding in the public interest;
If there is a known claim against the City (for instance a party has filed a lawsuit against the City) the case is named in the City Agenda. However, in some cases the City Council may want to discuss a matter it may believe is a potential claim against it OR a potential claim it has against a party. In its executive session discussions, the City Council may decide pursuit of the claim is not appropriate to proceed with OR may decide to move forward in one of many ways.
My question to you is: when a "pending investigation, claim, or action" could be harmed by revealing the potential party, how much should be placed on the agenda? Is the statute itself sufficient to be placed on the agenda under certain circumstances as it may cost the City more public funds to reveal the subject of the "pending investigation, claim, or action".
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
6700 NW 36th
Bethany, OK 73008
Thank you. I was unaware of the AG opinion. I'm glad he agreed with the advice I gave several years ago.
MIKE WARWICK OBA #9377MICHAEL P WARWICK INC.400 N BROADWAY, PO BOX 1211405-273-1554 (O) 405-395-4650 (F)
This communication, and any documents attached thereto, are covered by the Electronics Communications Privacy Act, and are protected by the Attorney/Client and/or Attorney Work Product Privilege. This communication is intended only for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any reading, disclosure, copying, distribution, or action regarding the communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the communication and attached documents, if any.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Thompson rthompson@cheekfalcone.com
To: Claudia Conner claudia.conner@bethanyok.org; oama@lists.imla.org oama@lists.imla.org
Sent: Wed, Jan 15, 2020 1:34 pm
Subject: Re: [Oama] Executive Session: investigation, claim or action
#yiv3231338501 #yiv3231338501 -- _filtered {} _filtered {} #yiv3231338501 #yiv3231338501 p.yiv3231338501MsoNormal, #yiv3231338501 li.yiv3231338501MsoNormal, #yiv3231338501 div.yiv3231338501MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;} #yiv3231338501 a:link, #yiv3231338501 span.yiv3231338501MsoHyperlink {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv3231338501 a:visited, #yiv3231338501 span.yiv3231338501MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv3231338501 p.yiv3231338501msonormal0, #yiv3231338501 li.yiv3231338501msonormal0, #yiv3231338501 div.yiv3231338501msonormal0 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;} #yiv3231338501 span.yiv3231338501EmailStyle18 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;} #yiv3231338501 span.yiv3231338501EmailStyle20 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;} #yiv3231338501 .yiv3231338501MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered {} #yiv3231338501 div.yiv3231338501WordSection1 {} #yiv3231338501 You do not have to disclose the name of the party that is a potential claim. That fact needs to remain confidential. Robert C. Thompson Cheek & Falcone, PLLC 6301 Waterford Blvd., Suite 320 Oklahoma City, Okla. 73118 direct telephone:405-286-9560 direct fax: 405-286-9680 Firm telephone: 405-286-9191 rthompson@cheekfalcone.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information that is protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
Visit us at our website http://www.cheekfalcone.com/ From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org On Behalf OfClaudia Conner
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 12:18 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Executive Session: investigation, claim or action Hello! My question is about Open Meetings Act in particular, Executive Session. My issue is about25 O.S. § 307(B)(4) which states in pertinent part: B. Executive sessions of public bodies will be permitted only for the purpose of: ***** 4. Confidential communications between a public body and its attorney concerning a pending investigation, claim, or action if the public body, with the advice of its attorney, determines that disclosure will seriously impair the ability of the public body to process the claim or conduct a pending investigation, litigation, or proceeding in the public interest; If there is aknown claim against the City (for instance a party has filed a lawsuit against the City) the case is named in the City Agenda. However, in some cases the City Council may want to discuss a matter it may believe is apotential claim against it OR a potential claim it has against a party. In its executive session discussions, the City Council may decide pursuit of the claim is not appropriate to proceed with OR may decide to move forward in one of many ways. My question to you is: when a “pending investigation, claim, or action” could be harmed by revealing the potential party, how much should be placed on the agenda? Is the statute itself sufficient to be placed on the agenda under certain circumstances as it may cost the City more public funds to reveal the subject of the “pending investigation, claim, or action”. Claudia Conner Bethany City Attorney 6700 NW 36th Bethany, OK 73008 --
Oama mailing list
Oama@lists.imla.org
http://lists.imla.org/mailman/listinfo/oama_lists.imla.org