PARIS – County officials have been going behind closed doors to discuss revisions to a personnel policy manual, raising questions relating to the state law protecting public access to meetings, according to the Maine Freedom of Information Coalition.
On Feb. 15, Oxford County commissioners entered an executive session, or a meeting closed to the public, in order to discuss what they first described as “personnel issues.” When questioned, Chairman Steve Merrill said the commission was about to discuss its personnel policy manual.
Attorney Annalee Rosenblatt, who handles labor negotiations and advises the county on personnel matters, said the session would cover areas “that will impact some of the decisions that are made, so on and so forth, for compensation” of employees.
What exactly was discussed may never be known, but Mal Leary, president of the Maine Freedom of Information Coalition, said there are two problems with what occurred Feb. 15.
Leary, an Augusta-based journalist whose work sometimes appears in the Sun Journal, said a revision to the state Freedom of Access law that was passed last summer requires public boards and commissions to be very precise when entering into executive session.
“Personnel issues” is no longer considered a valid reason to bar the public from a meeting, he said. “The new law is pretty clear – you have to come up with a specific reason to go into executive session and you have to cite the (state) statute.”
Boards and commissions also have to take a publicly recorded vote before entering an executive session.
In addition, Leary said, discussion of a personnel policy as a whole does not qualify as executive session material.
“If they’re just discussing a policy, i.e., all of our employees are going to have to pay more for health benefits, that should be done in public,” Leary said.
Mike Starn, communications director for the Maine Municipal Association, agreed with Leary’s assessment. “It’s my understanding that the intent of the law is, you can go into executive session where someone’s reputation potentially would be damaged by discussing the matter in open session,” he said.
Merrill said Tuesday that he believes the commissioners took appropriate action Feb. 15. He said it is the responsibility of Administrative Assistant Carole Mahoney to determine whether a matter should be discussed in closed session.
“It’s not her decision, but it’s her job to find out if we should (meet in executive session), then she brings that information to us,” Merrill said.
The Freedom of Access law does allow public bodies to discuss employee compensation and duties in executive session. When a similar executive session was questioned in October, Merrill said the county was examining its entire pay scale.
On Tuesday, he said, “We’re going through the whole (manual) page by page, item by item.”
At a Dec. 21 meeting, Carole Mahoney also made references to discussions about how to cover offices during the lunch hour and how to pay employees for staying through lunch.
Commissioner David Duguay said Tuesday that he believed the commission was within its bounds Feb. 15, but some portions of the manual possibly could be discussed in public session.
“Anything that we discussed there, it’s nothing that’s trying to be hidden on purpose, I can tell you that,” he said, adding that work on the manual has yet to be completed.
Mahoney said Tuesday that Rosenblatt had advised her the executive session would be appropriate. Rosenblatt called for the session, Mahoney said.
Rosenblatt could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
Comments are no longer available on this story