Three Northampton County Council members staged their own protest of an Executive Session at last night's meeting. After being outvoted, 5-3, they refused to participate in a private discussion of the looming, $25 million, swaption.
Although Pennsylvania's Sunshine Law generally requires open meetings, there are exceptions. Personnel matters, litigation or anticipated litigation, the purchase or lease of real estate, or matters that might violate "a lawful privilege or lead to the disclosure of information or confidentiality protected by law," can be talked about in the back room.
Executive John Stoffa requested the closed meeting, and County Solicitor Karl Longenbach justified it as a matter of anticipated litigation, and because it might lead to the disclosure of information that would put the County at a disadvantage in its negotiations with Bank of America.
Lamont McClure questioned whether either reason cited would justify an executive session, and instead argued that an "important public policy issue" like the swaption should be discussed publicly. Tom Dietrich added that going behind closed doors is "just another opportunity to go in a direction I'm not comfortable with." Ken Kraft added his vote to McClure and Dietrich, but without explanation.
After being outvoted, the three Council members refused to participate in the executive session. Instead, they remained at the dais, joking with reporters, for the 15-minutes that the other members spent discussing the swaption.
This is a first.
I've never seen Council members refuse to participate in an executive session, even if they thought the matter discussed should be under public scrutiny.
My first reaction is that their actions were needlessly disrespectful. But as I reflect on it, I actually agree that a Council member should refuse to participate in a closed door meeting if he or she feels the matter should be out in the open.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder