By Randy Kugler
The subject of Mayor Simmons reluctance to meet and have private one on one discussions with other Council members and only have discussions of City business at public meetings continues as some form of valid criticism of her role as Mayor.
Perhaps Mayor Simmons took seriously her responsibility to not engage in “serial communications”. A serial communication according to the State Attorney General is where ” A governing body risks violating meetings law through a series of private communications, even if a quorum isn’t involved in any single communication. We recommend that members of a governing body should not meet in private to discuss business, or exchange private communications about business, even if those involved constitute less than a quorum. Such a gathering creates the appearance of impropriety, and runs contrary to the policy of the Public Meetings Law, which supports keeping the public informed of the deliberations of governing bodies. ” Oregon DOJ on Public Meetings.
Translation: In Manzanita, less than a quorum means two Council members. Those two members of the City Council are not to communicate in person, by phone, text or email to discuss City business.
Prior to Mayor Simmons, a dissenting opinion or a no vote on an item of City business was unheard of. Has anyone else gotten a sense that over the years that decisions appear to have already been made before a Council discussion and vote? I wonder if you could find a single Council decision that had a less than unanimous vote in the past 15 years of Council meetings. Makes one wonder how such unanimity is possible for all of those Council decisions.
It would appear that in our city, attempting to follow the law or asking questions to better understand how the City operates puts one at risk of both criticism and investigation.
The now released acknowledgement of the expenditure of at least $139,000 of public funds for this report on the investigation of Mayor Simmons is a public record. The public interest in knowing how the Mayor acted inappropriately in her duties outweighs any reasonable claim by the City of a compelling need to refuse to disclose its findings and release the report.
