Closed sessions at meetings are allowed by the Virginia Code. However, the rules are very specific and must be followed in order to go into a closed session, while in closed session and coming out of closed session. These are not suggestions. These are enforceable laws.
I have been attending Saltville Town Council meetings for many months and watched them go into closed session at every regularly scheduled monthly meeting. I find this very disturbing. When I initially began attending, the agenda would give reasons for going into the closed session such as, “potential litigation” or “business prospects.” Not allowable folks. The public body has to be specific and the litigation has to be probable or actual and they have to tell you what it is. Now Saltville indicates, “Actual and probable litigation regarding the rails to trails issues.” That’s a bit better. It does raise questions, though, because it is on the agenda every month. And I mean every month. Just about every month the closed session agenda indicates the need to discuss personnel issues too. This has been listed with one of the following: Department Heads and Town Manager, Police Department, Public Works, Administrative Office. These subjects are much too vague. Every personnel issue is not eligible for closed session. The law is quite specific about this. There are criteria that must be met. And the public must know the reason such as disciplinary action, interviews for employment, etc.
If the subject is listed for going into closed session, it must be discussed. And only those things can be discussed. Let’s repeat that with emphasis…only those things can be discussed. The public body can’t add things once in closed session or talk about things kind-of related to the subject. I bring this up because I have noticed an interesting feature of the Saltville Town Council meetings. They can have a lengthy open agenda and whip right through it in an hour or hour and a half. Then they will have two or three things on the closed meeting agenda and will stay in closed session for hours.
Should anything be discussed which is not on the closed meeting agenda, it is the obligation and duty of someone (hopefully numerous people) present to object to the discussion or to leave the closed session. And they must refuse to certify that the subjects listed were the only things discussed. This is not a situation of “going along to get along.” This is where one’s ethics are shown. Tell the truth; was anything else discussed? I pose this question because the minutes sometimes reflect voting after on subjects quite different from the closed meeting agenda.
At the August meeting, a councilman referred to a vote taken that would cancel council meetings if the mayor could not be present. I don’t remember any such vote. When I was finally able to read the minutes from that meeting, I saw that this vote was done after coming out of closed session. How odd. Why wasn’t this done prior to closed session? Makes me very suspicious. Apparently others too, as I’m hearing the issue of the lengthy monthly closed sessions being a subject of discussions more and more.
When the council goes into closed session, many residents leave. They don’t want to wait around for hours to see what happens. My opinion is that this is what the council wants. I get the sense of “just leave so we can conduct our business.” Problem is that it’s not their business; it’s the public’s business. And the public has a right to know. I also notice that the council does not wait for residents to return to the room. They vote or adjourn immediately. That’s just plain rude.
The September meeting has the closed session listing the subject of, “to discuss the acquisition of real property for a public purpose.” No mention of what the property is or even a vague suggestion. They want to spend the public’s money on something but don’t want to tell what they’re thinking of buying? Come on! Of course the ‘potential litigation regarding the rails to trails issues’ is again listed. How many months do you all need to figure out how to deal with this subject?
It’s much too dark in Saltville. They need some sunshine.
don’t tell me, let me guess. you fell off the really slow moving turnip truck?
I sit through board of supervisor’s meetings, Abingdon, Damascus, Glade Springs, Wise, all of southwest Virginia meetings who do the same thing.
Saltville has acutally made tremendous progress in the last couple of years, not like when T-bone was there and they really were deciding how to take the town’s money. You forget that Saltville now has a downtown project started, a bike trail started, and a wave pool. What you don’t know is that those people are in there trying to decide how to fire Surber and stop the police force from dealing drugs like they do in Damascus.
I suggest for educational purposes, you attend some meetings in other towns.
PS> You’re absolutely correct in requesting some sunshine, but the majority of the people sitting beside you in that room, are not intelligent enough to participate in the conversation.
Posted by Backwood from on 09/10 at 10:04 AM
There will never be any sunshine in Saltville. Until they get rid of some of the people who are running the town. They go behind close doors to keep everything Hush Hush. Always remember what comes around goes around or what goes around comes around.
Posted by sweets from on 09/11 at 10:30 PM
Sphere IT
Save This Page
Reader Reaction
digg it