Serving Barnwell County and it's neighbors since 1852
Once again, Barnwell City Council has violated the law by failing to state a specific purpose for entering into closed session.
On Monday night, July 17, the council held a special meeting to discuss various financial and budget matters in open session. They later closed the meeting to the public to discuss a “personnel matter” and to receive “legal advice regarding the personnel matter”.
While public bodies are allowed to hold closed sessions - sometimes called executive sessions - they must state the specific purpose, according to the state’s Freedom of Information Act. However, the two reasons stated by council when they voted to enter into closed session were not specific enough. Simply stating “personnel matter” and “legal advice for the personnel matter” are not sufficient enough under the law.
“Councils must be as specific as possible without compromising the issue. The motion to enter executive session should be specific. For example, the presiding officer can announce a specific purpose ‘to go into executive session to discuss applications for employment within [a specific department]’ or ‘to discuss negotiation of a contract and receipt of legal advice related to a building project,’” according to an article from the Municipal Association of S.C., which represents and serves the state’s 271 incorporated municipalities, such as the City of Barnwell.
Jonathan Vickery, publisher of this newspaper, emailed the city administrator prior to the meeting after an agenda was published with the vague closed session reasons. He wanted to ensure that a specific purpose would be stated in the motion before council voted to go into closed session. He was told that the city’s attorney had reviewed it and deemed the purpose to be specific enough.
If that is the case, the city may need to seek new legal counsel. The reasoning presented definitely does not satisfy the law.
Jay Bender, an attorney for the S.C. Press Association and a leading expert on FOIA, said council’s action “violated the law and disregarded the decision of the Supreme Court of S.C. in the 2015 case Donohue v. City of North Augusta.”
This case was brought by Stephen P. Donohue who sought to invalidate the City of North Augusta’s ordinance amending an existing redevelopment plan to include an economic development project not considered at the time the original plan was adopted. Part of his case contended that the North Augusta City Council violated the FOIA by not providing a specific purpose since it was only stated that council would discuss a “contractual matter”. The court determined council did not satisfy the FOIA’s specific purpose requirement before going into executive session on 11 separate occasions.
Why does this matter?
FOIA violations can bring legal ramifications for public bodies and public officials. Even more importantly, FOIA violations also erode public trust.
Ensuring public officials follow the law and holding them accountable when they do not is a vital part of our job as journalists.
This is not the first time Barnwell City Council has not followed the law regarding this matter. In September 2022, neither the council, mayor, administrator or attorney knew what the closed session topic was really about and could only provide a very vague reason. We had hoped our discussion with city officials and printed editorial had explained this issue so city officials could learn from their mistake last year.
Apparently not.
Hopefully this latest case will be a teaching moment for all public officials.
Some may say that journalists are nosy and should mind their own business. However, we believe by being a watchdog for our community, we are actually doing our part to make it better.
If citizens are informed and public officials are held accountable, then a community will be in a much better state.
