County counsel briefs committee on open-meetings ruling; urges clearer on-record justification before closed sessions

County counsel Michael Punier gave an update to the Executive Committee on a recent Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruling, Witzinger v. City of Marinette, that found an open-meetings violation. He advised committee chairs to allow a discussion on the record explaining the justification before voting to enter closed session.

Nut graf: The court’s decision emphasizes that repeating statutory closed-session language on the record may not be sufficient; officials should record a visible, pre-motion discussion of why the closed-session exemption applies so members can cast an informed vote.

Punier told members that in practice this means committees must put enough specific information in the agenda’s “to wit” language and should consider a standalone agenda item to discuss whether closed-session criteria are met. He said where bargaining strategy or litigation is involved, the chair should ensure the pre-motion discussion explains why the subject cannot be discussed in open session without harming the county’s negotiating position.

Committee members raised implementation questions. Vice Chair Dickinson suggested beefing up agenda ‘‘to wit’’ language so the public has clearer notice. Supervisor Robinson asked for corp counsel to provide consistent background at the start of closed-session items to ensure compliance. Punier said he would circulate a memorandum to chairs and possibly the full board and offered to consult with committees in advance when the closed-session basis is unclear.

Ending: The committee asked that corp counsel review closed-session language in agendas before meetings and recommended adding a pre-motion discussion step; Punier will distribute written advice to committee chairs and vice chairs.