A dispute over how to handle sealed executive‑session minutes and broader meeting procedures dominated discussion during the Jan. 6 Westerly Town Council meeting.

Town Solicitor (Attorney) Connolly advised the council that the Rhode Island Open Meetings Act requires sealed executive‑session minutes to remain confidential and not be shared beyond council members. He told the council such minutes nonetheless must be approved, and that local public bodies use a variety of procedures to protect confidentiality while allowing members to review minutes. He said some jurisdictions require members to read minutes in the clerk’s office or use encrypted email; he also said approving minutes during an executive session is a permissible process.

Why it matters: Sealed executive‑session minutes often contain privileged or proprietary information (for example, real‑estate negotiations or personnel matters). Handling of those minutes interacts with state law and with expectations of confidentiality, and councilors said the practical method for review affects their ability to prepare for votes.

Key points from the meeting:
- Town manager circulated a notice that executive‑session minutes would be provided at the meeting for review and then collected, rather than emailed. Several councilors objected, saying members must have time to review sealed minutes in advance.
- Attorney Connolly explained: “the Open Meetings Act requires that the minutes of an executive session … stay confidential among the members of the council, and not be shared or distributed beyond that. They remain sealed. They are not public.” He added that sealed minutes “do need to be approved,” and that municipalities use differing practices (reading in the clerk’s office, encrypted email, or approving in executive session) to fulfill the statute while protecting confidentiality.
- Councilors proposed options including password‑protected email, in‑office reading sessions, or approval during an executive session; Connolly said the statute does not specify a single method and that approving in executive session appears permissible.

Council votes and procedures at the meeting:
- The council approved the consent calendar of minutes that included sealed executive‑session minutes; one or more councilors abstained on the executive minutes portion. The clerk and solicitor will continue to work with council leadership on a consistent local procedure.
- Separately, councilors debated a request that the town manager inform the full council of meetings related to Potter Hill Mill Dam work. A motion to have the manager notify the council about those meetings was proposed and put to a poll vote; the poll recorded a majority opposed to the information request. The meeting record shows councilors continue to disagree over when and how staff should notify the full council about consultant and community meetings tied to specific projects.

The council scheduled an orientation and an ethics training for newly elected members to review rules and procedures. The solicitor recommended tailoring a confidentiality procedure that protects sealed minutes while giving council members timely access for review and decision‑making.