Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County attorney objects to disclosure rule; board removes sections 1.8 and 1.9
Summary
Gloucester County's attorney objected to a new rule requiring him to share the substance of member contacts with the full board; supervisors debated the change and voted to remove the provisions.
The county attorney warned the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors that a newly adopted rule requiring him to "promptly share the substantive content" of any board member's legal question with the entire board could be untenable and intrusive.
At the Jan. 6 meeting, the attorney said the rule — section 1.9 of the board's rules — would in practice force him to disclose individual members' inquiries and could chill ordinary lawyer‑client communications. He told the board it put him in an "untenable position" and said he might have to record conversations if the requirement remained.
Supporters of the rule said its intent was to level the information field among members and improve transparency. Opponents said it could be overly burdensome and apply to routine, individual questions.
After extended discussion the board voted to remove sections 1.8 and 1.9 from the rules. The roll-call vote passed with a single dissent from Doctor Lemming, who said the provision had been adopted unanimously earlier and should be given more time.
The removal restores the prior practice where the attorney shares material widely only when he judges it appropriate or when a formal memo is warranted, according to comments during the meeting.
