Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meeting Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors debate open-meeting boundaries for "board-of-three" interactions; consider hiring consultant
Summary
Supervisors discussed whether the open meeting law's restrictions on serial meetings prevent necessary informal consultation with the board chair and suggested hiring attorney Charles Johnson to advise on carve-outs or clearer guidance for three-member interactions.
Cochise County supervisors spent part of the July 7 work session debating how Arizona's open meeting law applies to informal discussions with the board chair and whether the law invites unfair accusations of "secret" or chain meetings.
Several supervisors described incidents where public photos or private appearances prompted accusations that the board had violated open-meeting rules, even though no formal action occurred. "They were all noticed...Nobody showed," Chair (S1) said, describing a past permitting process where public meetings were properly noticed but later criticized as secret.
Clerk (S2) suggested the board consider paying Charles Johnson, an attorney who previously worked on open-meeting issues, to advise whether a narrow carve-out for three-member communications or clearer guidance is legally defensible. "He's the guy who worked on this open meeting last time ... he might be considered as a consultant," S2 said.
Board members said they want to preserve public access and the original intent of open-meeting law while ensuring supervisors can get informal advice or a sounding board from the chair on purely informational matters without creating an appearance of serial meeting violations. The board asked the clerk to explore consulting options and report back.
