Resident Ryan Doyle's open-meeting complaint prompts BCA to seek legal, Secretary of State guidance

The Board of Civil Authority discussed a July 25 public complaint from resident Ryan Doyle alleging that city council appointments had been handled in executive session and then ratified on the consent agenda, a process he said lacked transparency. The Chair summarized the allegation: “His claim was that folks were being voted on in executive session, and then the approval for that executive session appointment would be done on a consent,” and asked staff for an update.

Board members said they had already shared the complaint with legal counsel and the Secretary of State’s office and debated who should take the next step. The Clerk said she had “sent that information with the link as well as the statute” to Doyle and that Doyle declined to pursue the Secretary of State complaint form himself because he expects the process would be burdensome. Several members said the board should ask counsel to speak directly with the Secretary of State and recommended inviting legal staff to a BCA meeting or an interim call to clarify jurisdiction and next steps. No formal enforcement action was taken; members agreed to follow up with the city attorney and to report back at a future meeting.

Why it matters: The allegation, if substantiated, would concern whether appointments affecting municipal governance were made with the public’s ability to observe and comment. The board framed the immediate goal as clarifying roles and process rather than adjudicating or litigating the claim. The next procedural step recorded in the meeting was to forward draft minutes and the complaint materials to the city attorney for recommended follow-up and possible coordination with the Secretary of State’s office.