Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Executive Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trainer distinguishes deliberations from executive sessions and outlines required findings
Summary
VLCT trainer told board members that deliberations (tied to quasi-judicial hearings) are exempt from open-meeting rules, while executive sessions require specific findings and formal motions; courts favor openness when ambiguous.
The VLCT presenter explained the legal difference between deliberations and executive sessions. Deliberations are connected to quasi-judicial hearings and permit private discussion among members about evidence and written decisions once the public hearing is closed; they are an explicit statutory exemption tied to adjudicative proceedings.
Executive sessions are a separate, closed portion of an otherwise open meeting and can be used only for narrowly listed purposes. For some executive-session reasons (method 2 in the trainer's description), the board should first make an explicit finding — for example, that “premature general public knowledge would clearly place the public body or an individual at a substantial disadvantage” — and then move to enter executive session under the cited statutory basis. “When you enter executive session, you can't take any binding action,” Endier said, noting a single exception related to certain real-estate negotiations.
Trainer advice to the board included making clear, specific findings that justify an executive session and, where appropriate, using the two-motion approach for confidentiality-sensitive subjects; she also warned that courts interpret ambiguity in favor of openness. The presenter recommended documenting the statutory basis in the motion as a best practice.
