Northfield News column: Practicing openness is simply the best policy

EDITOR'S NOTE: In June 2004 I began a new venture as managing editor of both Northfield News and Faribault Daily News. This column originally appeared in the Northfield News on Jan. 6, 2006.

Last week's controversy over whether the Northfield City Council violated the state's open meeting law in regard to its discussions about hiring a new city administrator point to the complexity of such laws for elected officials and for those of us who report on them. On one hand, you have Councilor Galen Malecha who, during a council meeting, expressed his concerns over a memo discussing how the council should proceed being its first choice for the city administrator position declined the offer. He told his fellow councilors that he was concerned about the way the memo was generated. And if you review the memo, you can easily see why his concerns were prompted. The memo, coming from Mayor Lee Lansing and addressed to the rest of the council, very thoroughly takes each of the councilors through the process of what their next steps could be. Early in the memo, it states that each of the councilors were consulted and that three options as to how to proceed were identified. It later states that the third option, making an offer to the other finalist, is the option most councilors preferred. Still later, the mayor's memo states that: "I recommend that we instruct [the search firm] to begin immediate discussion with [the other finalist] that will result in an acceptable offer of employment." And still further on it states: "... I believe that the council can take formal action on this offer of employment during our January 9, 2005 (sic) regular meeting." Those statements in particular are concerning because of what Councilor Malecha expressed: Reading those statements it would seem that the mayor had individually discussed how to proceed in hiring a city administrator with each of the councilors, prepared the discussion in one concise memo and then made a recommendation to the council on how to proceed, all without any of this taking place in the public eye. This would be a perfect example of what's known as a "serial meeting," when decisions are made or consensus on an issue is developed by conducting a series of one-on-one discussions where eventually those discussions encompass a quorum or more of a public body, as described by Minnesota Newspaper Association attorney Mark Anfinson. Because of the way the memo is written it seems that the mayor did indeed discuss with each councilor the city administrator position, formulated their thoughts and came to the conclusion that most councilors agreed to offer the second finalist the job, and then the mayor recommended in the memo that the council do so. Based on the memo alone, it's troubling. However, on the other hand, Mayor Lansing insists the memo was just an informational piece that was used to give each of the councilors an update as to what options were available to them. The mayor candidly says that he did not individually discuss the topic with each of the councilors; that he, interim City Administrator Bill Bassett, the city's human resources department and the city's search firm all worked together to compile the memo; that memos such as this regularly used to come from the former city administrator and someone in this case had to do it; and that it was merely to provide information to the council, not to serve as a recommendation. He says very adamantly that he doesn't think the council violated the state's open meeting law. Now you can see why the law is so complex. Reading the memo alone, one certainly gets the feeling that an irregular process took place behind the scenes. And you have to wonder why because it's not like the city administrator process was a highly secretive issue. But talking to the mayor, one seems to hear that the council may have come close to violating the law, but didn't. Ultimately, it's a case in which only a judge could decide if a law were broken. But the entire episode gives me pause. Only a couple weeks earlier the Northfield News editorialized against the council's discussion about the municipal pool when it was added to a meeting agenda without the public knowing about it. At that time, the newspaper suggested the council should be doing important business such as this in the open because Northfielders care. And then the issue involving the city administrator memo comes along, and again I have to ask why. Nothing in the memo was so secretive that it couldn't have been discussed at a public meeting and then it wouldn't have prompted one councilor to ask if the state's open meeting law was violated and also drawn the suspicion of the public. Moving forward, for everyone's sake, it just would be best if the council and the mayor practiced the policy that openness is the only policy ... no matter what the issue. This would go a long way to alleviating Malecha's concerns and mine. -- Devlyn Brooks is the managing editor of the Northfield News.