Legal review of alleged Open Meetings Act violations delayed

PALMER — The Palmer City Council did not receive any report from City Attorney Michael Gatti on either of the two inquiries into alleged violations of the Open Meetings Act by members of the council. The council had scheduled an executive session that would not be open to the members of the public, which was removed from the agenda during the September 28 meeting. Minutes from the August 24 meeting were also written on the agenda to be approved by the council, prior to a motion from Councilwoman Dr. Jill Valerius.

“I think we need to move the approval of the August 24, 2021 regular meeting minutes. The conversation that happened after the meeting had gaveled out. Mr. Gatti was going to, I guess give us some advice today is my understanding and so I think we need to hold off on approving the minutes of the regular meeting from August 24,” said Valerius.

The motion to postpone the approval of the minutes passed unanimously. The council passed IM 21-005 on September 14, contracting Ketchikan attorney Scott Brandt-Erichsen of Keene & Currall, P.P.C. to conduct an investigation as to whether four members of the council had violated the Open Meetings Act in discussions on the Mat-Su Moms for Social Justice Facebook Page last year. The motion for the initial investigation of the alleged violations was made by Councilman Richard Best and seconded by Councilman Steve Carrington after an executive session was held on August 24. At the September 14 meeting, Valerius also moved to direct Gatti to provide a report on whether the direction given after Mayor Edna DeVries gaveled the meeting out was also a separate violation. The vote to postpone the executive session where council was scheduled to receive a report passed 4-3 with Deputy Mayor Sabrena Combs and Council members Julie Berberich, Jill Valerius and Brian Daniels voting in favor while Mayor Edna DeVries joined Councilmen Best and Carrington voting in opposition.

“It should simply just be answered was a quorum still available at the time of the meeting when the other council member had logged out and at that point there was still a quorum so we’re legally allowed to do the business of the day,” said Best.

Confusion arose among members of the council when Gatti suggested that the executive session was not prudent. Gatti then revealed that agenda setting meetings between he and city Manager John Moosey had not been taking place.

“This agenda should’ve been approved by him so I guess I’m just very confused why we’re holding this up and why it wasn’t written correctly to begin with if the attorney reviewed the agenda,” said Combs.

Gatti stated that he would not give a report on the second request for investigation and that Brandt-Erichsen would report to the council on both the approved IM 21-005 related to the Facebook group and the post-gavel direction given on August 24.

“Can you explain why you would have referred the investigations plural out to another attorney as these were at least the first one was brought by a public citizen,” said Berberich.

Gatti then relayed that Brandt-Erichsen was out of state and would not be able to present the findings of his investigation until the October 12 meeting.

“It really should be attorney client legal advice for pending or potential litigation and other matters which are required by law to be kept confidential, and this talks about character and reputation. So it’s the subject matter in the e-session is inappropriate for discussion of this and I know that Mr. Moosey put it on there in good faith. When I understand, I spoke to Mr. Moosey today and we want to make sure that the city is in compliance with all the requirements so my recommendation is to remove item M from the agenda at this time to be placed at a later date properly noticed,” said Gatti. “Also I think the idea that this was brought as an investigation is really a legal review, not an investigation. So it is really a misnomer to describe it as such.”

During public comment Jackie Goforth began reading directly from a thread on the Mat-Su Moms for Social Justice that was referenced in a letter from Mike Coons that led to Best’s motion for the initial Open Meetings Act investigation. Moosey signed a contract with Keene & Currall for a contract not to exceed $4,000. Councilman Daniels asked about the cost of the second legal review, which DeVries said was previously budgeted for last November.

“To refer this out so there’s no question of an independent opinion because no matter what opinion you issue, someone potentially could have an issue with that and question the validity so by referring this to an independent third party attorney that has the propensity to eliminate those sort of questions,” said Gatti.