Ron, in the event that Citizens are interested in all 14 reasons for Executive sessions, I’ll post them below. As you know, I believe some of these 14 reasons do not require permanent confidentiality.

RCW 42.30.110
Executive sessions.

*** CHANGE IN 2011 *** (SEE 5764.SL) ***

(1) Nothing contained in this chapter may be construed to prevent a governing body from holding an executive session during a regular or special meeting:

(a) To consider matters affecting national security;

(b) To consider the selection of a site or the acquisition of real estate by lease or purchase when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased price;

(c) To consider the minimum price at which real estate will be offered for sale or lease when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of decreased price. However, final action selling or leasing public property shall be taken in a meeting open to the public;

(d) To review negotiations on the performance of publicly bid contracts when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased costs;

(e) To consider, in the case of an export trading company, financial and commercial information supplied by private persons to the export trading company;

(f) To receive and evaluate complaints or charges brought against a public officer or employee. However, upon the request of such officer or employee, a public hearing or a meeting open to the public shall be conducted upon such complaint or charge;

(g) To evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment or to review the performance of a public employee. However, subject to RCW 42.30.140(4), discussion by a governing body of salaries, wages, and other conditions of employment to be generally applied within the agency shall occur in a meeting open to the public, and when a governing body elects to take final action hiring, setting the salary of an individual employee or class of employees, or discharging or disciplining an employee, that action shall be taken in a meeting open to the public;

(h) To evaluate the qualifications of a candidate for appointment to elective office. However, any interview of such candidate and final action appointing a candidate to elective office shall be in a meeting open to the public;

(i) To discuss with legal counsel representing the agency matters relating to agency enforcement actions, or to discuss with legal counsel representing the agency litigation or potential litigation to which the agency, the governing body, or a member acting in an official capacity is, or is likely to become, a party, when public knowledge regarding the discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the agency.

This subsection (1)(i) does not permit a governing body to hold an executive session solely because an attorney representing the agency is present. For purposes of this subsection (1)(i), “potential litigation” means matters protected by RPC 1.6 or RCW 5.60.060(2)(a) concerning:

(i) Litigation that has been specifically threatened to which the agency, the governing body, or a member acting in an official capacity is, or is likely to become, a party;

(ii) Litigation that the agency reasonably believes may be commenced by or against the agency, the governing body, or a member acting in an official capacity; or

(iii) Litigation or legal risks of a proposed action or current practice that the agency has identified when public discussion of the litigation or legal risks is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the agency;

(j) To consider, in the case of the state library commission or its advisory bodies, western library network prices, products, equipment, and services, when such discussion would be likely to adversely affect the network’s ability to conduct business in a competitive economic climate. However, final action on these matters shall be taken in a meeting open to the public;

(k) To consider, in the case of the state investment board, financial and commercial information when the information relates to the investment of public trust or retirement funds and when public knowledge regarding the discussion would result in loss to such funds or in private loss to the providers of this information;

(l) To consider proprietary or confidential nonpublished information related to the development, acquisition, or implementation of state purchased health care services as provided in RCW 41.05.026;

(m) To consider in the case of the life sciences discovery fund authority, the substance of grant applications and grant awards when public knowledge regarding the discussion would reasonably be expected to result in private loss to the providers of this information;

(n) To consider in the case of a health sciences and services authority, the substance of grant applications and grant awards when public knowledge regarding the discussion would reasonably be expected to result in private loss to the providers of this information.

(2) Before convening in executive session, the presiding officer of a governing body shall publicly announce the purpose for excluding the public from the meeting place, and the time when the executive session will be concluded. The executive session may be extended to a stated later time by announcement of the presiding officer.

[2010 1st sp.s. c 33 § 5; 2005 c 424 § 13; 2003 c 277 § 1; 2001 c 216 § 1; 1989 c 238 § 2; 1987 c 389 § 3; 1986 c 276 § 8; 1985 c 366 § 2; 1983 c 155 § 3; 1979 c 42 § 1; 1973 c 66 § 2; 1971 ex.s. c 250 § 11.]

Notes:
Captions not law — Liberal construction — Severability — Effective dates — 2005 c 424: See RCW 43.350.900 through 43.350.903.

Severability — Effective date — 1987 c 389: See notes following RCW 41.06.070.

Severability — 1986 c 276: See RCW 53.31.901.

Ken, Dont know if you have ever attended washington coalition for open gov. meeting. They are very informative and publish a news letter at washington cog.org

At last week’s council meeting Roger Hertrich’s comments were replete with statements supporting his candidates – incumbents Cooper, Buckshnis, and Petso, as well as being openingly critical of DJ Wilson. Mayor Cooper gave Hertrich a couple warnings, but he did not cut him off. City Attorney Taraday said nothing. Campaigning is not allowed at the podium. I hope that tomorrow night Cooper and Taraday will do their jobs, because you can be certain that Hertrich will once again test the rules.

Bill:

After Gary Haakenson’s resignation, staff wanted to enable the newly appointed mayor to “hit the ground running”. One of the things that they did to help was to start the process to recruit an executive assistant for whomever was appointed mayor. It’s my understanding that staff had received 100 applicants for the job prior to Cooper’s arrival, and that Cooper did not interview any of them.

I just think that the people who work in the offices for the city of edmonds get payed way way too much money lets face it over 100 thousand dollars for a hr director thats crazy. and how much was this ms cole getting and how many hours was she working, and then the city wants a levy cause they can’t pay there bills, good luck .I sure wish at the next council meeting somebody would bring a cake .

Reading the minutes of the Oct 25th council meeting I noticed that an executive session was held at the end of the regular council meeting; the only announcement of the session occurred immediately prior to it being convened. That’s highly unusual! Normally the session would have been announced at the start of the regular public meeting. Perhaps just an oversight, but these days I’m not so sure.

Ron B.:

I’ve come to the conclusion that you either lack reading comprehension skills, or you simply enjoy spreading bull – your #15 is full of it. I’ll just take the time to challenge you on one of your statements: “If anyone believes the campaign literature this guy Earling is mailing, proclaiming he’s going to cut city salaries and curb expenses, they are in serious need of a jump start to the brain.” I have all of Dave’s literature and there is nothing said about going to cut city salaries.

Ron W, I knew you were right without even checking. That’s because I’ve been reading the Dave Earling mailers (no small task) and reading his web site. As far as I can tell, he has not made a single promise that we can hold him to. Not one.