|
April 15, 1975
C. Hardaway Marks
Member, House of Delegates
74-75 574
This is in reply to your recent letter wherein you inquire:
1. "Whether or not members of the City Council and the
City Manager were in violation of the Freedom of Information Act
as set forth in Title 2.1 in the Code of Virginia. On Sunday,
March 9, 1975, the City Manager contacted the members of City
Council by telephone and asked them to meet with him at the office
of the Housing Authority within the City of Hopewell. All five (5)
attended. The press was not notified neither was the City
Attorney. Various items of the proposed budget
[INCOMPLETE] the members no official action on behalf of
any of the members or the City Manager was taken. This was merely
an information meeting wherein the City Manager was seeking the
advice of members of his resolution, motion or any votes at all
were taken by the body.
2. "Does the Charter of the City of Hopewell wherein it speaks
take precedence over the Freedom of Information Act?
3. "Can the City Manager seek advice of his governing board at
a gathering of the Council without being in violation of the
Freedom of Information Act?
4. "Does the Freedom of Information Act completely override
§ 15.1-840 of the Code?"
I shall respond to your inquiries seriatim: Section 2.1-344, Code
of Virginia (1960), as amended, provides:
"Except as otherwise specifically provided by law and
except as provided in §§2.1-344 and 2.1-345, all
meetings shall be public meetings. minutes shall be recorded at
all public meetings. Information as to the time and place of each
meeting shall be furnished to any citizen of this State who
requests such information."
"Meeting" is defined in §2.1-341(a) as:
... the meetings, when sitting as a body or entity, or as
an informal assemblage of the constituent membership, with or
without minutes being taken whether or not votes are cast, of any
authority, board, bureau, commission, district or agency of the
State or of any political subdivision of the State, including
cities, towns and counties; municipal, governing bodies of
counties, school boards and planning commissions; and other
organizations, corporations or agencies in the State, supported
wholly or principally by public funds. Nothing in this chapter
shall be construed as to define a meeting as a chance meeting of
two or more members of a public body, or as an informal assemblage
of the constituent membership at which matters relating to the
exercise of official functions are not discussed." Emphasis
added.)
In view of the specific provisions of §2.1-341(a), I would
advise that the above-described assemblage did constitute a "meeting"
notwithstanding its informal nature and the fact that no votes were
taken. I find no provision of §§2.1-344, 2.1-345 or any
other law which authorizes executive meetings for discussion of
budgetary matters. Accordingly, the meeting in question was required
to be public in compliance with the requirements of §2.1-343.
Upon consideration of the facts as set forth in your inquiry, I am of
the opinion that the meeting in question was not in violation of the
requirements of §2.1-343 provided that: (1) minutes were
recorded; (2) all pending requests for notice of time and location of
Council meetings were honored; and (3) public access was not
refused.
With respect to your second inquiry, I would first note that
§2.1-343, requiring all meetings of governmental bodies to be
open to the public, is prefaced by the language "[except as
otherwise specifically provided by law." If, therefore, the Charter
of the City of Hopewell contained provisions which exempted City
Council discussions of specified matters from the requirement of
openness, such Charter provisions would control and thereby authorize
closed meetings for the purposes so stated. I find no provision in
the Charter for the City of Hopewell, however, authorizing executive
meetings of City Council for the purpose of discussion of budgetary
matters. To the contrary, Chapter IV, § 6, paragraph 3, of the
Charter requires that all official actions of Council be taken in
public meetings. Chapter V, § 4, of the Charter, requiring the
City Manager to advise Council members of financial conditions and
future needs of the City, does not provide authority for executive
meetings of Council for discussion and advice regarding budgetary
matters.
In response to your third inquiry, I would advise that any
discussion by members of the City Council of matters relating to
official business, among themselves or with the City Manager or other
City official, must be undertaken in public meetings as required by
§2.1-343, except to the extent that such discussions are
authorized for executive sessions by §§2.1-344 or 2.1-345
or other specific provisions of law.
Your fourth inquiry deals with §15.1-840 which reads as
follows:
"A municipal corporation, in addition to the powers
granted by §15.1-839, shall have all the powers granted to it
in its charter; and nothing contained in this chapter shall be
construed to in anywise repeal, amend, impair or affect any
provision of any existing charter or of any charter hereafter
granted to a municipal corporation or any provision of any other
applicable law, unless such amendment or appeal so provides.
Whenever there appears to be a conflict between any provision of
this chapter, or any amendment hereof, and that of any charter of
a municipal corporation, the provisions of the charter shall be
construed and held to take precedence over such conflicting or
apparently conflicting provisions of this chapter or of any
amendment hereof."
The foregoing statute establishes the basic principle that, to the
extent that the provisions of Chapter 18 of Title 15.1, dealing with
the general powers of municipalities, conflict with specific powers
of a municipality its charter, the specific charter provisions shall
control contained in § 15.1-840 has no application to conflicts
between specific charter provisions and the provisions of the Freedom
of Information Act, found in Chapter 21 of Title 2.1 of the Code. As
noted above however to the extent that a municipal charter authorizes
executive meetings for a specific purpose it would take precedence
over the general public meeting requirement of the FOIA.
|