Winder city councilman Bob Dixon had a message for the local media Monday night — I’m right and you’re wrong.
Dixon took issue with a recent Barrow Journal column by publisher Mike Buffington that called the city to task for having held budget committee meetings without prior public notice being given as outlined in the Georgia Open Meetings Law.
In response to that writing, Dixon gave a long and rambling statement during Winder’s Monday night meeting. He defended the city’s actions in not notifying the news media or public and said the city did not have a “hidden agenda” as the newspaper’s publisher suggested.
Recent City of Winder budget committee meetings were held without the prior public notice required by the Georgia Open Meetings Law.
Dixon lectures media on closed meetings
“So the people were concerned, at least the news media was concerned, that there was a hidden agenda that was worked up and we were not notifying anyone and we had a lot of information to hide,” Dixon said. “I don’t know from the work agenda that anything could be considered information you would want to hide.”
Dixon read an excerpt from a book he had obtained for a class he had taken as a new council member at the University of Georgia’s Carl Vinson Institute of Government. The excerpt referred to “work sessions” held prior to business meetings.
While the excerpt, which he read, stated, “pre-meeting work sessions are subject to open meeting laws,” Dixon then added: “You can have work sessions and they don’t have to be public as long as they are for information gathering.”
He also said “a lot of assumptions” had been made concerning the issue, noted that he had taken five hours of journalism courses and proceeded to tell a story that he felt would make his point about incorrect assumptions.
Councilman Sonny Morris also defended the city’s handling of the budget meetings to which council committees were scheduled to meet with department managers. He said the council members merely dropped in and out.
“I would do it again,” Morris said. “I think the information was very well presented, the department heads were well prepared, they answered all of the questions in a professional manner and I appreciate it.”
DIXON IS WRONG, SAYS PUBLISHER
But publisher Buffington said Dixon’s view is wrong.
“While I appreciate the fact that Mr. Dixon took five hours of journalism classes, that does not override current state law which provides that all government committee meetings be announced in advance and open for the public,” Buffington said. “We have consulted with our attorney on this point and if Mr. Dixon or the city proceed to hold unannounced, closed-door council and committee meetings in the future, we will take all legal actions necessary to bring them into compliance with state law.”
Buffington also pointed out that Dixon apparently had a penchant for wanting to do city business in secret.
“Monday night, Mr. Dixon wanted to go into a closed meeting to discuss the salary of the next city administrator and the job’s criteria, a move that would have been illegal,” Buffington said. “City attorney John Stell correctly pointed out that those discussions have to be in the open. Mr. Dixon apparently wants to do the public’s business out of the public view as much as possible. Perhaps he should realize that when a public official knowingly participates in an illegal meeting, it can become a criminal matter with fines involved.”
Buffington also said Dixon’s view of work sessions is wrong.
“Mr. Dixon apparently thinks the council can hold secret meetings as long as it’s just for ‘information,’ but that is totally false,” Buffington said. “The law is very clear on when meetings should be open, and perhaps Mr. Dixon should read the full law before he discusses it further.”
Dixon read an excerpt from a book he had obtained for a class he had taken as a new council member at the University of Georgia’s Carl Vinson Institute of Government. The excerpt referred to “work sessions” held prior to business meetings.
While the excerpt, which he read, stated, “pre-meeting work sessions are subject to open meeting laws,” Dixon then added: “You can have work sessions and they don’t have to be public as long as they are for information gathering.”
He also said “a lot of assumptions” had been made concerning the issue, noted that he had taken five hours of journalism courses and proceeded to tell a story that he felt would make his point about incorrect assumptions.
Councilman Sonny Morris also defended the city’s handling of the budget meetings to which council committees were scheduled to meet with department managers. He said the council members merely dropped in and out.
“I would do it again,” Morris said. “I think the information was very well presented, the department heads were well prepared, they answered all of the questions in a professional manner and I appreciate it.”
DIXON IS WRONG, SAYS PUBLISHER
But publisher Buffington said Dixon’s view is wrong.
“While I appreciate the fact that Mr. Dixon took five hours of journalism classes, that does not override current state law which provides that all government committee meetings be announced in advance and open for the public,” Buffington said. “We have consulted with our attorney on this point and if Mr. Dixon or the city proceed to hold unannounced, closed-door council and committee meetings in the future, we will take all legal actions necessary to bring them into compliance with state law.”
Buffington also pointed out that Dixon apparently had a penchant for wanting to do city business in secret.
“Monday night, Mr. Dixon wanted to go into a closed meeting to discuss the salary of the next city administrator and the job’s criteria, a move that would have been illegal,” Buffington said. “City attorney John Stell correctly pointed out that those discussions have to be in the open. Mr. Dixon apparently wants to do the public’s business out of the public view as much as possible. Perhaps he should realize that when a public official knowingly participates in an illegal meeting, it can become a criminal matter with fines involved.”
Buffington also said Dixon’s view of work sessions is wrong.
“Mr. Dixon apparently thinks the council can hold secret meetings as long as it’s just for ‘information,’ but that is totally false,” Buffington said. “The law is very clear on when meetings should be open, and perhaps Mr. Dixon should read the full law before he discusses it further.”
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
#1
Anonymous
on
05/05/10 at 09:32 PM
[Reply]
Mr. Dixon also doesn't understand the City Charter which gives the Mayor the authority to appoint employees not the Council.
#2
anonymous
on
05/06/10 at 05:47 AM
[Reply]
How happy Mr. Yearwood must be with the focus on some other government group.
#3
Anonymous
on
05/07/10 at 01:43 PM
[Reply]
How conflicted Ms. Pierce must be, not knowing whom to believe. She normally is able to kneel before the alter of this paper AND Mr. Dixon as savior of the Council. I'd love to hear which side she'd take on this one.
