Political Mess

What is the name of your state? Mississippi

I am a local government employee in an upper management position. Our department has been through two years of hell, due to internal turmoil fostered by another manager who recently resigned.

I have tried to be the best manager I can be, treating everyone fairly, but I don't put up with a lot of BS. Some employees have been openly hostile towards me, and try to undermine my policies and procedures by "bending" words and practices.

With the advent of having me become the only executive-level manager in the department, a small group of disgruntled employees sought out two city councilmen to voice their grievances. Under Mississippi law and our city's form of government, council members cannot become involved in personnel matters; that duty is relegated to the mayor.

After the conclusion of the meeting, one councilman prepared a written "laundry list" of complaints aired against me, along with one particular statement that alleges I am a "racist." This list was typed and handed out to all council members, calling for a council meeting to hear the allegations.

Besides being outside the council's jurisdiction, I am seething that a scurrilous, false allegation of this magnitude could have devastating effects on my career, current and future.

My question to the collective body of legal knowledge here is: Do I have any legal recourse against the people who brought these allegations, as well as the council people who disseminated them in writing?

has the council meeting been held yet?

No, the meeting is scheduled for this morning. On advice of our city legal department, I am not attending.

Were the documents handed out in open session or closed? And how is the 'discussion' being held? Open or closed session?

The documents were distributed by hand, from one council member to the others. I don't know how many copies were made and to whom they were given.

Today's meeting is scheduled for a "closed" session, the results of which must be made public.

o.k. and during the meeting when the paper was distributed, was there discussion on holding a 'closed' meeting and was it entered into the minutes of the open session?

My response:

You're getting into the protected "Free Speech" arena, a very heady topic. But, generally, politicians, in their official capacities, are immune from libel or slander during meetings.

Acts and statements made by legislators in their official capacity are protected in accordance with the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution. [USCA Const, Art. I, § 6, cl. 1; United States v. Helstoski (1979) 442 U.S. 477, 488-489, 99 S.Ct. 2432, 2439]

Therefore, the only real question, as I see it from your post, is since this is "outside the council's jurisdiction", is whether the Council can do anything about it; i.e., it is only a job for the mayor.

But, since the counsel has taken up the issue, they can certainly make recommendations to the mayor for further action.

IAAL

And although I agree with IAAL, where I was going with this was the 'notification' requirements of the Mississippi Open Meetings Act § 25-41-(1-17) and the entering into the record of the 'reason' for such a closed (executive) session.

§ 25-41-7. Executive sessions.
(3) An executive session shall be limited to matters allowed to be exempted from open meetings by subsection (4) of this section. The reason for holding such an executive session shall be stated in an open meeting, and the reason so stated shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require that any meeting be closed to the public, nor shall any executive session be used to circumvent or to defeat the purposes of this chapter.

(4) A public body may hold an executive session pursuant to this section for one or more of the following reasons:

(a) Transaction of business and discussion of personnel matters relating to the job performance, character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person holding a specific position.

(e) Any body of the Legislature which is meeting on matters within the jurisdiction of such body.


Therefore, I would certainly challenge the holding of the executive meeting on the grounds that the matters are outside of the council's jurisdiction and therefore do not fall within the scope of section 4(a) above.

And, if the meeting is held anyway, require that the paper that was passed around and the underlying cause of the Executive session, be entered into the minutes of the public meeting called to adjourn into executive session.

Pfaffing85690, you have nailed it perfectly. There has already been a public notice in the newspaper to comply with the Open Meetings Act. The notice said the meeting was being called to discuss the need to go into Executive Session in order to discuss "personnel matters" within my department.

The council has circumvented department policies that outline how grievances are to be handled. There is a clearly defined chain-of-command that was ignored in order to bring the matter to one particular councilman.

Additionally, the council as a whole was recently admonished by the mayor about delving into areas in which it has no business, including personnel matters, which are the responsibility of the mayor and his administrators.

O.K. then what are you going to do about it?

Well, I think that was my original question. Do I have grounds to initiate legal action against any of the parties for slander/defamation?

No, not from what you posted. However, the local newspaper might find it very interesting that your city council is holding an executive session on issues in which it is not allowed to intervene.

OK, thank you.