Colfax discusses buying property in closed session

By LeAnn R. Ralph

COLFAX  — After meeting in closed session for about 30 minutes during the August 14 Colfax Village Board meeting, no information was available about the village’s intention of purchasing property.

The notice indicated the closed session was for “the purpose of deliberating or negotiating the purchase or acquisition of public properties, which for competitive and/or bargaining reasons requires a closed session.”

When the board convened into open session, Gary Stene, village president, reported that the village board had agreed during the closed session to move forward with investigating the options and the viability of acquiring some property.

When asked by the Colfax Messenger for clarification on the purpose for the closed session, Stene said he could not reveal any information, and several village board members suggested the article about the closed session could end with an ellipses … or the suggestion that readers “stay tuned.”

According to the state Attorney General’s “Wisconsin Open Meetings Law Compliance Guide,” the burden lies with the governmental body to show why competitive or bargaining interests require a closed session. Merely stating that the session is closed for competitive or bargaining interests is not enough.

“Governmental officials must keep in mind, however, that this exemption applies only when ‘competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session.’ The exemption is restrictive rather than expansive. When a governmental body seeks to convene in closed session under Wis. Stat. 19.85 (1) (e), the burden is on the body to show that competitive or bargaining interests require closure. An announcement of a contemplated closed session under Wis. Stat. 19.85 (1) (e) that provides only a conclusory assertion that the subject of the session will involve competitive or bargaining issues is inadequate because it does not reflect how the proposed discussion would implicate the competitive or bargaining interests of the body or the body’s basis for concluding that the subject falls within the exemption,” according to the compliance guide.

The Wisconsin Open Meetings Law, along with the Open Records Law, are intended to provide citizens with as much access as possible to the business of local government, and with as much information as possible, seeing as the local governmental unit spends taxpayer money.

The “Wisconsin Open Meetings Law Compliance Guide” also states: “The use of the word ‘require’ in Wis. Stat. 19.85 (1)(e) limits that exemption to situations in which competitive or bargaining reasons leave a governmental body with no option other than to close the meeting. On the facts as presented in Citizens for Responsible Development, the Court thus found that a desire or request for confidentiality by a private developer engaged in negotiations with a city was not sufficient to justify a closed session for competitive or bargaining reasons. Nor did the fear that public statements might attract the attention of potential private competitors for the developer justify closure under this exemption, because the Court found that such competition would be likely to benefit, rather than harm, the city’s competitive or bargaining interests.”

The Compliance Guide also notes the exemption does, however, “allow the city to close those portions of its meeting that would reveal negotiation strategy or the price it planned to offer for a purchase of property, but it could not close other parts of the meetings.”

To comply with state law, the Colfax Village Board’s meeting notice could have been written in a way to provide more information to the public but not in such a way as to jeopardize the village’s bargaining position. For example, “Motion to convene into closed session as per WI Statutes 19.85 (1)(e) for the purpose of deliberating or negotiating the purchase or acquisition of public properties for a rail spur — a housing development — a new park — a new salt shed —or whatever the case might be — and discussion of the price the village board would be willing to pay for the property.”

In the absence of additional information, at this point, then, it is left up to residents in the Village of Colfax to wonder what property their elected officials would like to buy — and why the Colfax Village Board wanted to discuss the purchase in closed session …