Submitted By: ben.killen.rosenberg@gmail.com – Click to email about this post
Posting on behalf of Loretta Kim Rosenberg loretta.kim.rosenberg@gmail.com
Let’s Get Our Facts Straight, Kids.
On May 2 the Tillamook County Pioneer published my article, “Manzanita Musings: Transparency and Compensation” in which I wrote about the Manzanita City Manager’s performance review, which is now public information. On May 11 the Pioneer’s editor abruptly revoked my press credentials and executive meeting hall pass after receiving “a couple of emails and phone calls.” What happened in those nine days? Who wrote those emails and made the phone calls that triggered the editor’s decision? Enquiring minds want to know!
Under Oregon law my connection to the Pioneer has enabled me to observe city council executive sessions. I assume the Pioneer editor read my article before publication. She agreed that I hadn’t revealed anything from the session but accused me of bias for publicly asking Manzanita’s Mayor to resign. It’s true that I, and about two-dozen other citizens signed a public letter that called on the Mayor to cut ties with an advisor whose troubling emails were released by a public records request, but that public letter didn’t suggest that she resign.
Since we moved here full-time I’ve shared writing with the community that I hope either explains something confusing or sheds light on some dark corner that people are avoiding. Writing about things helps me understand them better.
That seemed to please people when I was writing about things like dune grading and outdated land use documents. As long as it was a critique of the previous governing body and how things were or were not done then, everybody was happy. Well, most everybody.
I became a problem to some people when I began asking questions about what was happening right now in city government. In a small town like this, you’d have to have your head in the sand to not recognize there is something funky going on and it doesn’t pass the smell test.
During the election year I spent time meeting and talking with members of council, people running for office, city staff and the city manager so I could know all the players and understand their perspectives on issues.
I’ve been accused by some of switching sides, as if the truth has a side. Well, maybe she does.
Here’s what happened.
Way back on March 14th, the editor at the Pioneer kindly asked me to be a regular contributor, and I gladly accepted. On March 26, I let her know that I had asked the city manager for permission to attend executive sessions and received it.
Before ever attending a closed session, I read the Oregon Department of Justice’s Handbook on Public Meetings thoroughly to make sure I understood the rules.
The preference for public meetings is that they are open to the public so every member of the community has the opportunity to hear and see information presented.
Executive or closed sessions are only allowed in certain situations and are defined as a meeting or any part of a meeting, which is closed to “certain persons for deliberations on certain matters” (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 162).
When an executive session is called, representatives of the news media may attend to make sure that executive sessions are limited to the list of allowable reasons. It’s like a check on power to have media in a closed executive session.
Who represents the media? “. . . a news gatherer who has a formal affiliation with an institutional news medium. . .The news media includes specialty publications, which cover subject areas for a special audience, regardless of whether the publication’s specific area relates to the subject matter of a particular executive session” (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 176).
Internet media counts but the news entity has to have a staff, a formal structure and publish news on a regular basis. Governing bodies like city council can adopt policies about access to executive sessions but they can’t be enforced, if they conflict with the rule that news media can attend. In other words they can’t pick and choose who gets to be present.
What are the rules about disclosure of information discussed at executive sessions?
“Governing bodies may require that media representatives not disclose specific information. . .Except in the rarest instances, the governing body at least should allow the general subject of the discussion to be disclosed, and it cannot prevent the discussion of the statutory grounds for justifying the session. . . (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 177).
So a media representative may tell people who weren’t present what the meeting was about and why it counted as an executive session without violating the rules.
Does the Pioneer qualify as a news organization? Yes.
Do the op/ed pieces I write count as news gathering? Most of the time. Much of what I’ve written and posted about are the processes of city government. I’ve tried to educate and inform people as I’ve learned myself. I’ve been a regular contributor to the Pioneer for the past few months.
Do I have opinions about what I learn? Yes, I do. Sometimes what I learn changes my opinion, as it has about the mayor.
By the time I went to those two executive sessions, it was clear something had died in the City’s crisper drawer and it stunk to high heaven.
The articles I wrote for the Pioneer were about the rules and processes in city government, the health bond and my own experience with domestic violence. I did what I try to do with all my articles. I try to explain hard things that I want to understand better.
Ahead of the May 3rd council meeting, I submitted my article to the Pioneer on the performance review materials, which were now public documents on the City’s website. That isn’t a violation of the rules because it was all public information
So the documents were public when I wrote the piece, as was the subject of the executive session on the initial public meeting notice. Councilor Kozlowski’s role in the performance review, which I also touched on, is part of the duties of council president. It’s all public information.
At the May 3, Council Meeting, a public letter I signed as a private citizen not as representative of any news media, called on the mayor to cut her ties with an advisor whose emails bullying and berating two city managers and coaching the mayor to do the same were disclosed from a public records request.
Then on May 11th, the editor at the Pioneer emailed me to revoke my executive session privileges because unnamed individuals called and emailed to complain I violated the executive meeting rules and that, by signing the public letter, I was biased.
Since the May 3rd Council Meeting I’ve received hate mail and threats. I’m dropping the mic. You’ll come to your own conclusions. Like Edward R. Murrow used to say, Good night and good luck.
Kim Rosenberg loretta.kim.rosenberg@gmail.com
Let’s Get Our Facts Straight, Kids.
On May 2 the Tillamook County Pioneer published my article, “Manzanita Musings: Transparency and Compensation” in which I wrote about the Manzanita City Manager’s performance review, which is now public information. On May 11 the Pioneer’s editor abruptly revoked my press credentials and executive meeting hall pass after receiving “a couple of emails and phone calls.” What happened in those nine days? Who wrote those emails and made the phone calls that triggered the editor’s decision? Enquiring minds want to know!
Under Oregon law my connection to the Pioneer has enabled me to observe city council executive sessions. I assume the Pioneer editor read my article before publication. She agreed that I hadn’t revealed anything from the session but accused me of bias for publicly asking Manzanita’s Mayor to resign. It’s true that I, and about two-dozen other citizens signed a public letter that called on the Mayor to cut ties with an advisor whose troubling emails were released by a public records request, but that public letter didn’t suggest that she resign.
Since we moved here full-time I’ve shared writing with the community that I hope either explains something confusing or sheds light on some dark corner that people are avoiding. Writing about things helps me understand them better.
That seemed to please people when I was writing about things like dune grading and outdated land use documents. As long as it was a critique of the previous governing body and how things were or were not done then, everybody was happy. Well, most everybody.
I became a problem to some people when I began asking questions about what was happening right now in city government. In a small town like this, you’d have to have your head in the sand to not recognize there is something funky going on and it doesn’t pass the smell test.
During the election year I spent time meeting and talking with members of council, people running for office, city staff and the city manager so I could know all the players and understand their perspectives on issues.
I’ve been accused by some of switching sides, as if the truth has a side. Well, maybe she does.
Here’s what happened.
Way back on March 14th, the editor at the Pioneer kindly asked me to be a regular contributor, and I gladly accepted. On March 26, I let her know that I had asked the city manager for permission to attend executive sessions and received it.
Before ever attending a closed session, I read the Oregon Department of Justice’s Handbook on Public Meetings thoroughly to make sure I understood the rules.
The preference for public meetings is that they are open to the public so every member of the community has the opportunity to hear and see information presented.
Executive or closed sessions are only allowed in certain situations and are defined as a meeting or any part of a meeting, which is closed to “certain persons for deliberations on certain matters” (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 162).
When an executive session is called, representatives of the news media may attend to make sure that executive sessions are limited to the list of allowable reasons. It’s like a check on power to have media in a closed executive session.
Who represents the media? “. . . a news gatherer who has a formal affiliation with an institutional news medium. . .The news media includes specialty publications, which cover subject areas for a special audience, regardless of whether the publication’s specific area relates to the subject matter of a particular executive session” (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 176).
Internet media counts but the news entity has to have a staff, a formal structure and publish news on a regular basis. Governing bodies like city council can adopt policies about access to executive sessions but they can’t be enforced, if they conflict with the rule that news media can attend. In other words they can’t pick and choose who gets to be present.
What are the rules about disclosure of information discussed at executive sessions?
“Governing bodies may require that media representatives not disclose specific information. . .Except in the rarest instances, the governing body at least should allow the general subject of the discussion to be disclosed, and it cannot prevent the discussion of the statutory grounds for justifying the session. . . (Oregon DOJ Public Meetings Handbook p. 177).
So a media representative may tell people who weren’t present what the meeting was about and why it counted as an executive session without violating the rules.
Does the Pioneer qualify as a news organization? Yes.
Do the op/ed pieces I write count as news gathering? Most of the time. Much of what I’ve written and posted about are the processes of city government. I’ve tried to educate and inform people as I’ve learned myself. I’ve been a regular contributor to the Pioneer for the past few months.
Do I have opinions about what I learn? Yes, I do. Sometimes what I learn changes my opinion, as it has about the mayor.
By the time I went to those two executive sessions, it was clear something had died in the City’s crisper drawer and it stunk to high heaven.
The articles I wrote for the Pioneer were about the rules and processes in city government, the health bond and my own experience with domestic violence. I did what I try to do with all my articles. I try to explain hard things that I want to understand better.
Ahead of the May 3rd council meeting, I submitted my article to the Pioneer on the performance review materials, which were now public documents on the City’s website. That isn’t a violation of the rules because it was all public information
So the documents were public when I wrote the piece, as was the subject of the executive session on the initial public meeting notice. Councilor Kozlowski’s role in the performance review, which I also touched on, is part of the duties of council president. It’s all public information.
At the May 3, Council Meeting, a public letter I signed as a private citizen not as representative of any news media, called on the mayor to cut her ties with an advisor whose emails bullying and berating two city managers and coaching the mayor to do the same were disclosed from a public records request.
Then on May 11th, the editor at the Pioneer emailed me to revoke my executive session privileges because unnamed individuals called and emailed to complain I violated the executive meeting rules and that, by signing the public letter, I was biased.
Since the May 3rd Council Meeting I’ve received hate mail and threats. I’m dropping the mic. You’ll come to your own conclusions. Like Edward R. Murrow used to say, Good night and good luck.
Kim Rosenberg loretta.kim.rosenberg@gmail.com