Brent Gardner-Smith (Aspen Daily News) - Pitkin County commissioners appear to have violated both county policy and state law this week when they convened a closed-door executive session.

Both the county’s formally adopted “Governance Policies” and the Colorado Open Meetings Law require elected officials to identify the matters to be discussed in an executive session in “as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the executive session is authorized.”

On Tuesday the commissioners made and passed a motion to go into executive session that included only a list of nine topics and included no further details or discussion about the topics.

“The commission’s announcement of the particular matters to be discussed at the July 28 meeting does not conform to the statutory requirement of identifying ‘the particular matter to be discussed in as much detail as possible,’” wrote Christopher Beall, an expert in the state’s Open Meetings Law and an attorney in the Denver office of Levine, Sullivan, Koch and Schultz LLP. “The commission instead has simply provided a laundry list of what appears to be the entire collection of legal matters on the county attorney’s docket this week, without identifying the ‘particular matter, ‘i.e., the specific issue, that has arisen relating to those docket items that the commission wishes to discuss.”

At the request of the Aspen Daily News, Beall reviewed a transcript of the commissioners’ motion, which was recorded and transcribed by a reporter.

Luis Toro, senior counsel at Colorado Ethics Watch, also reviewed the transcript and concluded the motion fell short.

“They should have done a better job,” Toro said. “Instead of doing this laundry list, they should have gotten more specific about why they were talking with their attorney.”

Colorado Ethics Watch is a nonprofit watchdog group in Denver that holds public officials and organizations accountable.

Pitkin County attorney John Ely said he felt the motion was adequate.

“I believe we complied with the language and the intent of the statute and gave as much detail as practicable and possible in the context of the motion,” Ely said.

Commissioner Michael Owsley, who seconded the motion to go into executive session, said, as far he knew, the motion was OK.

“I think it is fine, but I’m relying on the advice of our attorney,” Owsley said. “I have no problem with informing the public as much as possible. But it does really boil it down to legal interpretations.”

Here is the entirety of the discussion and the motion prior to the executive session:

Commissioner Patti Kay-Clapper: “OK, we ready? I need a motion to open the special meeting and go into executive session for the purposes of Christiansen tax lien offer, RFTA/Larsh lease, Comcast cable franchise, CWBC (sic) Trust Agreement and river district discussion, Starwood notice of claim, Board of Equalization, code enforcement, is this New World contract claim, is that what this is?”

Pitkin County attorney John Ely: “Yes.”

Kay-Clapper: “Items pursuant to C.R.S. 24-4-402 4b.”

Commissioner Jack Hatfield: “I’ll make that motion.”

Commissioner Michael Owsley: “Second.”

Kay-Clapper: “I have a motion and I have a second, all in favor please signify by saying ‘aye’.”

Commissioners Hatfield, Owsley and George Newman: “Aye.”

Kay-Clapper: “We are in exec.”

At that point this reporter — the only member of the public present — left the room and the commissioners met behind closed doors, with several staff members present, for approximately 90 minutes.

To read the rest of the story, click here.