Por­terdale to pur­sue Sun­day pack­age sales

At­tor­ney: June 28 meet­ing did not break law

The Covington News - - Local News - Gabriel Khouli gkhouli@cov­news.com

Por­terdale is mov­ing closer to a pub­lic vote on Sun­day pack­age sales.

The Por­terdale City Coun­cil unan­i­mously ap­proved the first read­ing of an or­di­nance Mon­day that would al­low Sun­day al­co­hol pack­age sales from 12: 30 p. m. to 11: 30 p. m. if the pub­lic ap­proves a ref­er­en­dum this fall. The coun­cil is ex­pected to ap­prove a ref­er­en­dum at a later date.

In other city news, Por­terdale At­tor­ney Tim Cham­ber said the city coun­cil did not break the law when it went into ex­ec­u­tive session at its June 28 called meet­ing.

The ex­ec­u­tive session was held to dis- cuss what to do with ap­pli­ca­tions for the open po­si­tions of judge and so­lic­i­tor. Coun­cil­man Robert Fox­worth re­fused to par­tic­i­pate be­cause he said an ex­ec­u­tive session no­tice was not on the called meet­ing agenda. Based on his un­der­stand­ing of the law, Fox­worth said the coun­cil could not dis­cuss any­thing not listed on the called meet­ing agenda.

Cham­bers said in his of­fi­cial take that no laws were vi­o­lated.

“ It does not ap­pear that con­duct­ing a closed ex­ec­u­tive session with­out hav­ing placed an ex­ec­u­tive session as an agenda item for the meet­ing was done with the in­ten­tion or pur­pose of de­ceiv­ing the pub­lic, or was done in such man­ner as to im­pede the re­me­dial and pro- tec­tive pur­poses of the Open and Pub­lic Meet­ings Act,” Cham­bers said at Mon­day’s meet­ing.

He said the dis­cus­sion in ex­ec­u­tive session was al­lowed to be closed to the pub­lic, and noted that sub­se­quent votes took place when open session re­sumed.

“ Af­ter re­view of the above authorities, I can­not con­clude that the clo­sure of the meet­ing was un­law­ful, or that ac­tions taken af­ter the open, pub­lic meet­ing re­sumed are in­valid, as a mat­ter of law,” Cham­bers said.

Orig­i­nally, Cham­bers told The News that his find­ings were sub­ject to at­tor­n­ey­client priv­i­lege, but Coun­cilmem­ber Ar­line Chap­man made a mo­tion to al­low his find­ings to be read in the meet­ing. Fox­worth was the lone mem­ber to vote against the mo­tion. Chap­man also read a state­ment at the end of the meet­ing.

“ Por­terdale has taken some real hits lately, and I like to think that we will just pick our­selves up and move on to bet­ter things. We will,” Chap­man said. “ For now we seem to have in­flu­ences among us that in wit­ness­ing their own dis­ap­point­ments, would at­tempt to bring the whole house down with them.”

The coun­cil also ap­proved the first read­ing of an or­di­nance to in­crease its prop­erty tax rate by 2 mills, with Coun­cil­woman Linda Fin­ger vot­ing against.

The city also ap­proved tak­ing out a tax an­tic­i­pa­tion note to cover its op­er­at­ing ex­penses un­til prop­erty tax rev­enues came in, with Fin­ger again the lone op­posed vote.

Fi­nally, the coun­cil ac­cepted $ 16,375 in pri­vate do­na­tions, which en­tirely pays for the Fourth of July cel­e­bra­tion. No pub­lic money was used.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.