In most cases, when a quorum of public officials meets to discuss business, that meeting must be open to the public. There are certain exceptions \u2013 security or personnel matters, for example \u2013 where the officials can meet privately under an executive session. Those executive sessions, according to Colorado law, must be announced in advance and the topic of discussion described as specifically as possible without compromising sensitive information.<\/p>\n
On Monday afternoon, the county commission finished all business items listed on its agenda, and the commissioners declared the meeting adjourned. Meanwhile, Furse entered the room, wanting to speak with the commissioners alone. County Clerk and Recorder Carol Tullis, and two private citizens, were asked to leave. David Grant Long, one of the citizens and a reporter with the Four Corners Free Press, asked if an executive session was being called. No, Furse answered. It was merely an informal, non-business related discussion, he said. Finding themselves suddenly unwelcome, the trio complied and filed out, and the private meeting commenced.<\/p>\n
When reached for comment Tuesday, Furse would not say what the discussion was about or why it was necessary to clear the room.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt was just four guys talking,\u201d he said, suggesting the chat could have been about basketball or some other innocuous topic.<\/p>\n
Asked why non-business matters would be discussed behind closed doors, in the commissioner\u2019s room, Furse said it was simply an opportune time to get all three commissioners together at once.<\/p>\n
Furse underscored, twice, that the private meeting was unrelated to County Administrator Ashton Harrison\u2019s resignation, and called the timing coincidental. Harrison stepped down on Tuesday morning, effective immediately.<\/p>\n
The commissioners, likewise, were mum about the details. Keenan Ertel called the conversation in question a \u201cprivate thing.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThere were no actions taken. No county business,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Commissioners Steve Chappell and Larry Don Suckla did not return phone calls requesting comment.<\/p>\n
The Cortez Journal contacted Tullis on Tuesday to request an audio recording of the commissioner meeting. She said this wasn\u2019t possible because only public hearings \u2013 where citizens are invited to weigh in on a particular topic \u2013 are recorded. Other commission happenings are notated by Tullis in a typed summary, or \u201cminutes,\u201d published afterward. Tullis could not speak to the content of the private discussion between Furse and the commissioners, as she also was asked to leave.<\/p>\n
\u201cYour guess is as good as mine,\u201d she said. \u201cI have no idea. It took us all by surprise.\u201d<\/p>\n
Along with Tullis and Long, the third person booted from the room was Bud Garner, an erstwhile commissioner candidate who resolutely attends nearly all weekly meetings. He, too, was in the dark.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo clue,\u201d he said. \u201cIt struck me as a little odd.\u201d<\/p>\n
Steve Zansberg, attorney for the Cortez Journal and the Colorado Press Association, said open meetings laws were not violated as long as the conversation dealt with non-business topics. He gave a few hypothetical examples, like planning a surprise birthday party or talking about a death in someone\u2019s family. Under a 2004 Colorado Supreme Court ruling, they could even have discussed business matters connected to the District Attorney\u2019s office that the commissioners have no jurisdiction over, and still be within the bounds of the law, though this is a grayer area.<\/p>\n
Even so, Zansberg said it was unusual for Furse or the commissioners not to summarize the meeting\u2019s purpose, even in vague terms, to dispel suspicion.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo just hear \u2018take our word for it\u2019 is a little disconcerting,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Michael Goldman, one of two Durango attorneys the county is retaining in lieu of a permanent county attorney, had already left before the private meeting started, and could not speak to the substance of the conversation. He did, however, offer to take measures to clarify the situation and avoid any perception of undue secrecy.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ll do what we can to make sure even the appearance of doing business behind closed doors is avoided. I think everyone wants that. Nobody wants to give the wrong impression,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Goldman is a founding member of the Durango firm Goldman, Robbins and Nicholson. He and Jeff Robbins are splitting the task of providing legal counsel to the county until a permanent replacement is found for Bob Slough. In January the commission voted 2-1, with Suckla dissenting, not to renew Slough\u2019s contract. He had represented Montezuma County for 25 years.<\/p>\n