MONROE - The City of Monroe violated Wisconsin's Open Meetings Law when a 2013 meeting concluded with the termination of a department head, a judge found on Monday.
Former utilities director Alan Eckstein filed a complaint in October 2013 against members of Monroe's Salary and Personnel Committee, which had moved to fire Eckstein during a closed portion of a public meeting on Sept. 10, 2013.
Eckstein's complaint alleged the committee had violated the Open Meetings Law because his termination exceeded the scope of the meeting's agenda, which stated only that the committee would discuss "preliminary consideration of employee issues addressed by the utilities director."
Dane County Circuit Judge Rhonda Lanford wrote in her decision that "the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the language of the notice is that the SPC was going to discuss preliminary matters regarding Eckstein's employment, and not take final action."
The purpose of the meeting, Eckstein alleged, was to address his repeated complaints of harassment regarding circulating rumors of an "inappropriate relationship" between himself and another city employee. After Eckstein presented his case, the committee asked him to leave before they moved to terminate his employment.
Attendees of the meeting included aldermen Brooke Bauman, Louis Armstrong and Chris Beer, former alderman Charles Schuringa, council member Reid Stangel, city attorney Rex Ewald and assistant city administrator Martin Shanks.
Lanford wrote that former Council President Michael Boyce and City Administrator Philip Rath testified that they were unaware that the committee would discuss Eckstein's possible termination.
Lanford also dismissed the committee's argument that, since the committee acted outside of its authority to fire Eckstein, it could not have violated the Open Meetings Law.
"Given the public policy behind the Open Meetings Law, allowing the defendants a "pass' because they allege in hindsight that they were acting outside their authority undermines the whole public policy behind the law," Lanford wrote.
Other arguments that Eckstein waived any claim against the city over the incident and that the offense had been rectified by a later meeting that did not violate the Open Meetings Law were also dismissed.
A jury trial that begins Nov. 18 Wednesday will determine the legal remedy for the violation, which may include fines of $25 to $300 or voiding the action taken during the meeting.
Former utilities director Alan Eckstein filed a complaint in October 2013 against members of Monroe's Salary and Personnel Committee, which had moved to fire Eckstein during a closed portion of a public meeting on Sept. 10, 2013.
Eckstein's complaint alleged the committee had violated the Open Meetings Law because his termination exceeded the scope of the meeting's agenda, which stated only that the committee would discuss "preliminary consideration of employee issues addressed by the utilities director."
Dane County Circuit Judge Rhonda Lanford wrote in her decision that "the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the language of the notice is that the SPC was going to discuss preliminary matters regarding Eckstein's employment, and not take final action."
The purpose of the meeting, Eckstein alleged, was to address his repeated complaints of harassment regarding circulating rumors of an "inappropriate relationship" between himself and another city employee. After Eckstein presented his case, the committee asked him to leave before they moved to terminate his employment.
Attendees of the meeting included aldermen Brooke Bauman, Louis Armstrong and Chris Beer, former alderman Charles Schuringa, council member Reid Stangel, city attorney Rex Ewald and assistant city administrator Martin Shanks.
Lanford wrote that former Council President Michael Boyce and City Administrator Philip Rath testified that they were unaware that the committee would discuss Eckstein's possible termination.
Lanford also dismissed the committee's argument that, since the committee acted outside of its authority to fire Eckstein, it could not have violated the Open Meetings Law.
"Given the public policy behind the Open Meetings Law, allowing the defendants a "pass' because they allege in hindsight that they were acting outside their authority undermines the whole public policy behind the law," Lanford wrote.
Other arguments that Eckstein waived any claim against the city over the incident and that the offense had been rectified by a later meeting that did not violate the Open Meetings Law were also dismissed.
A jury trial that begins Nov. 18 Wednesday will determine the legal remedy for the violation, which may include fines of $25 to $300 or voiding the action taken during the meeting.