Opinion ID: 1186902
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: deliberations in executive session

Text: In Kenai the court enjoined the City from any deliberations toward appointment of a city manager unless those deliberations are held in compliance with the public meetings law, AS 44.62.310-.312. [28] The court held that such deliberations are not within any of the exemptions of AS 44.62.310(c) relating to subjects which may be discussed in executive session. The City of Kenai appeals from this ruling, contending that § .310(c)(2) which permits the discussion in executive session of subjects that tend to prejudice the reputation and character of any person is applicable. The appellee does not contend that the City Council may never go into executive session when discussing city manager applicants. It argues that generally such discussions do not have a tendency to damage the reputation of the applicants, and that the City erred in routinely convening executive sessions. Appellee's reading of the statute is not without a degree of merit. Ordinarily an applicant's reputation will not be damaged by a public discussion of his or her qualifications relating to experience, education and background or by a comparison of them with those of other candidates. However, a discussion of personal characteristics and habits may well carry a risk that the applicant's reputation will be compromised. Such a risk is especially acute where the qualities of several applicants are being compared. We believe therefore that the City Council was authorized by § .310(c)(2) to meet in executive session while discussing the personal characteristics of the applicants. [29] To the extent that the order of the court prohibits this, it must be reversed. [30] Accordingly, in Anchorage, the order of the superior court is AFFIRMED; in Kenai, the order of the superior court is AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part. CONNOR, J., dissents in part. BURKE and COMPTON, JJ., not participating.