The Norwalk City Commission voted Oct. 8 to go into executive session during a virtual meeting after two members of the public raised concerns that the posted agenda did not clearly state the meeting’s purpose.

Attorney Diane Callahan, speaking during the meeting’s public-comment period, said the agenda’s description — which she said listed only “processes for procurement” — was insufficient for an executive session. "The agenda that was posted is not a legal posting," Callahan said, adding that an agenda for executive session must be "clear and concise" so the public knows what will be discussed.

Callahan said a subsequent email from a commissioner clarified the item was meant to cover "a personnel matter, regarding the compensation of a consultant," which she said would fall within executive-session exemptions, but that the addendum had not been posted. "I respectfully suggested and requested that you postpone this meeting to a future date, after having legally, posted this meeting," she told the commission.

Resident Lynelle Jones, who also spoke during public comment, said the rules are intended to protect individuals who might not want their matters publicly discussed and urged adherence to open-meeting requirements. "The rules are very clear," Jones said.

Darren, the commission’s attorney on the call, responded to the concerns and recommended the meeting proceed. He told commissioners the meeting was "properly noticed" and said the legal basis for the executive session was attorney-client privilege for privileged communications tied to a September 12 communication about the procurement process. "There was sufficient specificity in the agenda item listed under executive session," Darren said.

After the attorney’s recommendation, a motion was made and seconded to enter executive session; commissioners voted in favor and left the public Zoom to rejoin on a secured executive-session link. Later the commission reconvened electronically, voted to adjourn the executive session, and then voted to adjourn the special meeting.

The meeting record in the transcript does not include a roll-call vote tally by name for the motions to enter or adjourn executive session; the motions were put to voice vote and approved. Public commenters urged the commission to ensure future postings provide the level of specificity required by law so the public can determine whether an item properly belongs in executive session.

No formal public decision about procurement or consultant compensation was recorded in the public portion of the meeting; the transcript shows the commission moved into and later out of executive session and then adjourned.