JoCo Commission holds closed-door meeting to discuss 'security'

Johnson County officials are giving few details following a special closed-door meeting of the county commission on Monday afternoon to discuss “matters related to the security of county operations.”

But in an open session beforehand Monday, tensions flared briefly as some commissioners argued over whether the information that was to be discussed, in fact, should be shared publicly.

Driving the news: On Monday afternoon, the Johnson County Board of County Commissioners held a special meeting at its Olathe chambers to convene a closed-door executive session in order to, as the commission’s agenda stated, discuss “matters relating to security of county operations and to preserve the security of county operations.”

Executive sessions are considered privileged by state law under certain circumstances, but any votes or decisions taken by the governing body during a closed-door session must be made public.
After commissioners reconvened Monday following their executive session, little was said and no vote or decision was discussed publicly.
On Tuesday, a county spokesperson said the county would not be issuing a statement following Monday’s closed-door meeting, since no final action or vote was taken during the executive session.

JoCo Commission discussion before

Johnson County Commission closed meeting — Commissioners at Monday’s meeting, before the board went into executive session. Photo by Lucie Krisman.

Before the board went into executive session on Monday, commissioners and county staff discussed concerns about the nature of the meeting, a public notice of which was sent Monday just hours before commissioners convened.

Commissioner Charlotte O’Hara, who is running for county chair in the Nov. 8 election, said she had concerns about the Johnson County Sheriff and District Attorney not being present for the meeting — in addition to suggesting some of the information that would be discussed in executive session should be public.
“I am very concerned that the sheriff and the district attorney are not going to be present,” O’Hara said. “We have some issues, and I had requested that they be present for our questions.”

Response to concerns: The county’s chief legal counsel Peg Trent responded to O’Hara’s concerns during the public portion of the meeting before the commissioners went into executive session.

“All of this is protected under the state statute,” Trent said, referring to the material set to be discussed in executive session. “The inference is being made that we’re discussing something that should be public, and I would caution (O’Hara) that it’s not. It’s all executive material.”

More back and forth: Commissioner Becky Fast also disputed O’Hara’s comment about some of the discussion involving “contractual public information”.

“None of us know what is going to be discussed, so for you to infer that it’s public, you don’t know,” Fast said. “None of us do. You’re putting something out there that you don’t know.”