Unposted meetings attended by Wagoner County commissioners appear to have violated the state’s open meeting laws, one expert said. At least one commissioner disagrees.

The meetings, which took place in February and March in Coweta, were organized to address the city of Coweta’s plans to scale back fire protection in areas outside its city limits.

Commissioners James Hanning, District 1, and Tim Kelley, District 3, reportedly participated in two unposted meetings, and District 2 Commissioner Chris Edwards joined Hanning and Kelley during the third. An agenda was posted before a fourth meeting in April, when all three commissioners appeared.

In a letter sent this week to the commissioners, William Swaim states the commissioners “appeared and discussed county business” at these meetings “regarding a proposal for a county ad valorem tax for the funding of a county rural fire district.

Swaim, the executive editor for Oklahoma Neighbor Newspapers, states the Open Meeting Act requires advance notice and the posting of an agenda anytime two or more commissioners discuss public business.

Hanning, chairman of the Wagoner County Board of Commissioners, disputes Swaim’s allegations, saying the meetings were organized by residents who might be affected by the city of Coweta’s decision to scale back its fire protection district. He said topics discussed during those meetings are not county issues, and no decisions were being made.

“I am also a citizen, and this does affect me,” Hanning said about the city of Coweta’s fire protection plans. “We (the commissioners) were there, if anything, for moral support — my concern is that the people have the power and knowledge they need to make an informed decision.”

Hanning said Assistant District Attorney John David Luton assured him the commissioners’ attendance at the three unposted meetings would not violate open meeting laws. A telephone call to Luton’s office was not returned Wednesday. Commissioners Kelley and Edwards also failed to return calls.

Joey Senat, an associate professor at Oklahoma State University’s School of Media and Strategic Communications, disagrees with Hanning’s assessment.

“If true, these would be outrageous violations of the Open Meeting Act. Absolutely criminal violations if they occurred as described,” Senat said about Swaim’s allegations. “If the allegations are accurate, then those commissioners stole from Wagoner County residents their right to understand and participate in their county government.”

Senat said it is clear the Open Meeting Act requires advance public notice and posted agendas anytime “a majority of a public body discusses the public’s business” regardless of who calls the meeting.

“These meetings ... warrant the fullest investigation and prosecution by the district attorney,” said Senat, who also serves as a board member for FOI Oklahoma, a public interest group that advocates for open government.

Swaim, in his letter, said the lack of public notice and a posted agenda prior to the three meetings in February and March “did not keep Wagoner County residents properly informed of the discussion of an ad valorem tax to fund a fire district in the county.”

“At least one county commissioner at each of these meetings actively took part in the discussion,” Swaim said. “Commissioners have circumvented the process while we believe attempting to garner support for an ad valorem tax proposal.”

Hanning, while acknowledging commissioners would have to vote to approve an election, said commissioners alone have no authority to pass an ad valorem tax. That issue, Hanning said, can be decided only by the affected residents at an election.

An election, Hanning said, would be set only if 25 percent of the residents within a proposed rural fire district signed a petition asking for one.

Reach D.E. Smoot at (918) 684-2901 or dsmoot@muskogeephoenix.com.