The primary focus of the meeting was the complaint regarding the executive sessions, which were conducted under the assumption that they complied with regulations. The advisory from the city solicitor recommended that future interviews must be public unless they are part of a pre-screening process. Board members expressed confusion about the distinction between pre-screening and public interviews, particularly concerning the confidentiality of applicants’ personal information. It was noted that during pre-screening, which involves assessing resumes and qualifications, privacy could be maintained. However, any official interviews must occur publicly.

The Board deliberated on how to balance transparency with the need for confidentiality during hiring processes. It was suggested that a thorough pre-screening process, possibly including phone interviews, could address initial privacy concerns before public interviews. The members agreed to work further with the city solicitor and human resources to clarify the appropriate process.

The Board unanimously voted to adopt the city solicitor’s advisory as their official response to the complaint. They also agreed to transmit the advisory, along with the complaint and a copy of the meeting minutes, to the attorney general’s office. The minutes from the November meetings will be released with necessary redactions as allowed by law once finalized.