So much writing on the wall can you read it all, can you see through the haze when the writings small,

    This is one of those “did they or didn’t they” stories.  Perhaps, however, it deserves some award for creativity in terms of the sunshine law.

    The city council meets in closed session.  The original minutes for that meeting say no vote was taken in the closed meeting.  Not long afterward, it becomes clear the mayor has offered the job of city administrator to a successful candidate who then accepts the offer and a start date is set.  After a subsequent request is received, at least a month later, for the minutes of the meeting where the council voted to offer the job, NEW minutes are produced that now show a vote was taken at the closed meeting in question to offer the job to the candidate.

    Huh?  The city attorney says the vote to hire the new administrator didn’t become “final” until the job offer was accepted, and that’s why the vote wasn’t announced at the time the original request for the minutes was made.

    I think this is a very confused city attorney.  The section which is applicable here, Section 610.021 (3) is clear that when a vote is taken on a final decision by the BODY to hire someone, that vote must be made public no later than 72 hours after the meeting.  Hiring can only be a decision to make an offer to someone.  Once the offer was made and accepted, the board did not vote again to accept the acceptance.  That would not make sense at all.  Any lawyer learns in the first year of law school that the process is offer and acceptance.  The offer is made and then it is accepted.  One doesn’t make an offer, have it accepted, and then go back and accept the acceptance.  (At least, I cannot imagine that is the answer you would want to produce when you were taking the Missouri Bar exam!) 

    Perhaps this city attorney is thinking about exception 1, where the settlement of litigation need not be made public until “final disposition” of the matter.  But that’s an entirely different exception, and doesn’t have any applicability  in connection with the hiring process.

    It hever hurts for the city attorney to actually READ the law before he or she advises a client what the law says!  It might cause them to get the answer correct!