While KCC keeps its counsel over the future of its managing director Katherine Kerswell amid the on-going swirl of rumours and speculation, some questions arise about the recent behind-closed-doors meeting where the issue was discussed.
KCC held what was described as an 'urgent' meeting of its personnel committee last week. It gave no advance notice of the meeting and produced no advance agenda and has yet to produce any minutes or reports from it. It has, however, recently posted a link to the meeting on its website (after the event) - which you can see here
So, was it consistent with the Access to Information regulations that set out the obligations of councils when it comes to holding and giving notice of any committee meeting, regardless of whether the business of that meeting is discussed in open or closed session?
The legislation states that principal local authorities must give five working days notice of any meeting it plans to hold and must additionally provide agendas, reports and background papers.
Even if part of the business to be discussed in private, the agenda of any meeting has to set out in advance what confidential or exempt items are to be discussed.
That certainly doesn't appear to have been the case here. And the legislation provides no cover to councils on the grounds of the urgency of the meeting - items of business can be added to an agenda as 'urgent' but there is nothing about 'urgent' meetings being able to sidestep the legal requirements.
Some of these points were raised last week at the meeting by the opposition Liberal Democrat member Cllr Tim Prater who questioned (during the public part of the meeting) whether KCC was being compliant with its legal obligations.
Like me, he wonders whether the council has fallen short of the Access to Information regulations.
So, could KCC have been able to hold its meeting under its own constitutional rules? Even there, it would appear there are questions as its own procedural rules for council meetings are broadly the same as the Access to Information Act.
The constitution says all meetings will be advertised five working days before they take place although shorter notice will be permitted 'in exceptional circumstances' - such as a meeting to consider a revised budget.
The constitution also talks about the copies of agendas and reports being available five days before. So, nothing at all so far as I can see about 'urgent' meetings.
Back to the Access to Information Act and a further requirement which relates to the publication of information after a committee meeting. Under this, councils are required to publish the agenda, minutes and any reports.
Even where items are exempt or confidential, there is an obligation to produce some summary of the item without disclosing the exempt details. To date, KCC has not done so - although it appears there are no time limits on this.
The irony is that as managing director, Katherine Kerswell initiated the authority's own transparency crusade under which the citizens' rights to information were supposedly to be enhanced.
RSS feeds