I'd have to agree with Ragsdale. Let the sunshine in. Why would they have a problem with letting the public view the debate over term-limits and such? What do they have to hide?

"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"

I think Mark Harmon has it about right. If the Commission needs advice on the legal effect on the County of actions the Commission might take, an executive session might be appropriate to maintain attorney-client confidentiality.

For instance, if the Commission were thinking of authorizing a lawsuit or taking action that might cause someone to sue the County, there might be questions they would need answered by the County's attorney in a setting where the adversarial party could not be sitting in the audience listening to the answer.

IMO, however, the Law Department should not be advising the individual commissioners regarding the legalities of anything affecting the commissioners as individuals.

This is true regardless of whether such advice would be in public or in private, to the whole assembled Commission, or to individuals privately, about the charter, or term limits or anything else.

The Law Department should not represent the commissioners individually. Commissioners should hire their own attorneys if they seek advice about their individual legal matters. In fact, they pretty much all have hired their own attorneys regarding term limits already.

If the charter is constitutional, then the eight term limited leave office. Will they automatically be replaced by the people who ran against them in the last election and lost?

If the charter is ruled unconstitutional, then what happens? Who's left in charge? Does the Supreme Court have any say in this since there will be no one left in office?

Be a blessing to someone today.