A Marinette alderperson recently received payment for legal fees related to a Open Meetings lawsuit he filed against the city — but was blamed July 1 by the city’s mayor for an increase in the city’s insurance rates.
The story was detailed in the July 9 issue of the EagleHerald of Marinette. According to the story:
At the last Marinette Common Council meeting on July 1, Mayor Steve Genisot brought up the lawsuit and insurance rates, as he said the council had requested an update.
Ward 3 Alderperson Doug Oitzinger’s lawsuit began on Nov. 17, 2021, alleging the city disregarded the state’s Open Meetings Law during two closed sessions in 2020. The meetings took place on Oct. 6 and 7, 2020, and centered around PFAS discussions.
On Oct. 6, 2020, the city council met behind closed doors to discuss a donation agreement with Tyco Fire Products. As part of the proposed agreement, Tyco would pay for equipment to make the disposal of the city’s wastewater treatment plants’ byproducts cheaper. The donation agreement with Tyco was presented during a closed session.
Oitzinger asked during closed session for cost comparisons and that Tyco contribute more. Another alderperson voiced concerns over the agreement. Kent advised the council that negotiations had finished.
Once the council convened in open session, they voted 8-1 in favor of the agreement, with Oitzinger opposed.
On Oct. 7, 2020, during a closed-session meeting, city alderpersons and administrators discussed providing the Town of Peshtigo with municipal water in the future, based on the recommendation of an engineering firm. The city hired Ruekert & Mielke, Inc., to review those recommendations.
A memo from Ruekert & Mielke was shared with the mayor, who decided to share it with the Common Council in a closed session. During the session, Ruekert & Mielke and Kent presented their analyses, and the council asked questions but ultimately voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting without taking action.
Oitzinger first filed a complaint with the Marinette County District Attorney, who declined to prosecute. He then filed suit against the city and Common Council. On Dec. 11, 2023, a circuit court ruled that one of two closed sessions violated the law.
Oitzinger appealed that decision and the city cross-appealed. On Feb. 18 of this year, an appellate court ruled that both of the city’s closed sessions violated the law and ordered the city to pay all of Oitzinger’s legal fees.
Genisot said at the last Common Council meeting that the city’s insurance rates have skyrocketed as a result of the lengthy lawsuit.
“Our rates have changed,”Genisot said, adding that premiums and deductibles have increased. “Our premiums went up due to claims.” Oitzinger was represented by the Wisconsin Transparency Project, a law firm dedicated exclusively to enforcing the state’s open records and open meetings laws.
Additionally, a non-party amicus brief was submitted by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, Wisconsin Broadcasters Association and the Society for Professional Journalists.
“When deliberations occur in public view, it puts pressure on officials to act ethically, justify their positions, and be accountable to those they serve,” their amicus brief said in part.
Since bringing the lawsuit, Oitzinger said there have been fewer closed sessions, and when one is on the agenda he almost always votes against it. The decision about whether or not to go into closed session is the council’s decision.
“It can’t just be, ‘I want to do it, because the topic is sensitive or embarrassing,’” he said. “… Those are not legal reasons.”
Oitzinger said a “firm discussion” has to occur before going into closed session.
