Editor’s Note: Emails quoted in this report have not been edited for grammar, spelling or punctuation.

Carroll County Judge Ronda Griffin vetoed an ordinance approved by the county’s quorum court that would have rescinded the position of major in the sheriff’s office.

That position is held by chief deputy Jerry Williams.

Griffin vetoed the ordinance Tuesday, the day after the quorum court approved it following an executive session during its August regular meeting.

The quorum court, which has no authority to fire sheriff’s office personnel, held the executive session despite protests from media members who cited the provisions for executive session outlined in the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act.

District 1 Justice of the Peace Jack Deaton, who earlier made a successful motion to add the ordinance to the agenda, requested that the quorum court go into executive session to discuss the proposal along with deputy prosecuting attorney Steve Simmons. A reporter pointed out that executive sessions are permissible only for certain purposes and that the law requires the specific purpose of the executive session to be announced before the executive session begins.

“(A)n executive session will be permitted only for the purpose of considering employment, appointment, promotion, demotion, disciplining, or resignation of any public officer or employee,” the FOIA says, with exceptions for state boards and commissions meeting for purposes of preparing examination materials and answers to examination materials that are administered to applicants for licensure from state agencies and for public agencies discussing matters pertaining to the security of municipally owned water or utility systems.

“And it is one of those,” Simmons said. “… You know, it’s not. It’s not. But it will result in a firing.”

The quorum court then approved the motion to adjourn to executive session on a voice vote, with District 3 JP Harrie Farrow expressing concerns about the action.

“Is there something on the books we can look at to see exactly what it says?” Farrow asked. “I don’t want to do this if we’re not supposed to do it.”

“Exactly what what says?” Simmons responded.

“About what is required to go into an executive session,” Farrow answered.

“You have to be discussing either personnel or positions to go into an executive session,” Simmons said. “And that’s what this ordinance does.”

“So he’s saying it has to be more specific,” Farrow said, referring to a reporter who objected to the executive session, “and you’re saying that’s not correct?”

“He went to law school,” District 7 JP Kellie Matt said, referring to Simmons.

“You can go into executive session on personnel issues — hiring, firing, demoting, promoting — and that’s what you’re doing,” Simmons said. “You’re kind of going the long way around the barn to do it, but that’s what you’re doing.”

“It’s a demotion issue,” said District 10 JP Larry Swofford.

“It is a demotion issue,” Simmons said. “And quite possibly a firing issue.”

In response to a question, Simmons advised JPs that there was no need to read the ordinance before going into executive session.

“You’re going to discuss the ordinance in executive session, and it doesn’t need to be made public if you’re not going to do anything,” Simmons said.

JPs then adjourned into executive session, along with Simmons.

The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act Handbook, produced by the Arkansas Press Association and co-sponsored by the state attorney general’s office and others, says there are restrictions on who may attend an executive session.

“Only the top administrator in an agency, the employee’s immediate supervisor, the employee in question, and any person being interviewed for the top administrative position in the agency involved,” may attend an executive session, the handbook says. “Neither the agency’s attorney nor the employee’s attorney may attend an executive session.”

When JPs returned to the table, Deaton read the ordinance declaring that the quorum court was rescinding the position of major in the sheriff’s office, and the nine JPs in attendance approved the measure on a unanimous rollcall vote. District 9 JP Roger Hall and District 11 JP John Howerton were absent.

On Tuesday,Aug. 16, Carroll County Newspapers obtained a copy of an email exchange between Griffin and Mark Whitmore, an attorney for the Arkansas Association of Counties, after filing a FOIArequest for the information.

“When I talked to you a few weeks ago, we discussed ‘removing the position’ of the Major at the Sheriff’s Department,” Griffin wrote in the first email in the string, time-stamped 11:49 a.m. on Aug. 15. “Well, apparently, my County Clerk and JPs have decided that this is what they want to do. I have been asked to check with you to see if you could /would write an Ordinance or a template to remove his position. The clerk also asked if this needs to be read 3 times. Oh…. And TONIGHT is Quorum Court.”

“they could go into executive session as a personnel matter under the FOIA,25-19-106,” Whitmore replied. “Also, it’s really an amendment of the budget appropriation ordinance.”

“They don’t want to call it a ‘personnel’ issue….. But, due to the fact that ‘removing’ the position (that is currently held by the Major) will ALTER his employment and finances, isn’t this REALLY personnel?” Griffin responded. “I don’t like they grey area they are choosing to navigate.”

“Keep in mind the county official decides which person fills which position, hires and fires, the QC does not,” Whitmore said in email time-stamped 3:29 p.m. “14-14-1101 and 1102. It’s definitely a budget issue primarily. But if the reason to abolish it is a personnel issue might want to invoke the executive session. Keep in mind Executive session is to protect an employee and not injure them in public.”

Whitmore emailed again, time-stamped at 4:27 p.m.

“I would very strongly encourage the matter be conducted in executive session due to the protection of the employee,” Whitmore’s email says.

John Tull, the Little Rock-based attorney for the Arkansas Press Association and a member of the state’s Freedom of Information Task Force, said he believed the executive session was improper and a violation of the FOIA based on a reporter’s description.

Griffin vetoed the ordinance on Tuesday, Aug. 16. She said she had concerns about the manner in which it was handled by the quorum court.

“My thought (was) that maybe procedure was not followed properly on it,” Griffin said. “With (prosecuting attorney) Tony Rogers not there, and Mr. Simmons was not aware of it. It made me really uncomfortable. I didn’t feel like procedure had been followed.And when I went to talk to Tony the next morning, he agreed. Under advice of legal counsel, I was best to veto it. I felt like it just really got out of hand and I was not comfortable with the situation. I wrestled with it all night and I knew Tuesday morning I wanted to veto it. And when I talked to Tony and Steven, they were in full agreement with me and I proceeded to veto it.”

Deaton said he would seek more advice on the issue before deciding whether to bring the ordinance back to the quorum court and try to override Griffin’s veto, which would require a three-fifths majority.

“ I’m just going to seek some more advice, I guess,” Deaton said. “It’s a touchy situation. It’s something we need to do, I think. There’s just a lot of stuff going on and they thought that we might have done it wrong. We were doing it by the book, I thought. Anyway, I’ve got three weeks to think about it. We’ll study it a little bit longer. I always try to do the right thing. Sometimes you get bad advice, or good advice, and you’ve kind of got to go through it. What it is, it is. We’re going to kind of leave it, and we may or may not bring it back. I don’t know.”

Williams declined to comment. Sheriff Jim Ross did not respond to a text message. Rogers also declined to comment for the record.

The quorum court’s next regular meeting is scheduled for 5 p.m. Monday, Sept. 19, at Southern Heights Baptist Church in Berryville.