SALEM, Ore. – Questions have been raised concerning potential public meeting violations relating to the events leading up to the resignation of former Salem City Manager Keith Stahley. Those concerns are based on an inaccurate understanding of those events. As City Attorney I was asked for guidance from members of Council concerning this matter. Based on my knowledge of this matter and 18 years advising the City concerning Oregon public records law, I am confident that no public meetings laws were violated and all members of City Council acted consistent with advice from the City Attorney concerning Oregon public meeting laws.
- Mayor Julie Hoy had individual communications with different members of City Council concerning Keith Stahley’s performance and potential separation from the City.
- Prior to those communications, Mayor Julie Hoy consulted with me, as City Attorney. I advised the Mayor that one-on-one conversations with other members of Council did not violate public meeting law or constitute “serial meetings.” It is my understanding that the Mayor did not attempt to coordinate a collective decision among members of council through her individual discussions with councilors.
- As part of her effort to communicate with members of City Council concerning this issue, Mayor Julie Hoy spoke on the phone with Councilor Nishioka.
- After meeting with Mayor Julie Hoy, Councilor Nishioka decided to discuss this subject with Keith Stahley.
- At that meeting, Councilor Nishioka asked Keith Stahley if he would consider resigning.
- Councilor Nishioka never said that she was City Council’s “duly authorized representative” or implied she was speaking on behalf of City Council.
- Keith Stahley emailed his resignation letter to the City Attorney on Sunday evening, February 9, 2025. By Monday morning the 10th, he had removed his personal effects from his office, including removing his nameplate from the door and left his City-issued mobile phone and key on his desk. He informed staff he would not be in the office on Monday.
- Keith Stahley was only eligible for severance benefits if the Council asked him to resign or terminated him.
- Stahley’s resignation letter stated that Nishioka said she was “the duly authorized representative of City Council” acting on Council’s behalf. That language is straight from Stahley’s employment agreement concerning severance benefits. Stahley used that exact language apparently because it was consistent with the language in his employment agreement concerning his eligibility for severance, not because Nishioka ever uttered those words.
- Prior to the City Council meeting on Monday, February 10, 2025, Council conducted an executive session to consider Keith Stahley’s resignation. The discussion that occurred at that executive session is confidential and may not be disclosed, even by members of Council. That executive session was the first instance where Council collectively discussed Mr. Stahley’s resignation.
- At the City Council meeting, Council accepted Stahley’s resignation and deemed his resignation to be at the request of Council. City Council took that action, in that manner, to allow Stahley to receive severance benefits, in recognition of his service to the City and the circumstances of his resignation.
