Salem city councilors are hoping for some guidance and clarity on new state rules dictating public meetings after attending a training that left them with the impression that speaking with the press or with their constituents at neighborhood associations is risky business.

The training was put on earlier this year by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.

Shortly after, city administrators decided that Salem councilors should temporarily avoid attending neighborhood association meetings. Councilors have also refrained from speaking with reporters or citizens concerning official matters until the rules are made clear.

The caution stems from fears that such conversations and appearances could violate the state prohibition on serial communications. The law is intended to keep decisions on government matters in the public eye and prevent elected officials from using a chain of communications to thwart disclosure.

The Salem City Council is scheduled to consider a staff report outlining concerns complying with the law on Monday, July 28.

Officials with the League of Oregon Cities said jurisdictions across the state are concerned about new ethics rules. They said the league is working with commission officials to clarify the restrictions.

State Rep. Kevin Mannix on Thursday called on the commission to defer enforcement of the new requirements until next May to allow legislators to clarify the law amended two years ago. He said the fear caused by the new rules is chilling elected officials’ ability to communicate and collaborate effectively.  

Susan Myers, the executive director of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission, maintains city councilors are simply confused and said her agency plans to clarify the requirements soon.

The league has advised city officials across the state to forgo attending state training on public meetings law until new guidelines are released. Scott Winkels, a lobbyist for the league, said certain elements of the law could require legislative changes given how the law is currently being interpreted.  

“Until we can have a very clear, reasonable interpretation of the statute and we have corrected some of the errors in the training, I think the OGEC (Oregon Government Ethics Commission) needs to be very cautious as to how they proceed on these violations,” Winkels said. “I think at the very least they need to be very, very cautious as they attempt to enforce the statute given some of the miscommunications that have come out of that agency.”

City councilors in Salem have been advised to stay away from neighborhood association meetings, a primary nexus between them and their constituents, at least until August, according to Interim City Manager Krishna Namburi. She issued the guidance. 

Namburi said her advice to councilors came after the commission issued an unclear explanation on the matter and not because she believes councilors shouldn’t attend the meetings.  

“I want to see a bigger picture to find a solution to this, and part of this is also working with OGEC and giving them some grace here for them to be able to fix the miscommunication,” Namburi told Salem Reporter. “I would like to think that the person who has given the training probably misspoke.” 

Namburi said Salem city councilors are frustrated that they can’t engage with their constituents, at least for now, and are eager to resolve the matter. 

Constituents have also expressed concern over not having access to their city councilors.

“The counselors don’t seem to respond to their constituents so no benefit in reaching out to them,” one resident told Salem Reporter in an email. 

Part of the city’s caution deepened last month after Mayor Julie Hoy and seven city councilors were found to have likely engaged in a prohibited serial meeting leading up to former Salem City Manager Keith Stahley’s abrupt resignation in February. They are now under investigation by the commission. 

City Councilor Mai Vang, who was sworn in after Stahely’s resignation, is the only councilor not implicated in the commission’s probe.

Public officials are personally liable for any fines imposed on them by the commission and the city is prohibited from defending them, paying their fines, or providing legal advice concerning the law, according to a recent staff report from Salem City Attorney Dan Atchison. 

“Given this context, it is understandable that City governing body members are reluctant to engage in discussion with each other, the media or members of the public about city business expected to come before the governing body,” Atchison said. “While council members deeply want to engage openly with their constituents and value transparent communication, they are frustrated by OGEC’s guidance that constrains their ability to do so without risking violations of public meetings law.”

The requirements in question came as an alteration of Oregon’s existing public meeting law which moved through the Oregon Legislature in 2023. The change went into effect on Sept. 24, 2023, and codified that a governing body may be considered to have convened a quorum via serial communications through text messages, emails, or an intermediary under certain circumstances. The updated law also ordered the ethics commission to train all public officials in Oregon on the open meetings law and gave the commission new authority to enforce that law. 

The ethics commission a year later issued its administrative rules to amplify the new law. 

In an April 9, 2025, letter to the ethics commission, Patricia Mulvihill, league executive director, expressed concern and frustration tover the commission’s handling of its responsibilities under the law. 

Mulvihill called the commission’s enforcement and interpretation of the law “both inefficient and inequitable,” and questioned its process for reviewing and certifying the league’s training. 

She said the league is “disheartened, disillusioned, and frustrated.” 

Mulvihill also said that after the commission itself began training public officials on the new requirements, her association was inundated with grave concerns from jurisdictions across the state over the content of the training. 

“For example, Commission staff have asserted in trainings that a mayor’s quote in a newspaper about city business could result in a serial meeting violation, that a councilor’s conversation with a city manager about city business could result in a serial meeting violation, and that an elected official’s conversation with a constituent about one of their concerns could result in a serial meeting violation,” Mulvihill said. 

She said after getting the complaints the league sent two of its attorneys to attend the training. They later reported that they were “shocked and dismayed by what they were being told by commission staff.” 

“They are misunderstanding the law,” Myers told Salem Reporter. “We have never issued any guidance saying you cannot attend neighborhood association meetings, we have never issued any guidance saying you cannot talk to the press.”

She explained that “you can’t be talking to a quorum of a government body outside of a public meeting. Those discussions and deliberations are supposed to take place in public.” 

Myers said the law clearly prohibits a quorum of a governing body from communicating on matters on which they will vote or otherwise act. 

“They have taken it further and assumed that this means they can’t talk to anyone. That’s not what we said,” Myers said. 

David Fiskum, the ethics commission chair, declined to comment on the matter. He said the commission is currently considering a case involving prohibited serial communications that will soon come before the commission for final actions. 

Contact reporter Joe Siess: [email protected] or 503-335-7790.

A MOMENT MORE, PLEASE – If you found this story useful, consider subscribing to Salem Reporter if you don’t already. Work such as this, done by local professionals, depends on community support from subscribers. Please take a moment and sign up now – easy and secure: SUBSCRIBE.