By Bailey Quinonez

Staff Writer

ROCKVILLE - A little more than a month ago, the City of Rockville questioned whether or not a retreat qualified as a meeting. Now, state officials are investigating the city's June 2 "retreat" because of a possible violation of Maryland's Open Meetings Act.

State officials said that problems with the "retreat" were brought to their attention after Joseph Jordan, a Rockville resident, filed a complaint.

"I think it sets a pattern of having closed meetings. They say it's for establishing personal relationships and I'm fine with that but there should be a third party facilitator," said Jordan.

"There were several comments made by those attending this closed session/retreat that lead me to believe some city business or policy might have been discussed, in violation of the Maryland Open Meetings Act," wrote Jordan in his letter to the Attorney General.

"Many in Rockville are concerned with what appears to be the lack of open government, inclusion and transparency. This latest potential violation is yet another example of a lack of transparency," said Drew Powell, a Rockville resident and candidate for mayor in 2007.

In June, after several discussions and a lack of agreement, councilmembers agreed to divide the retreat into two meetings, one closed and the other open to the public. However, Councilmembers Piotr Gajewski and Anne Robbins refused to attend the closed portion of the meeting, both for different reasons: Gajewski said the entire meeting should be open to the public whereas Robbins said that she would not attend unless a third party facilitator was present during the closed meeting.

However, just as city councilmembers were divided in June they remain divided about any possible violation during the retreat.

"I agree that there is a very good chance that the closed meeting on June 2 was in violation of the Maryland Open Meetings Act; I think that there is considerable evidence that it was. I welcome the Attorney General Office's investigation to determine if the meeting was inappropriate," said Gajewski.

But Mayor Susan Hoffmann said that she sees nothing wrong with the June retreat. "We didn't even end up having a meeting because not everybody showed up. We went to dinner instead," she said of the closed portion of the meeting.

"What I think of the complaint about the 'retreat' can't be said in polite company. I find it difficult for anyone who was not present to complain about an event when it didn't happen. Nonsense and hearsay," said Councilmember Phyllis Marcuccio.

Currently, the state has asked that the city respond to Jordan's complaint and produce any minutes that were taken at both the closed and open meetings.

According to city staff, the city did not take minutes at either portion of the retreat. However, at the open half of the retreat, Gajewski's wife Tisha placed a home video camera in the room to record the meeting, for his own personal use. At the time, Gajewski said, "I can't imagine who is going to see it. In the previous retreat people had different recollections of what happened."

After receiving the city's response the Open Meetings Compliance Board will deliberate for up to 30 days before delivering their opinion to the mayor and council. However, the board does not have the authority to issue any penalties. "We can only offer our opinion," said Attorney General spokesperson Raquel Quillory.

Even though no penalties will be issued, Jordan said that should the meeting be in violation of the Open Meetings Act he hopes that the mayor and council will learn from their mistakes.