FFH board nearly violated state open meetings law

It took the Franklin Foundation Hospital board of commissioners’ legal counsel only a few minutes to verify at their monthly meeting on Thursday that the group needs a two-thirds vote to enter into executive session to discuss topics which are legally out of the purview of the public and the press.
Some members of the board were under the impression that a 3-3 tie vote could be broken by the FFH Board Chairman Eugene Foulcard which is what started to happen at the meeting Thursday when a vote was taken to enter into executive session to discuss “strategic planning” and another issue.
The vote was a tie with Commissioners Dr. Roland Degeyter, Clegg Caffery and Dr. Nick Accardo voting in favor of entering into executive session. Commissioners Allan Von Werder, Didi Battle and Bobby Judice voted against entering into executive session. The tie was seemingly broken when Foulcard voted in favor of entering into executive session.
That was until Von Werder informed the board that they needed a two-thirds vote, not just a simple majority vote, which meant Foulcard did not break the tie. It was at this point FFH legal counsel began to research the issue and confirmed minutes later that Von Werder was correct.
According to information published by the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, Inc., the Open Meetings Law (R.S. 42:4.1-12), “was enacted to insure ‘that public business be performed in an open and public manner and that citizens be advised of and aware of the performance of public officials and the deliberations and decisions that go into the making of public policy.” The information also states, “The law must be construed liberally.”
The Open Meetings Law also specifically addresses the rules regarding public bodies entering into executive session. The law states, “To hold a closed meeting, two-thirds of the members present must vote in an open meeting to do so. No binding or final action can be taken during a closed meeting. A closed meeting cannot be used “as a subterfuge to defeat the purposes” of the law.”
The board decided to not go into executive session and to continue with the agenda which also included the discussion and approval of officers elected by the medical staff for 2016-2017. It was at this point in the meeting where the subject of the medical staff’s nomination of Dr. Donna Tesi to be the new FFH chief of staff came before the board.
During the discussion portion of the issue, FFH Chief Executive Officer Craig Cudworth said on the record that it had been determined that Tesi was not eligible to be chief of staff because, according to medical staff by-laws, a candidate for the position has to have not held the position for a calendar year. Tesi was formerly chief of staff, but was removed from the position at some point last year.
However, Cudworth admitted he did not know the specific dates in question when asked by St. Mary Parish President David Hanagriff about when Tesi was removed as chief of staff. Cudworth said, “We are checking on the dates.”
The Banner-Tribune reporter in attendance attempted to ask Cudworth about how Tesi’s ineligibility could be determined if the dates of her tenure as chief of staff were unknown to him and FFH legal counsel.
Cudworth refused to take questions from the Banner-Tribune reporter when he was approached seconds after the meeting adjourned and was given several opportunities to answer questions.
It was at this point that FFH Director of Marketing/ Business Development Dawn Kaiser-Melancon interjected in the conversation between Cudworth and the reporter, stating, “He (Cudworth) is unavailable,” while Cudworth was still seated at the boardroom table after the meeting concluded.
Kaiser-Melnacon later informed the reporter that Cudworth would be available next week.
The issue regarding Tesi’s election as FFH Board chief of staff was sent back to the medical staff for further examination as per instructions from the FFH board.
In a statement regarding the controversy surrounding the election of a new chief of staff, Hanagriff said that while he understood the rules contained within the medical staff by-laws, he did not understand how a determination about Tesi’s ineligibility could be made when the dates of her previous tenure were unknown to legal counsel and FFH administration.
“The question at hand is the timeline,” Hanagriff said. “I’m going to look into this personally to make sure these things are appropriate.”