The Complainant alleged that the Council violated the OMA by improperly convening into executive session to discuss the disposition of the Tower Street property and because the agenda for the meeting did not explicitly give notice that the Council would be convening into executive session to discuss and/or vote on said disposition. Based upon the undisputed evidence before us, we determined that the Council's executive session discussion pertaining to the Tower Street property did not violate the OMA and that the agenda notice fairly informed the public that the Council intended to convene an executive session to discuss and/or act on the disposition of the property. Accordingly, we found no violations.
