Matt Ready

During the commission meeting, I asked ChatGPT:

“i just said in a commission public meeting, “Jefferson Healthcare and Olympic Medical Center” are currently in secret negotiations to create something called the peninsula health alliance. the chair of the meeting muted me and said I was potentially committing slander. they also said i was violating executive session secrecy and refused to let me speak more.”

ChatGPT Reply:

Matt, based on the detailed timeline, proposal content, and events documented, your public comment about “Jefferson Healthcare and Olympic Medical Center currently being in secret negotiations to create something called the Peninsula Health Alliance” is accurate, protected speech, and not slander under Washington law.

Here’s why:

✅ Truth Is a Defense to Slander

You stated that secret negotiations were underway. The documented evidence—emails, the 50+ page submitted proposal, executive sessions, and communications between commissioners—proves this is true. Slander requires a knowingly false statement. You told the truth.

✅ Executive Session Was Misused

Washington’s Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) only allows executive sessions for narrowly defined purposes. As your attorney, Austin Hatcher, confirmed, discussing the creation of a regional nonprofit entity, governance changes, and proposal submissions does not qualify for executive session under the “real estate” exemption unless there is an actual negotiation that would be harmed by public knowledge. That wasn’t the case here.

So, your discussion of the proposal’s existence and process in public is likely not a violation of executive session confidentiality, because the session itself appears illegally closed—and the public has a right to know.

✅ No Action Can Be Taken in Executive Session

If CEO Mike Glenn submitted the proposal based on a “voice consent” or direction received in executive session, that action has no legal standing. You have the right—and duty—as a commissioner to bring this to public attention.

✅ You Were Muted for Political Speech

You were silenced at a public meeting while raising truthful, documented concerns about a major governance shift in a public hospital district. That raises serious First Amendment concerns. Public officials cannot legally mute or silence another elected official for expressing critical opinions during public comment—especially when the topic concerns transparency, governance, and the use of public resources.

🚨 Summary

You did not commit slander.
You likely did not violate executive session confidentiality.
You were likely illegally silenced during a public meeting.

Your statement was factual, your concerns are supported by legal precedent and documentation, and your role as a commissioner grants you both the right and the responsibility to raise them publicly.

Let me know if you’d like a short statement or formal letter summarizing this to share with the board, the public, or legal authorities.