No vote has been taken and no contract has been offered, but the Convention and Visitors Bureau could decide on its new President and Chief Executive Officer today, according to a CVB board member.

“We’re going to have to decide (today) on the final contract,” City Councilman and CVB Board member Dean Barlow said. “I’ll know if (all of the contract) process has been put in place at 10 a.m.”

The CVB met with the final two candidates during executive session Feb. 2 and 3 at the Havasu Air Center. The Board is scheduled to adjourn to executive session for “review and discussion of employment agreement for the President/CEO” at 10 a.m. today in the CVB Board room, 314 London Bridge Road. Board Chairman and Interim President/CEO Dennis Schilling replaced former President/CEO Char Beltran in October.

Barlow said he has a good idea of who the new President/CEO would be, based on previous meetings.

“There was an agreement among the (board members) that were there, that was ‘let’s go forward with this one (candidate),’” Barlow said, adding that the agreement took place following the discussion Feb. 3. “We agreed we would do follow up of one individual and until the investigation on that person was done, we didn’t offer that individual a job. Now, apparently, we’re ready to do that.”

The CVB Board is not technically a public body and therefore not required by law to comply with the Arizona Open Meetings Law, according to City attorney Paul Lenkowsky.

“However, with the terms of their contract with the city, the CVB is contractually required to follow the Open Meetings Law,” he said.

A public body must vote during an open meeting, according to the Open Meetings Law. Barlow said a vote has not taken place and a final contract has not been offered.

“We interviewed both of (the final two candidates) out at the airport and that was the first time the board met with them,” Barlow said. “And then at end of that process, we gave direction, not a vote, to the search committee to do additional investigation. There was no reason to do both (background checks), if the first one went through OK.”

Barlow said he believed the board would not do a background check on the other final candidate, unless one of two things happened.

“If something came up (in the background check), or we offered that person a contract and they said no, then we would go to the second one and just keep going on down the line,” Barlow said. “ I’m not exactly sure if we’re going to take a vote (today), because we’d have to do that in open session.”

A local Online news blog reported Wednesday that “a very reliable source who sits on the CVB executive board says the ‘unidentified candidate’ has been offered a contract, with the board recently approving that move. At the same time, the ‘runner-up’ has also been notified that the paperwork has been sent to the other for a signature. … Meanwhile, members of the CVB executive board have only approved the presentation of a contract to the yet-to-be identified person — apparently during an informal meeting this weekend.”

Barlow said he was not in attendance of any meeting since Feb. 3 and is not aware of any other meetings taking place besides the CVB’s regular meeting on Feb. 17.

“What I just described to you, with the board interviewing with the final two candidates, that’s the last I know,” Barlow said. “Unless something else has happened, I didn’t have anything to do with. I didn’t attend any meeting since (Feb. 3).”

Upon hearing of the possible unidentified board member’s claims, Councilwoman Margaret Nyberg said she was unaware of any and all of the claims made.

“I have more faith in Dennis Schilling than that,” she said. “My biggest thing is, I think we need to have a big meeting with the CVB about how the contract has been worded and where their goals are. Since we’re paying them, and it’s taxpayers’ money we’re using. We need to look to the future and ask, ‘are they doing what we’ve set goals up for?’ I think that could be taken care of during a work session.”

Other CVB board members contacted Wednesday deferred comment to Schilling. Several calls to Schilling were not returned as of press time.

City Attorney Lenkowsky said he could not respond to any legal complaint from an unidentified source.

“I don’t typically respond to allegations from unidentified sources,” he said. “Without knowing who is claiming that a meeting allegedly occurred that was apparently not in compliance with the open meeting law, I’m not really in a position to comment on that.”

If an individual approaches the city attorney’s office, Lenkowsky said he would look into the matter.

“If my office receives a complaint from an actual individual who is willing to identify themselves so we can ascertain what facts, if any, they are based on, we would be happy to review their concerns,” he said. “But at this point I can’t offer further comment.”

Lenkowsky reviewed the bureau’s Sept. 16 board of directors meeting and found agenda items he considered “palpably inadequate” according to Open Meeting Law requirements in October 2009. Lenkowsky previously said he advised the CVB board to review the requirements and warned of future city action if additional inadequacies were found.

“The CVB is contractually committed to conform to the open meeting laws and it plainly appeared to be in need of improvement,” Lenkowsky said in October 2009. “If no improvement occurs and there are continued problems then at some stage that information would be communicated to City Council.”

You can contact the reporter at nbruttell@havasunews.com