Subscribe free to our daily email newsletterContributor Opinion by John Britton: State Of The City And The Open Meetings Act
Feb 4, 2009 10:05 - 4 Comments
>The following Contributor Opinion is by City Councilmember John Britton:
A few points on the planned February 11, 2009 gathering and the Open Meetings Act:
1. As you may know, Mayor Hoffmann, Councilmember Marcuccio and I are proposing an open and public gathering on Wednesday, February 11th for a discussion of issues. This is not an official mayor and council meeting as there will be no business conducted nor will there be votes taken on any matter. Rather it is an open, public gathering to hear three perspectives (varying and probably divergent depending on the issue!) on the accomplishments (or lack thereof?!) of this mayor and council of the past year and of issues that the community members think the mayor and council may address in the next year. Although we may have brief introductory comments, the bulk of the time will be devoted to questions from the community members and, hopefully, thoughtful, relevant and insightful answers from us.
2. I stress that this is not an official meeting of the mayor and council. However, since at least a quorum of the mayor and council may be present, special rules and safeguards apply to the gathering as set out in the Maryland Open Meetings Act. These rules and safeguards implement public policy of the State and ensure public access to any gathering of a quorum. The Open Meetings Act requires that the public be provided with adequate notice of the time and location of the public gathering, that the location be reasonably accessible to individuals who would like to attend, and that minutes be prepared as soon as practicable after the public gathering.
3. Rather than make up rules as we went along, as has been alleged, we were constrained by a rigid set of existing rules under the Open Meetings Act. Prior to initiating the process for this public gathering, a thorough review of the Open Meetings statute (State Government Article, Title 10, Subtitle 5) and the Open Meeting Acts Manual (Sixth Edition, October 2006) was warranted. This review established the framework for the public gathering. I also confirmed the requirements of the law and compliance thereto with the City Attorney. Our recognition of and adherence to the rules set out in the Open Meetings Act resulted in the following to ensure compliance with the law:
(a) Notice of the time, date, place, participants and agenda was sent to the Gazette for publication this week and placed on the RockvilleCentral and RockvilleLiving blogs. The City also distributed a press release with the same information. This notice also was copied to the City Attorney.
(b) A “reasonably accessible” location – the Rockville Public Library on the Town Center plaza – was selected that could accommodate a large group. The Open Meetings Act does not require that the public gathering be held in City Hall or in any other official location. The Act’s focus is on accessibility. The library is certainly as accessible as City Hall (some may argue it is even more so). And the added benefit is that the location helps to further the City’s “Buy Rockville” campaign – we hope that attendees will shop and/or dine prior to or after the public gathering.
(c) We have planned to audio record the meeting from which minutes may be developed, as allowed under the Open Meetings Act, section 10-509. We even have considered use of hand held mikes so everyone in attendance can hear and be heard. The Open Meetings Act does not require that a public gathering be televised. The Open Meetings Act also does not address the content of any public gathering so the agenda may be limited or as broad as the participants desire. The Act is particularly concerned with votes or other decisions made. Since the announced public gathering is not to enable the conduct of any business, the recording of votes will not be an issue.
4. The Open meetings Act was also the framework in the planning of the public gathering. We did not discuss this public gathering in a group that constituted a quorum. Even phone conversations and e-mail exchanges were separate and individual, and never contemporaneous or even close in time. The Open Meetings Act is silent on the involvement of City staff or the City Attorney in the planning of this type of public gathering or their attendance.
The above points are strictly my analysis and based on the requirements of the Open meetings Act. I appreciate comments on this process and further review by the City Attorney and others. If we cannot successfully implement these procedures and satisfy the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, then obviously the public gathering would have to be cancelled. In the meantime, as stated in the publication announcements, all in the public are welcome, including City staff, the City Attorney and other members of the mayor and council.
I invite you to attend the public gathering on February 11th, in the first floor meeting room of the Rockville Library at 7 p.m. Please come in the spirit in which it is offered, a public discourse open to all. Also, I encourage you to take advantage of the shops and restaurant offerings of Town Center either before the meeting or afterwards. I know I will.
John Britton
Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.
John, I never questioned if this violated the Open Meetings Act. My concerns are…should this be seen as a meeting of the M&C since a quorum is present, and if so, why were other members not invited? "State of the City" sounds to me like official city business…at least it gives that impression. As far as location, I know what the requirements are. As stated in my opinion piece, we have been down this road before. If it turns out that this public gathering can be construed as an "official" meeting of Mayor and (some) Council, and needs to adhere to State regulations, then have it in council chambers and make it available to all, including those who can't be there.
@JJ My concerns are…should this be seen as a meeting of the M&C since a quorum is present, and if so, why were other members not invited? ">
how do you know this? should they not speak up?
This is precisely my point. For Mr. Britton to go through such a lengthy explanation of how they are complying with the Open Meeting Act kind of begs the question…if this is a casual meeting of three council members, why the concern? My opinion is, if a quorum of our governing body is assembled, and they present, discuss, voice opinions on any City issue, policy, ordinance, etc, then it needs to conform to all the rules…City, State, etc, that govern such meetings. My final point is, if it is to be considered a meeting of the council, then do what is done with all other council meetings…hold it in city hall with the cameras and recorders roling.>
Whether the other council members speak out or not is their business. It is my understanding they were not invited, and Mr. Britton’s commentary..item #4, seems to corroborate that.
What I find laughable is that some people complain that things aren’t open enough…>
Then, when a few councilpeople are hosting an opportunity to openly discuss anything at all, people complain about that too.