 |
| Some folks think they understand the sunshine law and what it means. When they begin to write about it, their ignorance on the topic is spotlighted..... |
I am not a lawyer, but I still have an opinion, just like the "facebook-page self-anointed experts" do on topics like the Florida Sunshine Law. So here is my opinion on Sunshine.
One thing I understand is that giving my opinion on a topic or a subject that may come before the full board for a vote is NOT a violation of the sunshine law. That means I can blog and facebook post and do radio and TV interviews on topics that might come before the board without being in violation of this law.
---But what about if I sent a memo outlining my reasons for supporting something specific on an agenda, to my fellow commissioners before a vote, telling them implicitly how I was going to vote....Would that act in and of itself be a violation of the Sunshine Law? NO it would not be, so long as I didn't solicit or receive responses from my fellow board members--that's my understanding of the law. (I don't do this, I'm just pointing out that one-way communications, so far as I understand it, are not sunshine law violations).
---How about this one: What if I walked up to one of my fellow commissioners at a social function not at a meeting and said "Hey-I'm going to vote YES for the [fill in the topic coming up for a vote]!!" and then walked away? Would that be a violation? NO, so long as the other board member said nothing and did not respond in any way--this is my understanding of the law. (I'd never do this either--and it would be risky because if the board member who I said this to said anything back signalling his/her intention--this could be construed a meeting out of the Sunshine)
What WOULD be problematic and what COULD be construed a meeting out of the Sunshine?
---Back to back meetings with members of the board individually by staff members or polling the board in advance of an advertised meeting by calling the members one by one. These individual meetings or calls could happen and the individual board members might not even know. These are the scenarios that concern me.
--Conduits: If a person takes my opinion on a topic then goes to another commissioner and gets his thought on that topic, and then on a subsequent discussion slips and discloses what the other board member said----that could be a violation via the conduit who relayed the information.
1 comment:
Hi Commissioner, I used to be Chairman Pro Tem on a zoning and planning commission for the City of Alabaster, Alabama for over 8 years. Our city attorney would always be careful about telling us to be careful about announcing how we were going to vote before a meeting. We were told that if we ever got into a lawsuit, the commission could be accused of being capricious by not hearing both sides of an issue and voting without public opinion or not being transparent. The Cardinal Rule was to not discuss voting with fellow commissioners like you indicated. The City Council and us never did have a problem of being capricious and I am sure a few members discussed how they voted a few times but I did not think it would be a problem but I made it my policy not to discuss what I considered "settled" and would not reveal how I was going to vote. It could be the City Attorney knew better. Anyway, this is my two cents worth and I believe there is little difference if any in Alabama Sunshine Law and Florida Sunshine Law. The big thing is not to discuss things in private with fellow commissioners.
Post a Comment