.png)
GAYLE JOHNSON | FOR LNP | LANCASTERONLINE
When: Columbia Borough Council meeting, Jan. 14.
What happened: A borough resident used the public comment portion of the meeting to accuse council members of violating the Sunshine Act by meeting behind a locked door in private — a matter disputed by the borough's attorney and by a lawyer who specializes in Sunshine Act violations.
Details: Frank Doutrich said he returned to council chambers after the Jan. 7 meeting to retrieve his cell phone, but found the door locked while a quorum of council members remained in the meeting room to sign checks.
Quotables: "That's not a violation of the Sunshine Act," borough solicitor Evan Gabel said after Doutrich spoke. Melissa Melewsky, an attorney with the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, later agreed. "The law only applies when there's a quorum — and that quorum is deciding agency business," she said Jan. 20. Administrative work would not be considered as deliberating a business matter, she said.
Quotable: "I can't recall any time we've ever talked about a subject" after a meeting that would fall under council business, Eric Kauffman, vice president, said.
Locked door: Borough employees who leave the building after the meeting lock the door on their way out, because the door had been left unlocked several times, Mayor Leo Lutz said. Police officers have contacted him about the problem, he explained.
Wrong message: While not a Sunshine Act violation, having council members together behind a locked door may send the wrong message, Melewsky and Kauffman indicated.
Quotables: "It creates the appearance of impropriety and not necessarily a violation of the law," Melewsky said. During the meeting, Kauffman said, "I do agree with Frank," that the situation could raise concerns.
Change: The door now will be left unlocked while council members remain in Borough Hall, and anyone can stay after the meeting, Zink said Jan. 20.
https://lancasteronline.com/news/regional/lawyers-say-columbia-council-in-compliance-with-sunshine-act-after-resident-questions-meeting/article_64929cfc-d80f-11ef-b8ae-f75be23501fd.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=user-share
When: Columbia Borough Council meeting, Jan. 14.
What happened: A borough resident used the public comment portion of the meeting to accuse council members of violating the Sunshine Act by meeting behind a locked door in private — a matter disputed by the borough's attorney and by a lawyer who specializes in Sunshine Act violations.
Details: Frank Doutrich said he returned to council chambers after the Jan. 7 meeting to retrieve his cell phone, but found the door locked while a quorum of council members remained in the meeting room to sign checks.
Quotables: "That's not a violation of the Sunshine Act," borough solicitor Evan Gabel said after Doutrich spoke. Melissa Melewsky, an attorney with the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, later agreed. "The law only applies when there's a quorum — and that quorum is deciding agency business," she said Jan. 20. Administrative work would not be considered as deliberating a business matter, she said.
Quotable: "I can't recall any time we've ever talked about a subject" after a meeting that would fall under council business, Eric Kauffman, vice president, said.
Locked door: Borough employees who leave the building after the meeting lock the door on their way out, because the door had been left unlocked several times, Mayor Leo Lutz said. Police officers have contacted him about the problem, he explained.
Wrong message: While not a Sunshine Act violation, having council members together behind a locked door may send the wrong message, Melewsky and Kauffman indicated.
Quotables: "It creates the appearance of impropriety and not necessarily a violation of the law," Melewsky said. During the meeting, Kauffman said, "I do agree with Frank," that the situation could raise concerns.
Change: The door now will be left unlocked while council members remain in Borough Hall, and anyone can stay after the meeting, Zink said Jan. 20.
https://lancasteronline.com/news/regional/lawyers-say-columbia-council-in-compliance-with-sunshine-act-after-resident-questions-meeting/article_64929cfc-d80f-11ef-b8ae-f75be23501fd.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=user-share
No comments:
Post a Comment