Marcia Meoli: Ottawa needs to remember transparency is the spirit of good governance
All state and local governments must comply with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, contained in MCL 15.261 to .275. The Act imposes minimum requirements for the conduct of public meetings to ensure transparency and openness. The definitions in the Act show that it governs broadly over state and local bodies and decisions made by them.
Indisputably, this governs the Ottawa County Board of Commissioners meetings, deliberations and decision-making processes.
Here is what I see in the Act:
Meetings and deliberations of public bodies must occur in places available to the general public.
There are specific requirements for the advance public notice and access and specific prohibitions on limiting public notice and access to meetings and deliberations.
A public body can go into closed session only for specific reasons and some reasons require a 2/3 vote in advance. There is a long list of reasons, but I do not see any of the controversial decisions made so far by the Ottawa County Commission this year on that list and I am not aware that there was a 2/3 vote for the board to go into closed session, but I have not yet watched all of the initial meetings of the board (which have lasted hours each). The statute specifically states: “However, except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, all interviews by a public body for employment or appointment to a public office must be held in an open meeting pursuant to this act.”
The state attorney general and the county prosecutors have specific authority to commence civil actions to challenge the validity of a decision of a public body made in violation of the Act. These civil actions can result in orders to compel compliance or enjoin non-compliance.
Public officials who violate the Act intentionally are guilty of misdemeanors and shall be personally liable for actual and exemplary damages. They can also be liable for attorney fees, which may not be covered by the county's liability insurance policy, if the complaining party is successful in establishing a violation.
Why do we have an Open Meetings Act? The Library of Michigan information sheet on this topic states: “The intent behind these laws is to ensure governmental transparency, or the ability of citizens to witness, view, and participate in the actions of their government. These Open Meetings Acts (or “Government in the Sunshine Acts” in some states), along with the corresponding Freedom of Information Acts (FOIA) form a foundation and expectation of government openness and transparency for Federal, State, and local public bodies and officials.” That information sheet appears to have been written for public library boards and lists the kinds of things which would violate the Act:
Private {non-public} “retreats”
Private “work sessions”
Private meetings to “discuss” issues
Electronic discussions about issues
Private discussions to “pre-determine” the outcome of a public meeting
Note that the Act limitations here apply if a “quorum” of the public body in involved. Quorum generally means the minimum number of members who must be present for a board to act. A public body should have a more precise definition of this in its written rules. For the Ottawa County Board of Commissioners, quorum is defined in Rule 6.2: “The presence of a majority of the Members elected and serving shall constitute a quorum of the Board. No business shall be considered without the presence of a quorum, except to adjourn or recess.”
The Board Rules cover many topics including how to place an item on the meeting agenda: “A member desiring to place an item on the agenda will request approval from the chairperson at least six calendar days prior to the next Board Meeting.” Rule 4.5 shows a number of other requirements for placing an item on the agenda but also gives the chairperson the sole discretion to waive requirements and allow the board to add items to the agenda by majority vote.
We have a history in this democracy that public bodies be public — transparent without prior request. People administering public offices and public funds must do this in the public interest, not for any one person or group and certainly not for themselves or their families and friends or private, hidden agenda. These are tried and true principles and necessary for the proper functioning of our government. We need to safeguard these processes and, if a public body violates these rules, this needs to stop and people involved need to be held accountable.
— Community Columnist Marcia Meoli is a Holland attorney and resident. Contact her at Meolimarcia@gmail.com.
This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Marcia Meoli: Ottawa needs to remember transparency is the spirit of good governance
