Sunshine Week: PMUA gets 'executive session' right on two counts

How about a nice, upbeat post about a Plainfield organization for Sunshine Week?

About fifteen people turned out for the PMUA's board meeting on Tuesday evening. The meeting itself was unremarkable, with a number of items covering routine matters, plus an item on renting some vacant land on Cottage Place and leasing five 'solid waste collection vehicles' on an emergency basis as the current lease is expiring and negotiations for a new one are unresolved (see the agenda here).

However, there was the need for an EXECUTIVE SESSION, and here is where the PMUA gets it right -- as contrasted to both the City Council and the Board of Ed.

FIRST, the PUBLIC MEETING is conducted first and then the Commissioners go into EXECUTIVE SESSION if necessary (as it was Tuesday night).

This comports perfectly with a February 18 appeals court decision (see here) ruling against Rutgers for routinely convening a public meeting for five minutes to then go into executive session, after which returning to a public meeting.

SECONDLY, the PMUA Commissioners adopted a resolution for the executive session that IDENTIFIED THE MATTER TO BE DISCUSSED WITH AS MUCH SPECIFICITY AS POSSIBLE -- in this case to discuss contract negotations on the lease of the vacant Cottage Place lot.

This also perfectly comports with the second portion of the above-cited ruling requiring public notice and the resolution --

"should contain as much information as is consistent with full public knowledge without doing any harm to the public interest"

The Board of Ed's practice in this matter seems to be exactly what the Court ruled against Rutgers for.

At last nights BOE meeting, the agenda (see here) contained its standard first page, announcing the opening  of the public meeting at 6:30 PM, to be closed for executive session at 6:35 PM and resuming the public meeting at 8:00 PM. This is EXACTLY the practice the court ruled against in the Rutgers case.

Additionally, the non-specific language at the bottom of the first page, detailing items to be discussed as merely 'personnel' and 'legal', do not meet the requirements of the court ruling.

To be fair, the PMUA is lacking in an archive of its agendas or the posting of minutes to its website, but it does get this one item right.

Is it time for others to follow the PMUA's good example?

---

• Ledger: "Bill would require local authorities to post budgets, meetings to websites"
• NJ Open Government Notes:  "Court forbids routine 'sequencing' of open and closed sessions"
  
• Sunshine Week:  "Sunshine Week website" | "Wikipedia"
• PMUA:  "Agenda, 3/15/2011" | Board of Ed:  "Agenda, 3/15/2011"
  

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

Workshop on OPRA and Sunshine Law offered

Plainfielders interested in more transparency in government will find a lively, free workshop next Tuesday particularly useful.

The workshop is presented by NJFOG (New Jersey Foundation for Open Government), the statewide advocacy organization dedicated to open government, and will include free handouts.

Longtime open government advocates Walt Leuers, an attorney, and John Paff, chair of the open government task force of the NJ Libertarian Party, will lead the workshop which will focus on training attendees on how to avoid common mistakes in requesting public documents, as well providing overviews of both the OPRA (public documents) and OPMA (public meetings) laws -- including recent changes and case law strengthening citizen activist rights.

This Union County opportunity is being sponsored by the Union County Watchdog Association.

"This provides an opportunity to educate the public on their rights and give them the necessary tools to watch over their government," says Tina Renna, president of UCWA.

The workshop is free, but space is limited, so reservations are strongly suggested. Light refreshments will be served. Make your reservation by email now here.

This is the same workshop Maria Pellum and I attended a few months ago in North Plainfield and I highly recommend it. It is well worth your time. The speakers are extremely knowledgeable, the presentation is lively and packed with useful information, plus you will get to network with other folks who believe 'sunshine' is the best disinfectant for government there is.

---

FREE WORKSHOP ON OPRA & SUNSHINE LAW

Tuesday · December 7 | 7:30 PM

Cranford Community Center
220 Walnut Avenue, Cranford

---

• CountyWatchers:  "Free seminar on OPRA and the Sunshine Law"

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

WBLS payments: The mayor's twisted logic

The flap over Plainfield Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs' questionable expenditures in getting WBLS to broadcast her showcase August 1 community forum promises to flare up more now that Her Honor -- using her own twisted logic -- has squirted some verbal charcoal lighter on the flames.

Courier reporter Mark Spivey quotes Her Honor in an article today (see here) as saying --

...If council members had questions about the broadcast prior to its airing, Robinson-Briggs said "they would have got (gotten) answers...''

The mayor, of course, is completely ignoring the fact that no one had even dreamed Robinson-Briggs had PAID FOR the WBLS broadcast.

Folks had simply assumed that the gang violence in Plainfield had made the topic newsworthy and that WBLS was covering the mayor's showcase event purely out of its newsworthiness. Now we have to wonder if WBLS considered the matter newsworthy at all.

Who knew to even ask the Mayor a question?

The first inkling the public got that something fishy was afoot was at the Council's August 9 agenda session, where the Council -- for the very first time -- had received financial reports from the Administration detailing payments made in July. Councilor Mapp spotted a check to WBLS for $2,500 drawn on a CAPITAL EXPENSES ACCOUNT that on its face raised the question of propriety of the expenditure (see my report the next day here).

Even then, no one suspected Mayor Robinson-Briggs had personally caused a check for $20,000 to be drawn for WBLS until a tipster posted a comment on my story, which prompted a further post from me on the matter (see here).

By this time, there were questions of what the exact circumstances were around the issuance of the check --

• was the acting CFO involved?
• had the Mayor personally ordered the check drawn?
• was there a 'sponsor' who had failed to come through?
• if there was a 'sponsor', who was it?
• why was the Council kept in the dark?
  

Then there is the matter of 'reimbursing' the City.

The Ledger quotes Councilor Burney (see here) as saying --

...The layers keep peeling back, and there's some stuff going on here..."

Some stuff indeed, including the question of whether Mayor Robinson-Briggs thought she could simply 'reimburse' the $20,000 with a sponsor's check.

City finances are not the sugar bowl in your grandmother's cupboard.

If something is taken out, everybody can see it (as we now know).

And if it is to be replaced, it will be noticed, too. Because it will have to be entered as a miscellaneous receipt to the GENERAL FUND. If the administration wants to move it to a specific account, guess who they would have to come to.

The Council is not only within its rights to demand to get to the bottom of all this, the public expects it.

And there must be a suspicion that if all this was uncovered after just one month's worth of financial information to the Council what else is out there waiting to be discovered (strengthening the argument for a forensic audit, in my humble opinion).

Robinson-Briggs' remarks also throw a new light on her veto of the Council's two financial oversight ordinances.

Why is she opposed to more transparency in Plainfield's financial affairs?

Has she got something else to hide?

Given the track record of Robinson-Briggs' hired gun Corporation Counsel Dan (I'm-partial-to-the-one-who-signs-my-paycheck) Williamson, the Council would be well-advised to get their OWN ATTORNEY for the special investigative meeting Councilor Burney has proposed, one whose sole duty will be to the Council.

As for Mayor Robinson-Briggs' assertion that the Council's move is 'an attack on my character that has a lot of residents up in arms', I've found a T-shirt she can distribute to them (see illustration above).

Then we can OPRA the expense and see what account she paid for the t-shirts out of.

Speaking of OPRA, you can view the documents Bernice uncovered in this matter here and here.

---

• WBLS Payments --
• Plainfield Today --
  
• 8/10/10:  "Questionable spending uncovered by Council"
• 8/11/10:  "$20,000 for WBLS at Robinson-Briggs' Town Hall?"
  
• Courier:  "Mayor refutes council's accusation of improper spending"
• Ledger:  "Plainfield may investigate mayor for paying $20K for radio broadcasts"
• Plaintalker II: "Search: WBLS" | "No comment needed"
  

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

Board of Ed minutes: Maria moves a mountain

Maria got help from NJFOG.

Evidently Maria has moved a mountain with the Plainfield Board of Ed.

That mountain would be the backlog of minutes of FOURTEEN Board of Ed meetings since March 2 that were not approved or posted to the District's website (excluding the month of July).

As Maria says, 'we may never know' why it has taken so long, but evidently she got some action when she pointed out that the interpretation of the 'reasonable time' called for by the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) (see here, PDF) has been deemed to be THIRTY DAYS.

Some minutes were approved and posted (see the Board's minutes page here), and some have been posted pending approval, with a disclaimer suggested by the Board's attorney at the top of all pages --

"The following minutes have not been approved by the Board and are therefore a mere recital of the actions taken by the Board at the listed meeting and are subject to modification and/or correction and approval by the Board at a later date."

Maria and I both belong to the NJ Foundation for Open Government listserv, which updates those interested in Sunshine Law and OPRA matters on an almost daily basis.

The generosity with which its participants, particularly Walt Luers and John Paff, take time to answer queries from interested activists is a great help to those interested in transparency in New Jersey governmental affairs.

Here is the text of an email Maria sent to the NJFOG listserv early this morning, reporting the success of getting the minutes matter addressed by the BOE last night --

Just wanted to let you know that the Plainfield Board of Education past due, really past due (6 months) Minutes, got finally posted last night.  The Minutes from March through May had to be posted, at the district's website, without approval and with clarifying language from their counsel.  Minutes from June were approved last night and should be posted within the next few days.  Hopefully approving and posting Minutes won't be an issue here anymore. You can see their Minutes HERE if you want.

I had been pressing for these Minutes to be available for few months now and it is thanks to you and your advice that I was able to make a better argument. Knowing the facts, with statutes and all, certainly made a difference.  Even the county prosecutor's office learned since his office had to research this matter and while a complaint was not filed, at least now we know what to do in case this becomes an issue again.

Thanks again for the advice and the comments!

Kudos to Maria for her role in getting the Board of Ed to fulfill its responsibilities in this regard.

---

• NJ Foundation for Open Government --
• "Overview of the Open Public Meetings Act"
• "NJFOG Home Page"
• Plainfield Public Schools:  "Board of Ed Minutes"

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

North Plainfield Sunshine Act would leave Plainfield in the dust

If adopted, a citizen-driven initiative in Plainfield's sister community North Plainfield would leave the Queen City in the dust when it comes to access to public records.

Led by a committee of six residents and needing to collect 300 signatures by the end of this month (tomorrow), the effort is an outgrowth of North Plainfield Citizens for Community Rights (NPCCR), a grassroots community organization formed two years ago. See their website here.

Provided enough signatures are gathered, the petition would place a fully formed ordinance (The North Plainfield Sunshine Act) on the November ballot, where ratification by the voters would make the ordinance a public law in the borough.

Plainfielders interested in access to public records would do well to study the proposed ordinance -- see the petition and ordinance here (PDF) -- which sets out a clear and comprehensive public meetings and public records policy.

Among items of interest are the following --

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Not only the Council, but every board and committee would be required to establish a period of public comment near the beginning and end of EACH PUBLIC MEETING (section 6). As things stand now in Plainfield, the public can only comment at the end of the Council's agenda session, and there are no established overall rules for public comment at various boards and committees.

RECORDINGS

An explicit policy is set that sound recordings be made of ALL meetings -- including closed (executive) sessions, and that they be made available in a prompt manner in both printed and electronic format(section 8). Procedures for redacting minutes of closed meetings are outlined as well as a process for guaranteeing these minutes eventually become open public records to the extent allowed by law. Aside: As I learned in 'Clerk University', municipalities which sound record their public meetings but not their executive sessions put the town at risk in case of lawsuits over what was discussed at those closed meetings. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that executive sessions of Plainfield's City Council have had improper conversations in the past, a situation which the North Plainfield proposal would discourage its Council from indulging in.

ACCESS

The proposed ordinance would make access to public records (including financial records) easy by posting them to the borough's website or making them available electronically, or both. This would allow residents to download minutes or financial spreadsheets and perform their own analyses of payments made or budget allocations, etc. -- something to delight open government advocates anywhere.

FEES

Lastly, the proposal establishes a common-sense and up-to-date fee structure that includes not only photocopying fees (as state law currently specifies, but at a lower rate that reflects recent adjudications on the matter), and outlines fees for providing records in other formats, such as DVD, etc.

All in all, this is a very forward-looking effort and one that Plainfielders and the City Council should keep an eye on.

---

• Website: "Grassroots Groundswell"
  

-- Dan Damon

Council-PMUA Meeting: Two teensy weensy footnotes

Two teensy weensy footnotes from Monday evening's City Council and Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority working session.

As the meeting was getting under way, Council President Burney read aloud a list of several items he said would be covered in the evening's meeting.

Councilor Mapp then asked if there was an agenda for the meeting (the one-page sheet prepared by the Clerk only noted this was a joint meeting and the public would be allowed to speak).

Council President Burney replied that that was what he had just read aloud, that he had emailed it to Mapp (and presumably the other Councilors) 'a week ago', and the only copy he had was the one he had printed out for himself.

Mapp then asked the Clerk if she had an agenda for the evening for the Council. She did not, other than what had been handed out.

I am concerned at the casual manner with which this was treated. Whether or not it is proper for the Council President to communicate the agenda to the Councilors by email, I am perplexed as to why it evidently was not communicated to the Clerk and ordered to be printed up as the agenda for the evening's meeting.

Whether or not the Open Public Meetings Act (the 'Sunshine Law') requires it, wouldn't it just make good sense, considering all the blather about 'transparency' that goes on around here?

My second teensy weensy footnote concerns the (sizable) 'black binder' to which PMUA counsel Leslie London referred in her remarks. It obviously contains tons of useful information about the PMUA. Information that is public record. Wouldn't it be nice if that were made available by the PMUA on its website? Without the public having to go to the effort of forcing the issue through OPRA requests.

What a great sign the PMUA had amended its high-and-mighty ways that would make!

---

-- Dan Damon

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

Court strikes down standardized OPRA request forms, impacting PMUA

Life just got easier for Plainfielders who make use of the state's Open Public Records Act (OPRA) to request public documents -- including those of the PMUA -- thanks to a big boost from a state appeals court Thursday.

Ruling in favor of the Union County Watchdog Association, the three-judge panel ruled that standardized forms go against the legislative intent to give the public 'unfettered access to government records'.

The court ruled that custodians of public records -- which include the City, the School District and the PMUA -- must honor written requests however filed as long as they identify who is making the request and specifically what records are wanted.

This is interpreted to include requests by letter, fax and even email.

OPRA requests have been in the spotlight in Plainfield recently as the PMUA has stonewalled the citizens' group DumpPMUA (see website here) over requests for public records. While the city has put its downloadable OPRA request form on its website (see here -PDF), thanks to Municipal Clerk Laddie Wyatt, one will search in vain on the PMUA website's forms page to find an OPRA request (see here).

Today's Ledger reports the story (see here) and CountyWatchers has posted a statement on its website (see here). The full ruling is also available as a PDF file (see here).

Suffice it to say that Union County spokesperson Sebastian D'Elia is not happy at losing yet again to the feisty Tina Renna and the UCWA.

---

• Ledger: "Form not required for public records, court rules"
• CountyWatchers: "UCWA wins OPRA form lawsuit"
• Ruling: "Renna vs. Union County, Docket No. L-1145-06" (PDF)
• PMUA: "Downloadable Forms Page"
• City of Plainfield: "Downloadable Forms Page"
• DumpPMUA: "Homepage"
  

-- Dan Damon

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

OPRA symposium tonight

If you have an interest in knowing what goes on in government and how to get your hands on public records, you will want to make it to a free symposium Wednesday at Rutgers. Titled (OPRA) Finding Out: How to Exercise Your Right to Obtain Public Records, it will help you understand NJ's public records law and make it work for you. Speakers: Guy Baehr, Rutgers professor and former Ledger reporter; Tina Renna, chairperson, Union County Watchdog Association; and John Paff, citizen-activist. At the Rutgers Student Center, Room 410. College Avenue Campus, New Brunswick. The symposium is free and open to the public and Rutgers students.

Press Association joins Countywatchers suit over Union County records

Plainfielders who have ever tried to get access to Union County records through OPRA will appreciate that the New Jersey Press Association has joined Countywatchers in its lawsuit over the requirement that requestors use a mandated form. (Read today's Ledger story here.) This is sure to give the suit some added clout.

Countywatchers has just won a settlement from Union County over the fees it was charging to view public records (view, NOT copy) -- read more here.

One thing that would help everybody would be if the Government Records Council were to set some standards here, and also insist that local governments (which includes counties), get their records AND their request processes online ASAP.

Not to do so only heightens the continued suspicion that government likes operating out of the public's eye.

There is not even consistency about what records need to be requested through OPRA.

Witness my own experience: Last year, when my car was totaled after I had pulled into my driveway by someone in a hurry to work, I got my accident report without an OPRA request and at no charge from the Plainfield Police Division. Of course, it did take three weeks for it to be ready despite a five-day rule (but that's another story).

Earlier this summer, I had a bumper-to-bumper incident at the A&P in South Plainfield. The officer who responded to my phone call just after 5 PM on a Tuesday advised both of us that the accident report would be ready for pickup at the South Plainfield Police station on that Friday morning. Which, indeed, it was.

After I filled out the Borough's standard OPRA request form and paid my fee for the two pages of the crisp, clear and immaculately printed accident report.

So, mileage varies. But should it?

---

Ledger: "Suit: Form slows access to records"
Countywatchers: "Countywatchers"

-- Dan Damon

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

ARCHIVED POSTS OF PLAINFIELD TODAY FROM 11/03/2005 THROUGH 12/31/2006 ARE AT
http://plainfieldtoday.blogspot.com/

County Watchers wins battle with Union County, war is hardly over

Union County has given in on the County Watchers suit over access fees to view public records.

But if you think county government has gotten more open, get over it.

County Watchers reports the story on its blog this morning, and the Ledger covers it here.

Having worked in government, I can vouch that government officials in New Jersey -- both elected and non-elected -- find it very difficult to embrace the kind of openness and transparency with regard to government records and activities that is considered normal in other parts of the country.

Perhaps it's because of our [jaded] political history -- just think of the unending drumbeat of corruption cases in the last couple of years, the bulk of which have hinged on keeping decision-making out of the light of day.

Is County Watchers annoying? Maybe. But they have a right to demand access. Do their requests take time and resources? Sure. But if the County were committed to transparency it would become less and less of an issue if stuff was just digitized as created and made available -- either directly online or by going into a County office and using a dedicated County computer. What IS the big deal?

Union County officials apparently are only going to be dragged into the sunlight kicking and screaming.

And that's too bad for all of us who will have to put up with their obstructionist and delaying tactics -- need I say, at taxpayer expense.

---

• County Watchers: "Union County Watchdog Association wins OPRA lawsuit"
• Ledger: "County settles watchdogs' suit over records fees"
  

-- Dan Damon

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

ARCHIVED POSTS OF PLAINFIELD TODAY FROM 11/03/2005 THROUGH 12/31/2006 ARE AT
http://plainfieldtoday.blogspot.com/

OPRA requests coming

PT used the state's Open Public Records Act (OPRA) last week to request some public documents from the City -- including Mayor Robinson-Briggs' 'State of the City' address, which was not available at the Clerk's office at the time of the request, unlike past years when it was immediately and widely available.

That is likely to be of less interest than some of the other material requested. Next week should be interesting.

-- Dan Damon

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.

ARCHIVED POSTS OF PLAINFIELD TODAY FROM 11/03/2005 THROUGH 12/31/2006 ARE AT
http://plainfieldtoday.blogspot.com/